“Do you think Raffi is
showing good judgment by challenging the election and getting people out in the
streets, or is it more self motivated towards his own ends and needs”
A very close friend of mine sent me this question, knowing
that I follow things somewhat closely. I think its an excellent question, and
in fact, much more complex than it initially seems, as it makes and exposes
certain key statements and assumptions that are worthy of discussion. (please note, i just threw this together, please excuse any typos, and addendum i may fix/add later)
1.
“using
good judgment”
a) I’m not sure whether not challenging the election was an
option. There were obviously significant
violations both before and during the elections. Despite that, Raffi’s final official
percentage surprised everyone, including him.
Would not challenging the election have been an option? Once he chose to
be a candidate, with the platform and statements he made about changes he would
make, especially regarding fraud, corruption, etc, was not challenging an
option? Aside from being completely hypocritical,
his political career in Armenia would have been dead forever.
b) What about the “good judgment” of getting people out in the streets? Well,
it seems that if change is going to come about, even if it were to be a
compromise with the regime, then Raffi would have to show the backing of the
people. Perhaps Sargsyan would have met
him even if there weren’t thousands in the streets behind him, and he can
challenge the decision of the CEC without people in the streets, but the
likelihood of anything happening without popular visible support would be even
less than it is now.
c) the most obvious response, of course, to this initial question, is, is
it possible to be a candidate who truly believes in democracy, experience such
massive falsifications and fraud, and not do anything? Is it possible to be a
citizen who is truly hoping to move forward toward democracy, and do nothing in
a case such as this?
d) now none of this means that he is challenging the election and getting people
out in the streets in the best possible way. There are steps it seems he has yet to take
that would be beneficial, and his overall plan, or what seems to be a lack of
one, is concerning. The latter point is
extremely important, and asked throughout Armenia by even his supporters. Sometimes especially his supporters.
e) the next step in this question, is in
the phrasing of “using good judgment.” Because that implies that there may be a
problem, perhaps a risk, in doing what he is doing. Now, I don’t know exactly what my friend had
in mind when he asked the question. But
I suppose there are two main downsides that my friend may be considering:
1—the
security of the people: this is a very common and critical concern, especially
because of the events of March 1, 2008 and the events which followed. Even if Sargsyan is not willing to use
violence, he is not the only deciding force.
Many from different circles I have spoken with think this may be why he
is not setting up a camp in Liberty Square. And it’s a good concern. There is always some degree of risk when
opposition gathers in Liberty Square, and the larger, more vocal the crowd, the
more they grow and the longer they stay, the greater the risk. One can only guess that part of the reason he
sends people home every night is because of the concern of safety. But this act of sending people home is very
disheartening to his supporters – I see it on their faces, here it spoken every
few meters as I walk through the square.
Which brings me to the point below…
2—the
morale of the people: what happens if this comes to naught? What happens if
after all of this, protests, challenges, everything, things for the mostpart
stay the same? Sure, some say that this
will move civil society forward in Armenia, and of course it will, to some
extent. But there is also a hopelessness
and inertness that comes in the general population from being lifted and
dropped. This is potentially quite dangerous.
2.
“is it
more self motivated”
a.
Now, Raffi is definitely motivated, of that
there is no question; he has been motivated to become president since the
1990s. And he has worked hard to that end.
And yes, he seems to be self-motivated… but I think my friend was
getting at the next part…
3.
“towards
his own ends and needs”
a.
Raffi does want to be president, and I would
argue that he wants to make his mark in history, but there is nothing wrong
with that. Many of us do in our own way.
b.
But I think perhaps my friend is asking,
especially in the context of the question, is whether there is an internal
drive in Raffi which obstructs him from seeing the risks, or issues, which can
arise from his challenge. I am not in
his mind so I can’t really answer that.
I do believe that Raffi wants to see a better, stronger, more just,
Armenia. I don’t believe that his
approach, especially to foreign policy, is the answer, and in fact I believe
his approach is potentially destructive, but that’s not the what we’re
discussing here. Actually, it is
relevant, because that same drive that guides him to demand reparations,
genocide recognition and NKR recognition as foreign policy, I believe, blinds
him to why addressing those things, now, as he does, is not in Armenia’s best
interests. And perhaps whatever drives him to take that stance in his foreign
policy, that internal drive, is also driving him now.
I think the results caught everyone including Raffi by
surprise. I think he responded and acted, but I do not know if there is a
plan. Given that many of his own
supporters have similar questions, it is not clear how long this will
continue.
To move forward, to have gone forward, and to continue to do
so, means that something is driving things, for the sake of this question,
driving Raffi, forward. Sometimes we
know something is Right, and it is that vision of Right which drives us. We see Right, but we don’t know how to get
there – because we are lost, overwhelmed, unprepared, naïve, or just don’t have
an answer.
But when we are responsible for or lead others, the
calculations must change. Any step
forward, even when driven by a vision of what is Right, must be countered by
responsibilities and risks. To not have
that counterbalance present in the plan, or not to have a plan at all, is a
sign of either blind and arguable dangerous adherence to a vision, or being
driven by other, often internal, forces.
To move forward without a plan would be reckless. And if
things do move forward, people continue to gather, protests continue in large
numbers, and a clear plan does not crystalize, visible or not to the rest of
us, then things could become quite concerning.
But if he can move forward, with a plan, and mobilize, unite
and lead, it could be something truly incredible for the electoral process, for
democracy and human rights in Armenia…
What it would mean for the foreign policy, peace and
security of Armenia, that concerns me.
