Armenia's recent presidential elections show maturity but leave many questions unsolved, says Eva Dadrian Following 11 consecutive days of protests, a state of emergency has been declared in Yerevan, capital of Armenia. Since the result of the presidential elections 20 February were declared in favour of current Prime Minister Serzh Sarkisian, thousands of supporters of former president Ter-Petrosian have been camping on Freedom Square protesting against allegedly rigging of the vote. Some observers feel that the unrest may risk destabilising Armenia, a tiny land-locked former Soviet republic of 3.2 million people that lies south of the Caucasus Mountains. But what went wrong in Armenia? Why did supporters of Ter- Petrosian have to act like they did? A few years ago disputed presidential elections sparked mass unrest in two other former Soviet republics, namely Georgia and Ukraine. The Orange Revolution in Ukraine erupted following elections declared fraudulent by the opposition as well as Western election monitors. This was not the case in Armenia. The Central Election Commission declared actual prime minister and leader of the ruling Republican Party of Armenia Serzh Sarkisian the winner of the elections with 52.8 per cent of the vote. According to official tallies, Armenia's first president Levon Ter-Petrosian (1991-1998) who was the main opposition challenger came second with 21.5 per cent. A few observers such as the representatives of the Russian Federation admitted that there were some violations but these were technical ones and shouldn't have any impact on the final results. Furthermore, the international observation team has deemed the presidential vote "a step forward in the country's start-and-stop process towards Western-style democracy". The official report of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe election monitors confirmed that the election was conducted "mostly in line with the country's international commitments, although further improvements are necessary to address remaining challenges." The current tension should not divert the newly elected Armenian president from confronting some extremely urgent issues such as the economy, education, employment, corruption and Armenia's relations with Azerbaijan and Turkey on the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh and on the 1915 Armenian Genocide. The issue is much part and parcel of Armenia's past, present and future yet some Armenians consider it as a hindrance to development and would like it to be solved sooner than later or just go away. Regular meetings and talks are held between Armenia and Azerbaijan but the peace process remains deadlocked. The newly elected president has vowed to continue the policies of his ally and mentor, incumbent president Robert Kocharyan. Declaring that Karabakh will be at the centre of his attention, Serzh Sarkisian is adamant that ample conditions must be created for the exercise of the right of self-determination of Karabakh's people as well as for the security of the territory. According to Hayk Kotanjian, director of the Institute for National Strategic Studies and advisor to the Armenian minister of defence, the issue is one of the key problems for the security of Armenia, Azerbaijan and the South Caucasus region as a whole and its resolution should be by peaceful democratic means. However, solving the issue may not be as easy as some would expect it. Talking about the issue -- to be discussed at the forthcoming Russian State Duma hearings on the settlement of conflicts on the territory of Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) -- Konstantin Zatulin, deputy chair of the Duma committee for CIS affairs, says that both Russia and Armenia face a delicate issue, connected with the recent independence of Kosovo. Political analysts reckon that Kosovo's independence will have a domino effect on the breakaway states in the former Soviet Union -- Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Georgia and Transniestria in Moldova. For Gregory Petrosyan, Nagorno-Karabakh's foreign minister, the declaration of independence of Kosovo demonstrates how a breakaway region can win international recognition even if the state it breaks away from opposes the move, and that the recognition of Kosovo's independence could become "yet another factor solidifying Nagorno-Karabakh's position in its talks on settling the conflict with Azerbaijan". The Armenian presidential elections will probably change the economic and social fabric of the country, but most importantly it's the foreign policy of Armenia that is expected to take a major turn, and direct talks with Ankara would pave the way to lifting the embargo imposed on Armenia by Turkey and Azerbaijan and rid Armenia of the political as well as economical isolation of the past two decades. It would also help re-launch, on a new footing, the peace process with Azerbaijan. Ankara has been sending signals in that direction, including a message of congratulations sent by President Abdullah Gul of Turkey to Serzh Sarkisian on his victory. Gul hopes that Sarkisian's new position "will permit the creation of the necessary environment for normalising relations between the Turkish and Armenian peoples". Currently Turkey and Armenia have no diplomatic relations and Turkey keeps its border closed in protest at what Ankara calls "Yerevan's occupation of territory belonging to ally Azerbaijan". Surprising as it may sound, Turkey was one of the first states to recognise the independence of Kosovo. In doing so, Ankara may hope that this might help alleviate the overwhelming international opposition to the partition of Cyprus, yet another thorny issue. On the other hand, fearing that this could set a precedent and that Karabakh is permanently separated from Azerbaijan, Baku has refused to recognise Kosovo's independence. Armenia may be entering a new political era in terms of not only democracy but also in terms of its relations with its neighbours. This new political era will be defined by the rise of an empowered parliament. Following the recently introduced reforms, the parliament will elect the prime minister, and this could mean that a new and more powerful prime ministerial position will pose a significant test for the Armenian president, says Richard Giragosian, a political analyst specialising in international relations. The expert reckons that the parliament, controlled since last May's parliamentary elections by a new political elite, will emerge as the real centre of gravity for Armenian politics.
