Armenia Update

28 May 2008

INTRODUCTION

“Another major step towards democracy”, that’s what president Robert Kocharian of Armenia said about the general elections in Armenia on 12 May 2007. The elections, which brought a victory to the pro-government parties, were assessed by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe / Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR) election observation mission as being largely in accordance with international standards, although some issues remained. It was hopefully proclaimed that the elections could be seen as a further step to democratization of the country.

The 19 February 2008 presidential elections shed a darker light on democratization processes in Armenia, however. After a campaign period marked with incidents, presidential candidate and then prime minister Serzh Sargsyan was proclaimed the winner within a single round. The opposition, led by former president Levon Ter-Petrossian, protested these results, claiming widespread election fraud had taken place. After the opposition staged protest rallies in the Armenian capital of Yerevan that lasted for over a week, the police violently dispersed the demonstrations, and a stage of emergency was proclaimed which was used by the government to curb down political liberties in Armenia. The international community also protested the authorities’ conduct in the event.

Meanwhile, the unrest is again under control, and Serzh Sargsyan has been inaugurated as Armenia’s president. Part of the political opposition gave up their struggle and concluded deals with the new president. Supporters of Levan Ter-Petrossian, though, still fight the results of the elections. The political situation in Armenia might seem calm again, but is not yet stable.

POLITICAL SITUATION

Armenia is a presidential representative republic. The president is head of state and the head of a pluriform government. The executive power is exercised by the government, the legislative power by both the government and the parliament. More about this later on.

Presidential elections 2008
Presidential elections were held in Armenia on 19 February 2008. Although nine candidates competed in the elections, there were two main contenders. Then prime minister Serzh Sargsyan, a trustee of then president Robert Kocharian, was supported by the ruling coalition consisting of the Republican Party of Armenia (RP) and Prosperous Armenia. The other important candidate was ex-president Levon Ter-Petrossian, who was ousted in 1999 by Kocharian over his willingness to solve the Nagorno Karabakh conflict with Azerbaijan, which was unacceptable to the more hard-lined Kocharian, who had fought in the war with Azerbaijan. Ter-Petrossian was supported by a number of opposition parties during the elections, led by the opposition Heritage Party. Incumbent president Kocharian was not allowed to compete in the elections as he had served two consecutive terms.

Campaign period
During the official campaign, which started 21 January, most of the nine candidates campaigned actively, and voters were thus able to learn about their programs. According to the OSCE. “The authorities made efforts to provide a permissible campaign environment.” On several occasions, high placed state officials also declared their intention to hold democratic elections in line with OSCE and Council of Europe standards for free and fair elections. However, although “[t]he freedoms of assembly, association and expression were generally respected,” it was also noted that “on several occasions citizens were obstructed in exercising their right to attend campaign events.” Moreover, during the pre-election period, a lack of confidence in the election process was noticeable with the Armenian population. During the campaign period there were widespread allegations of vote-buying, opportunities of multiple voting, printing of excess ballot papers, issuance of ID documents to facilitate election fraud, and coercion of voters.

The campaign period was furthermore marked by several incidents. On 3 February, former parliamentary speaker and opposition candidate Artur Baghdasarian from the Orinats Yerkir (Rule of Law) party claimed to have received death threats from the Armenian authorities. He subsequently expressed readiness to team up with Ter-Petrossian. This prompted Sargsyan to call the allegations a pre-election trick, saying that “[i]f such a thing had really happened, he could have simply appealed to law-enforcement bodies. […] They didn’t receive such appeals.” Moreover, Serzh Sargsyan continued to function as prime minister during the campaign period, which awarded him with campaign advantages, and created an “absence of a clear separation between state and party functions.”

In its second interim report on the election campaign released on 14 February, the OSCE Election Observation Mission noted that Sargsyan’s election campaign drew heavily on government resources. The report further registered indications that local government employees were pressured to attend Sargsyan’s election campaign rallies. Last, although media coverage of all candidates was on the whole positive of neutral, Ter-Petrossian received “extensive negative coverage across the broadcast media, including on public media” and “[n]ews programmes were largely devoid of viewpoints critical of the ruling authorities.”

The campaign period was characterised by a struggle between the candidates Serzh Sargsyan and Levon Ter-Petrossian, in which the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict played a big role. Ter-Petrossian profiled himself as the opposition, anti-establishment candidate, and the democratic choice for Armenia. As such, he repeatedly accused the authorities of obstructing the elections, wishing to keep power within the small ruling group, and frequently directed derogatory comments at Sargsyan and president Kocharian. Sargsyan, on the other hand, denied the allegations by repeatedly calling Ter-Petrossian a liar, and sharply criticized Ter-Petrossian’s presidential record and ongoing campaign. The strong competition between these two candidates also led to a grim atmosphere.

On 7 February, Levon Ter-Petrossian filed an official complaint, claiming that the Armenian government prevented him from normal election campaigning by placing hurdles for him to use media outlets and reach people with campaign rallies. Four days later, the Constitutional Court ruled these complaints were “legitimate” and required action by the Central Election Commission and the National Commission on Television and Radio, but at the same time also ruled that the actions of the government formed no “insurmountable obstacle” to Ter-Petrossian’s campaign, and therefore took no other legal actions than issuing a warning.

On 13 February, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation-Dahnaktsutiun (ARF), member of the governing coalition, expressed its concern about the pre-election struggle, stating that “the atmosphere of intolerance sowed in society, the violation of elementary norms of political struggle, the personal offences addressed to each other by the rival candidates and their team fellows, the threat of reprisals, as well as the sowing of enmity and mutual hatred in society, have reached a very dangerous level.” All these events did not only lead to a charged campaign environment, but also served to further undermine people’s confidence in the fair process of the elections. Meanwhile, Ter-Petrossian called upon his supporters to hold a rally in the Armenian capital of Yerevan after election day, either to celebrate his victory or to protest the result, already alleging that these could only be false in case he didn’t win before the actual ballot had taken place.

Elections
The elections took place on 19 February and were, according to the first preliminary statements of the OSCE/ODIHR election observation mission “mostly in line with international commitments.” As positive points, the international election observation mission mentioned the observers “found that the Armenian authorities made genuine efforts to address shortcomings”, and noted that it was an “active and competitive election” in which “Armenians turned out in strength to choose between genuine political alternatives.” However, the OSCE also noted several shortcomings, including “concerns such as the lack of public confidence in the electoral process and the absence of a clear separation between State and party functions.” Moreover, the counting procedures had been assessed as ‘bad’ in over 16% of the polling stations, including several districts with an implausibly high voter turnout.

Results from the four Precinct Election Commissions (PECs) in the Goris area, to which Serzh Sargsyan has strong familial links, showed Sargsyan receiving over 99 percent of the votes, with a “striking” turnout of 97 to 99.5 percent. Furthermore, several instances of ballot stuffing were observed, whereas conversely, there were also cases noted in which the number of ballots found in the box was considerably lower than the number issued. Proponents of the internal opposition, led by Ter-Petrossian, during election-day complained about ballot-stuffing, multiple voting, violent voter intimidation, beatings, and even kidnapping at polling stations, and alleged the elections were marred by serious violations.

The official results of the elections are as follows:

Candidate	% votes
Serzh Sargsyan	52.8
Levon Ter-Petrossian	21.5
Arthur Baghdasaryan	16.7
Vahan Hovhannisyan	6.0
Vazgen Manukyan	1.2
Tigran Karapetyan	0.6
Artashes Geghamyan	0.4
Arman Melikyan	0.3
Aram Harutianyan	0.2

Turnout: 70.5 percent

Aftermath
After initial results were announced on election day, Serzh Sargsyan immediately claimed victory. The opposition led by Ter-Petrossian, however, protested against the results, claiming they had been forged. During election day, there were widespread complaints by proponents of the opposition about the conduct of the elections. Ter-Petrossian insisted he had won the elections, and announced a string of rallies in the Armenian capital of Yerevan to protest against the “widespread falsification and violations” during the ballot, starting 20 February. All the other candidates except Sargsyan supported Ter-Petrossian in his claims of widespread irregularities.

On 22 February, Deputy Parliamentary Speaker and presidential candidate Vahan Hovhannisian (ARF) resigned from office out of frustration with the alleged election violations, although his party stated later that it would not dispute the results. The same day, Deputy Prosecutor-General Gagis Jahangirian affirmed his support for Ter-Petrossian’s ongoing protest, saying “the scale of fraud, violence, beatings, [and] intimidation perpetrated in these elections was unprecedented.” Several other government officials also came out in support of the opposition and resigned from their positions, including nine high-ranking Foreign Ministry officials.

Meanwhile, rallies in Yerevan took off. From 21 February to 1 March, protesters maintained a “peaceful, though not formally sanctioned” assembly on Freedom Square, and numerous peaceful marches. According to the organizers, the aim of the protests was to reach annulment and repetition of the election. Overall, the authorities accommodated the protest action, although according to the OSCE/ODIHR post-election interim report “the main broadcast media, including public television and radio, provided extensive coverage of the views of the authorities but rarely aired the views of those who raised concerns regarding the conduct of the 19 February poll.”

President Kocharian, however, spoke of an “illegitimate attempt to take over power” and announced “determined and sharp actions directed at preserving stability and constitutional order in the country.” On 23 February, he met with the leadership of the armed forces, the police and the National Security Service to discuss the situation. Eventually, cooperation offers were made by Serzh Sargsyan to all the opposition candidates, which he claimed Levon Ter-Petrossian had refused. Meanwhile, several persons were detained on charges of ‘illegally possessing weapons’, ‘actions or physical abuse towards an authority’ and ‘intentional delinquency.’ On 1 March, the police violently dispersed the protesters on Freedom Square and the surrounding area. ”, This led to many injuries and 8 fatalities (the number of fatalities would later rise to 10 as two more persons eventually died from their injuries). Levon Ter-Petrossian was taken by the police to his home, and remained there. This led to allegations that he was placed under house arrest, although the authorities denied this. As protesters regrouped later during the day, serious unrest occurred leading to “violence, looting and vandalism.” The same evening, a 20-day state of emergency was declared for the city of Yerevan, which imposed a ban on rallies and gatherings and constrained media reporting to official information.

Meanwhile, both the internal opposition and international organisations and governments criticized the actions of the Armenian government. US diplomat Matthew Bryza called the government’s reaction to the opposition rallies “harsh” and “deplored” the use of violence. Criticism was furthermore directed against the way in which the government had assumed control over the press, and Kocharian’s and Sargsyan’s refusal to start a dialogue with Ter-Petrossian. The Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights called for an independent and transparent investigation into the clashes between the police and protesters, and was supported in his demands by the EU, but president Kocharian rejected all international calls for such an inquiry. Moreover, during the period in which the state of emergency was in force, the government permanently altered the law, making it more difficult to organise protests, and continued to detain hundreds of opposition activists.

On 21 March, the state of emergence expired. This immediately led around 2000 opposition activists to resume their protest, and “pay respect to the eight people killed during the clashes on 1 March.” Police, however, tried to prevent the protest and arrested several people, making use of the newly altered law. Meanwhile, the political situation in Armenia has remained unstable, although gradually normalizing.

On 9 April, Serzh Sargsyan was inaugurated as the new president of Armenia during a presidential ceremony that took place in the heavy presence of security and police personnel. On 21 April, a new coalition memorandum was signed by four of the five parties represented in the Armenian parliament, including two parties that had outspokenly criticized the government during the recent election campaign: the Country of Law (Orinats Yerkir) Party and the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF). The same day, the Armenian authorities accepted the Council of Europe’s demands to stop the crackdown on the opposition after the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) had adopted a resolution threatening to suspend the voting rights of Armenian delegates unless the authorities allow and independent investigation into the post-election violent unrest in Yerevan. PACE furthermore demanded the urgent release of individuals arrested for their political activities and the scrapping of the restrictions on freedom of assembly imposed after the 1 March violence.

Parliamentary elections 2007
The Armenian National Assembly consists of 131 deputies that are directly elected every four years. The Electoral Code, amended in 2005, provides for the deputies to be elected according to a mixed electoral system. 90 deputies represent the parties or blocs that have overcome 7% voting threshold in a single national constituency. They are elected on a proportional basis. The other 41 deputies were elected from single-mandate constituencies by means of a one-round majoritarian system. Before the 2005 amendment of the Electoral Code the distribution of the seats was: 75 seats available for the majoritarian system and 56 for the proportional.

Since the parliamentary elections on 30 May 1999, the political landscape of Armenia has experienced significant realignments. The most important reason of these changes was the attack on the parliament on 27 October 1999. Prime minister Vazgen Sarkisian, speaker of the parliament Karen Demirchian and six other parliamentarians were assassinated.

In the period before the elections, opposition parties complained about the high tariffs for campaign ads on the pro-government TV-broadcasters. It was stated that the high tariffs caused unequal opportunities for political parties to communicate their message to the electorate. However, not all political parties had the capacity and/or the will to put effort in the electoral campaign. So, there were still some parties that didn’t organise any meeting or rally prior to the elections.

During a visit to Armenia in April 2007, the parliamentarians of the Council of Europe (PACE), expressed their concerns about the level of political apathy among the Armenian citizens. They stated that the level of apathy does not contribute to the quality of democracy in Armenia. It was hard for the parliamentarians to precisely find out what caused the political apathy. The suggestion was made that possibly the coming election were seen as a contest between political elites, rather than a contest between ideas.

In contrast with the pre-election period and the elections of 2003, the elections of 12 May 2007 have, according to International Election Observation Mission (OSCE, PACE and the European Parliament), largely met the international standards. Tone Tinsgaard, vice-president of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, stated that “the conduct of the voting was assessed positively in the vast majority of the polling stations observed.” Although the positive evaluation of the elections, the Mission concluded that still some issues remain unaddressed and that some irregularities took place. The report of the Mission states that their observers claimed to have seen “deliberate falsifications of results” and other types of electoral fraud. The overall conclusion of Leo Platvoet, head of a delegation of observers from the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly, was positive: “It’s not black and it’s not white, but I think it’s more white than black.”

The opposition parties in Armenia criticised the statements of the International Election Observation Mission. They accused the Mission of having a double standard: the conclusions about the elections in Armenia would never have been the same conclusions if these elections would have been held in the countries of the Mission-members. In other words: what is marked as “more white than black” with respect to Armenia, would absolutely be “black” in the countries of the members of the Mission.

Immediately after the elections, opposition parties started protesting against the results of the elections. They stated that the elections were fraudulent and that the results were manipulated by the government. In reaction to the allegations, president Robert Kocharian promised to thoroughly investigate the possible forms of fraud during the 12 May elections. The Constitutional Court started its hearings on this issue on 1 June 2007. Three of the opposition parties, the Hanrapetutyun (Republic Party of Armenia), Nor Zhamanakner and the Impeachment Bloc demand a rerun of the elections under the rules of proportional representation. The fourth party, the Orinats Yerkir (Country of Laws) party demanded a recount of 10% of the ballots of some 2.000 polling stations across Armenia. On 10 June, the Constitutional Court came with its verdict. It rejected the election appeals. They concluded that some irregularities took place, but that these were not of such magnitude as to determine the overall outcome.

The parliamentary seats are therefore distributed as follows:

Party	Votes	%	Seats	+/-
Republican Party of Armenia (RP)	457,032	32,82	64	+33
Prosperous Armenia (PA)*	204,443	14,68	24	+24
Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF)	177,192	12,72	16	+5
Rule of Law (OY)	95,256	6,84	9	-10
Heritage*	80,890	5,81	6	+6
United Labour Party (ULP)	59,309	4,26	0	-6
National Unity ( NU)	49,863	3,58	0	-9
New Times	47,018	3,38	0	0
Others	204,732	15,91	12	-43
Total	1,375,733	100	131	0

* = new party in elections 2007

The elections brought a enormous victory to the biggest ruling party, the Republican Party of Armenia. The party doubled its number of seats by winning 64 out of the 131 seats in parliament. The other party of the ruling coalition, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF) couldn’t take much advantage of the popularity of its fellow ruling party. The ARF increased their representation in parliament by five seats. Much of the power in parliament is now concentrated in the faction of the Republican Party of Armenia.

A second remarkable outcome of the elections is the fact that two new parties (“Prosperous Armenia” and “Heritage”) entered parliament, of which one party (Prosperous Armenia) instantly became the second party in parliament with 24 seats. The party was formed in January 2006 by millionaire businessman Gagik Tsarukian, who is a close associate of the President. Its goal is rather to support the president specifically than the ruling coalition in general. The future of the party depends therefore largely on the future of president Kocharian. The second new party in parliament is “Heritage” (“Zharangutiun”) of former-Foreign minister Raffi Hovannisian. The popular Hovannisian is seen as the new leading figure of the opposition bloc.

According to BBC News, the voter turnout was around 60%, significantly higher than the turnout of the previous general elections in 2003 (52,7%).

Negotiations for a new government
After the outcomes of the elections were officially revealed, negotiations for a new government started. As biggest party, the Republican Party of Armenia had a leading role in these negotiations. On 6 June, so within a month since the elections, the Republican Party of Armenia and Prosperous Armenia signed a memorandum on forming a coalition government. Together, the parties hold 89 of the 131 seats in parliament.

According to the memorandum, the coalition’s primary objective for the next four years is to form an efficient government that enjoys popular trust and will be able to ensure stable and continuous economic development.

The new coalition signed a cooperation agreement with the Armenian Revolutionary Federation-Dashnaktsutiun (ARF). It was agreed that the ARF will introduce its own candidate for the 2008 presidential elections, will fill two governmental posts (Agriculture and Education), a regional governor and on of the two deputy speakers in parliament. Furthermore, the chairmanship of two out of nine parliamentary commissions.

According to a senior ARF-member Rustamian, signing a cooperation agreement would guarantee the ARF’s “tactical freedom”. It could also be stated that signing a cooperation agreement was for the ARF the highest possible goal. After all, the party was not needed to form a majority in parliament.

Gender representation
Women continue to be underrepresented as candidates and political party activists. During the parliamentary elections, only four percent of the candidates in the majoritarian-system, and fifteen percent of the candidates on proportional lists were women. All parties and blocs met their obligation to include a minimum of 15% of women on their candidate lists, but most women were placed on positions that were highly unlikely to be supported with enough votes. Just four parties were an exception to that rule.

Due to the traditional, old Christian society of Armenia, highly educated women lost a great amount of their economic independence after the political independence of Armenia. Also their confinement to the private sphere (family) was restored, as a result of massive unemployment. Nowadays, the percentage of women in politics is low, around 10%. The only party that seems to have a deviant opinion on women in Armenian politics, is the Heritage party. Armenian experts on gender issues state that Armenia lacks a party that could serve as a role-model on gender issues for all the other parties. Maybe the Heritage Party could take up this role.

Out of the 131 elected deputies to the National Assembly (2007 composition), 12 are women, which is 9,2% of the total number of seats. Armenia is ranked at a 100th place out of 188 countries.

Nationalities
Armenia is ethnically the most homogenous state of all former Soviet States; ethnic minorities in Armenia constitute only about 2 percent of the population. Kurds, Greeks, Jews, Russians and Assyrians are the main minorities, but these are mostly well integrated into society.

The Armenian population is divided among other groups. These groups all have a different notion of being Armenian. Hayastantsis - literally ‘Armenians’-, Karabakhtsis, refugees from Azerbaijan and Diaspora Armenians are all different groups. Since the presidency of Robert Kocharian, the Karabakhtsis have been the mayor player in the political arena.

In February 2007, the new law on dual nationalities passed the Armenian parliament. The law states that it is now possible for Armenians abroad (the Armenian Diaspora) and for Armenians living in Armenia to have two passports. From now on, the Armenian Diaspora has the opportunity to vote in their motherland for the elections. Before the 2007 elections, it was for Armenians abroad only possible to vote in the Armenian diplomatic missions in their country.

Oppositional boycott of the parliament
After the presidential and parliamentary elections in 2003, the opposition parties went to the constitutional court to fight the fraudulent outcomes of the elections. The court recognised the claim of fraud, but did not rule that Kocharian had won the elections due to this fraud. It did however suggest that the president should organise a referendum asking the people for a vote of confidence for President Kocharian.

The president and the governing parties called the ruling of the constitutional court “unconstitutional” and refused to organise a referendum.

As a result of this refusal, 14 parliamentarians of oppositional parties decided to start a boycott of the parliament. They have refused to take their seats from January 2004 until the second half of 2005, when most of the parliamentarians had re-taken their seats in parliament.

The boycott of the parliament has received criticism from independent observers. They feel the opposition parties are not benefiting from the boycott because as long as the parliamentarians are not in parliament, a solution is not likely to come about. The opposition should be active in the parliament “to improve parliamentary regulations so that in the future they can take advantage of the rights and decision-making opportunities of the parliament’s minority factions to a greater extend”, human rights activist Karen Ohanjanyan said.

IMPORTANT POLITICAL ISSUES

Clans
The Armenian society is predominantly divided in clans. These clans are groups of people related by kinship and descend and play an important role in the functioning of society. Members of a clan have a sense of loyalty towards each other. This means that in all aspects of society, be it family life, business, politics or in crime, clan lines can influence the distribution of money, means and positions.

The spheres of influence in the political landscape can be divided over several clans. Since 1997, when Kocharian became the Armenian prime minister, the Karabakh clan has been the driving political force in the country. Kocharian, has created his own support by appointing others from the Karabakh region on key socio-economic positions. He appointed his closest ally, Serzh Sarkisian, former commander of the armed Karabakh forces, as minister of defence. Other Karabakhtsis were made heads of universities, hospitals and schools.

The opposition consists of several other clans. The most important figures of the Demirchian clan are father Karen and son Stepan. The family has been very influential since the 1970s, when Karen Demirchian was First Secretary of the Communist Party. When he was killed in the attack on the parliament of 1999, his son took over his position and became a key opposition leader.

The Sarkisian clan is another powerful clan. Vazgen Demirchian, former defence minister, became prime minister in 1999, but like Karen Demirchian, he was assassinated later that year. His brother Aram Sarkisian succeeded him and became prime minister for a few months. Later he formed the opposition Republic Party. The youngest brother Armen Sarkisian is currently in prison on charges of ordering the killing of the head of State Television, Tigran Nagdalian, in December 2003.

Economic Situation
Armenia experiences a significant growth in the economy. At a yearly 13,9 percent (2005 est.), GDP growth is higher than in some other former Soviet republics. Neighbouring countries like Georgia (7% GDP Growth, 2005 est.) and Azerbaijan (32,5%, 2006 est.) score a high GDP growth rates as well. The positive economic indicators and the macroeconomic reforms that were implemented in order to be incorporated into international organisations give the Armenian economy an aura of stability and progression. President Kocharian’s commitment to the distribution of some basic needs, like electricity and the payment of pensions for instance, has also contributed to the sense of increasing economic stability, and compared to the situation during the economic crisis in the ’90s, this idea is true. Still, the majority of the economic growth is concentrated in Yerevan, especially in the circles around the government.

Poverty among the population of Armenia is a relatively important issue in the country. The official figures show that 15 percent (2004 est.) of the Armenians live at or below the poverty level, some estimate these figures even higher. Although the issue of poverty has been a subject in the power struggle between Robert Kocharian and the oppositional political parties, the government shows little initiative to provide a more equal spread of wealth and does not do much to reduce the high levels of poverty. However, the neighbouring counties like Georgia (54%, 2001 est.) and Azerbaijan (49%, 2002 est.) score much worse than Armenia on percentage below the poverty line. It must be noticed that the estimations for both countries are the most recent estimations available and that the results therefore could be somewhat outdated.

The little initiative to provide a more equal spread of wealth can be attributed to the high influence of the business elite in Armenia. Since independence, the rise of a new elite, the oligarchs, has troubled the Armenian economical reform. These influential businessmen were able to obtain seats in parliament by not skewing the means of bribery and manipulation to win the elections in single-mandate constituencies. Especially on certain issues, like poverty, anti-corruption, criminal justice reform and the privatization program, the political influence of the business elite is a possible liability to progressive reforms in Armenia.

The levels of real unemployment is high as 30 percent and an estimated 20 percent of the Armenian workforce has left the country to seek employment in Russia, the EU or the US. Since independence, over one million of Armenians have left the country and the bad economic situation has been one of the major causes for that. Despite the rise economic growth and of foreign investment in Armenia, the social-economic position of many Armenians still hasn’t changed. Analysts state that this is caused by the situation of “neither war nor peace” in Armenia.

Corruption
Another problem of Armenia is the high level of corruption in the country. Just like its neighbouring countries Georgia and Azerbaijan, Armenia is part of the problem of large corruption in the former Soviet Union. All the countries (Transparency International Corruption Perception Index 2006) can be found among the 75 most corrupt countries in the world. Armenia even scores relatively good with a score of 2.9 (1 Is highly corrupt, 10 is not corrupt at all) and is ranked 93 out of 163 countries. Azerbaijan, for instance, scores much worse with 2,2 and a 130th place. Armenia’s corruption level has been relatively stable since 2001.

Political party funding – business involvement
Something that is not contributing to the stability of political parties Armenia is the involvement of businessmen in Armenian politics. In Armenia it’s a daily practice that big businessmen support political parties financially in the run-up to the elections. When a party, for some reason, not passes the electoral threshold, it is most likely that the supporting businessmen will leave the party. This kind of political-economic involvement makes it difficult for parties (with less electoral fortune in their first elections) to survive in Armenian politics. It is therefore hard for opposition parties to take a stand against the pro-government parties and to build of a vivid oppositional block. New parties therefore should have instant success in order to survive and to gain media-exposure.

The Armenian Diaspora, worldwide around 8.000.000 Armenians, is also very important for the funding of the political parties in Armenia. Especially the ARF depends heavily on the funds of foreign benefactors.

Human rights
According to Human Rights Watch, the Armenian government has done little to address serious human rights violations. They state that threats to media freedom in Armenia continued in 2006, as more journalists faced harassment and attacks, and broadcast media lack pluralism and remain largely pro-government. Furthermore, Torture and ill-treatment remain serious problems in places of detention and the military. The ombudsperson was dismissed in January 2006, apparently for criticizing the government.

The November 2005 national referendum vote approved constitutional amendments that aimed to introduce stronger checks and balances among government branches. However, according to Human Rights Watch, Council of Europe legal experts approved the draft amendments, but Armenia’s political opposition contested the legitimacy of the Armenian authorities and called for boycotting the referendum. Council of Europe observers expressed concern about the integrity of the vote.

Media
The general position of the media in Armenia is weak. Journalists often practice self-censorship because they are subject to a system of patronage. They risk being harassed or threatened and chose to refrain from bringing up certain subjects.

There are many television stations, but most of them are oriented at leisure. Independent television stations covering news are nonexistent. The licences of last two independent stations doing critical reporting, A1+ and Noyan Tapan, were not renewed in 2003.

The Armenian newspapers are mainly in the hands of private owners and are not subjected to control from a professional supervising body. This has led to the lowering of journalistic standards and has formed newspapers into carriers of personal political agenda’s. Printed media however, has a limited impact, as the circulation is very low. The distribution networks are bad and the costs of paper and ink are high leading to high newspaper prices. The Armenian citizens cannot afford this.

Freedom House, an independent non-governmental organisation that supports the expansion of freedom in the world, marks Armenia as a country that is not free (Freedom House report 2006) regarding the press. They confirm the above remarks that the intimidation and self-censorship of journalist, together with the great influence of the private owners of newspapers, make Armenia into a country without a free press.

Constitutional reform
On 1 September 2005, the Armenian National Assembly passed a number amendments to the Armenian constitution and the electoral code. The bulk of the amendments aimed at imposing a more strict separation of powers between the judicial, executive and legislative branches. The constitutional change was endorsed by the international community in order to sustain the parliamentary democracy in the country.

The President lost its power to alone dissolve the parliament. In addition to this, the parliament’s voice is decisive when a new government is about to be formed. In the past, this authority was solely in the hands of the President.

Another reform was the installation of an Ombudsperson. This reform could be seen as an important step towards ensuring and protecting human rights in Armenia. The appointment of the National Commission on Radio and TV was the third constitutional reform. In the past, the Commission was appointed by the President. After the constitutional reform, half of the members is appointed by National Assembly (with exclusion of members of political parties) and half is appointed by the President. Other reforms concerned the execution of the foreign policy or Armenia. In the past, the control of the foreign policy was in the hands of the President of the Republic. After the amendments, it is stated that the President “determines and implements the foreign policy jointly with the government”.

Probably most important was the electoral reform. The number of seats elected from party lists increased (from 75 to 90) and the number of seats elected in single member constituencies decreased from 56 to 41. A second important reform was the new quota for women in parliament. Parties are now obliged to include a minimum of 15% of women on their party-lists. This was only 5%.

In November 2007, a referendum was held to approve or disapprove the amendments, as they had passed the National Assembly. The amendments were supported by 93 percent of the 1.5 million people who cast ballots, according to official results. However, the referendum was criticised by the international community.

International relations - general
In the history of the country, many foreign powers have ruled and influenced Armenia. In recent history, the Soviet-Union and the Russians were of great influence in Armenia. However, the geographical position of Armenia has brought also influences from the West (Europe) and from the middle-east (Iran). This history of diverse influences is reflected in the way Armenia is handling its foreign-relations in the present time.

Armenia is namely not focused on solely one foreign partner. Even though the relationship with the neighbours Turkey and Azerbaijan is tensed for already a long time, Armenia keeps good relationships with Iran, Russia, Georgia and the West. Armenia has the wish to integrate in international organisations and at the same time, the country seems equally interested in maintaining relations with Russia, the EU and the US.

In 1992, Armenia joined a number of international organisations including the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), The OSCE and the United Nations. In 2001 Armenia joined the Council of Europe. Furthermore the country is a member of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, and since 2003, Armenia is a member of the World Trade Organisation.

In the following section, the different foreign relations will be discussed one by one.

International relations – Russia
Historically the relationship with Russia is very close. As former-republic of the Soviet-Union, Armenia has been under the influence of Russia for decades. However, as written above, nowadays Russia is not the only foreign-partner for Armenia.

Since 1991, the relationship Yerevan-Moscow relationship has been very close. The relationship had also a strategic purpose because of the hostile Armenia’s relationship with its eastern (Azerbaijan) and western (Turkey) neighbours. The last few years, the relationship between Russia and Armenia has become more difficult because of the closer Russia-Azerbaijan ties and the closer ties of Yerevan with the United States and Iran.

Despite the frayed relationship, on 29 August 2006 Armenia and Russia signed a treaty on friendship, cooperation and mutual assistance. By signing the treaty, Russia is obliged to defend Armenia when the country is attacked by a third country.

International relations – Iran
Armenia holds a good relationship with Iran. The relationship between both countries goes back for thousands of years. There are no border disputes with Iran, in contrast to the relationship of Armenia with other neighbouring countries.

Both countries are have a good economic relationship, especially in the field of energy supply. On 19 March 2007, President Kocharian and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran officially inaugurated a gas-pipeline between Iran and Armenia. In return of each cubic meter gas from Iran, Armenia is obliged to send 3Kwh of electric energy back to Iran. Currently, Armenia and Iran are also working on a new highway to boost the trade between the two countries.

Politically, it is the merit of Armenia that the relationship with Iran is good, while it holds also good relations with the United States. The recent dispute between Iran and the US about Iran’s nuclear program, has had, surprisingly, little effect on the relationship Armenia-US.

Armenian and Russian experts expect that the Armenia – Russia relationship is unlikely to change after the composition of the new government. The leader of new governmental party Prosperous Armenia, Gagik Tsarukian, told Russian media in 2007 that Armenia should focus for 90% on Russia an 10% on the West. However, a party’s spokesperson confirmed the governments current policy of trying to achieve a balance in the foreign relationships. Opposition parties are tend to be predominantly pro-Western, while governmental parties are more balanced in their standpoint.

International relations - The Nagorno Karabakh conflict
One of the most important and long-lasting issues that influence the political situation in Armenia has been the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. The situation has not been resolved, and continues to follow the country in several ways. The relation with neighbouring states, the relation with the U.S, the domestic economic situation and the social divide within the Armenian citizens are all influenced by this conflict.

The region of Nagorno Karabakh, an Armenian-populated enclave in Azerbaijan, was transferred to Azeri control in 1923 as part of a Stalinist campaign to ‘divide and rule’ its satellite republics. The death toll in the conflict over this region to date has been put as high as 20,000, with refugee numbers estimated at over one million.

A cease-fire agreement was signed between Azerbaijan, Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh in July 1994, but Armenian military forces continue to occupy Nagorno Karabakh and a significant portion of the south-western part of Azerbaijan. The Azerbaijan government accuses the Armenian Government of pursuing an active settlement strategy, trying to increase the Armenian share of the population in this region. The Armenian Government denies this.

In the meantime political negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan continue over the disputed territory. In 1999, a number of land swaps were proposed which almost led to a solution of the conflict. The killing in the Armenian parliament however, ended these negotiations. In 2001, another proposal was dismissed.

The international negotiations conducted in the framework of the OSCE/Minsk Group continue with ups and downs, as well as intensified face-to-face meetings between the two Presidents, but have so far failed to bring a peace agreement.

The issue of Nagorno–Karabakh is highly sensitive among the Armenian population, and potentially dangerous for Armenian politicians. When, for instance, former-president Ter-Petrossyan called for compromises with Azerbaijan on the subject of Nagorno-Karabakh, he had to step down for all the criticism he received in connection to that.

The Nagorno-Karabakh issue puts an immense pressure on Armenian domestic politics. Apart from the trade embargos from Turkey and Azerbaijan that lead to food and energy shortages, the conflict has led to a social divide. Hayastantsis see the Karabakhtsis as foreign to the Armenian values and culture and hold them responsible for the results of the war. This is also subject of political speculations. There are no serious studies at least at academic level on the topic. confirming that Hayastantsis vs. Karabakhtsis is an issue of divergence in Armenian society.

The chances of a new war with Azerbaijan weigh heavy on the Armenian people. According to a poll conducted by the Armenian Centre for National and International Studies in August 2004, almost 50 percent of all Armenians believe that war with Azerbaijan is the country’s most serious threat in the next five years.

International relations - Relations with Turkey
The relations of Armenia and Turkey have been troublesome for ages. Between 1895 and 1920, the Armenian population in Turkey allegedly lost 1.5 million people through violence and starvation. In 1915 the violence reached its peak when thousands of Armenians were massacred. Turkey however has never admitted to the Armenian accusation of being guilty to this genocide. This debate still rules the relations between the countries.

Turkey closed its borders with Armenia in 1993 during the violent Nagorno-Karabakh conflict to show its solidarity to Azerbaijan. The country refuses to lift the blockade, demanding that Armenia stops it’s international effort to get the Ottoman Turkish genocide affirmed.

In January 2007, the Armenia-Turkey relationship became even more tensed when Armenian-Turkish writer Hrant Dink was shot dead by an ultra-nationalist Turkish schoolboy. Dink was editor-in-chief of the bilingual Armenian-Turkish weekly newspaper Agos. He was also on of the most prominent Armenian voices in Turkey. In 2005, Dink was found guilty of insulting Turkish identity after he wrote an article which addressed the mass killings of Ottoman Armenians in 1915. For this reason, Dink was seen by Turkish nationalists as a traitor. After the killing, the EU, US and Armenia all condemned the murder. On behalf of Turkey Prime Minister Erdogan said that "A bullet has been fired at democracy and freedom of expression".

International relations – The European Union
Relations between the EU and Armenia are based on a Partnership and Co-operation Agreement, which gives a framework for the EU to support democratisation and market liberalisation of the country. The EU has an interest in developing a politically and economically prosperous Armenia, as part of the South Caucasus region. In this respect, the negotiations for the settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict are important, as well as the important geo-strategic position of the region, giving access to the Caspian Sea countries.

In June 2004, Armenia was included in the ‘European Neighbourhood Policy’ (ENP). This policy was designed to prevent the emergence of new dividing lines between the enlarged EU and its neighbours and to offer them the chance to participate in various EU activities, through greater political, security, economic and cultural co-operation. On 14 November 2006, the EU signed the ENP action plan for Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia.

International relations – NATO and the US
Armenia joined the Partnership for Peace (PfP) program in 1994. This program is aimed at defence cooperation of NATO and the partner countries and is designed to reinforce stability and reduce the risk of conflict. Partner countries work on developing the interoperability of their military forces and have to reform the defence system. Since 2006, Armenia has an Individual Partnership Action Plan with NATO.

In attempts to intensify the contacts with NATO, the Armenian government decided to delegate a peacekeeping battalion to Kosovo, and to join the coalition of countries in the ‘war against terror’. Some Armenian troops have been stationed in Iraq to assist in peacekeeping and the reconstruction of the country.

The official relationship with the United States started at 7 February 1992, when the two counties officially established diplomatic relationships. Ever since, the USA and Armenia have signed several treaties on economic cooperation. Besides the economic relations, the United States tries to sustain the process of democratization by means of training for political parties. It can be states that the Armenia – United States relationship has been good over the years, also because of the high number of Armenian citizens in the United States.

However, the Armenia – United States relationship has become more difficult due to the good relationship of Armenia with Iran. As part of the “Ashes of Evil”, Iran has experienced an increasing level of American interest in the country. The nuclear plans of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are followed by the Bush administration with great concerns.

Armenian analysts fear that a military conflict between Iran and the United States would harm Armenia in a serious way. Not only is Iran economically an important partner of Armenia, but Iran has, according to Armenian analysts, also an important stabilising role in the region.

POLITICAL PARTIES

Since the constitutional amendments of 2005, the political parties have gained power with respect to the pre 2005 years. The influence of the President on has therefore diminished compared to the power of the political parties. Groups in parliament have changed, new ones have been formed and oligarchs gained influence over politics. New political parties were created based on economic power, rather then on political ideology. Still, most parties present themselves with a certain ideological background.

SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC PARTIES

Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF) – “Dashnaktsutyun” Hay Heghaphokhakan “Dahsnaktsutuin”
Leaders: Hhrant Markarian (chairman of The Bureau, the international body of the ARF), Armen Rustamyan (Chairman of the ARF Armenia Supreme Council) and Vahan Hovhannesyan (number one on the ARF Party list).

Seats: 16

The ARF was established in 1890 in Tbilisi. During the First Armenian Republic the party was in power, but it was banned following the Sovietisation of 1920. The party, however, continued to function in the Diaspora. The party was reintroduced in Armenia after 1988, but was banned in 1994 by Ter-Petrossyan on allegations of terrorism. The President took this and other allegations (following the Constitution) to the Supreme Court. The Court concurred only with one of the President’s accusations, that the ARF broke the Law on Parties by having non-Armenian citizens in its leadership. In 1998 Kocharian re-allowed the party and asked it to support him in his campaign for the presidential elections. Since then, the party has been backing him. The support is however more pragmatic than ideological.

The nationalistic ARF has set its mind on “the creation of a free, Independent and United Armenia” and is prominent in Nagorno-Karabakh. The “Dashnakts” hope to once reunite the entire Armenian diaspora on the united Armenian lands. The party therefore is popular among the Diaspora Armenians and receives much financial support from them. The main objectives of the party are the establishment of a minimum wage of 50,000 Drams, the establishment of an anti-corruption entity and a minimum retirement benefit.

On its website, the party describes itself as essentially nationalist, socialist, democratic and revolutionary. The ARF is internationally recognised as a social democratic party, and became a full member of the SI in 2003. Already in 1907, the ARF became a member if the SI. Following the changes in the SI statues, which required that only parties functioning in their homeland can be members, the ARF membership of the SI was terminated. Currently, the party is seeking to intensify the relationship with the Party of European Socialists, the PES.

The ARF voiced considerable critique on the conduct of the 2008 presidential elections, expressing its concern about incidents during the campaign period and stating that “the atmosphere of intolerance sowed in society, the violation of elementary norms of political struggle, the personal offences addressed to each other by the rival candidates and their team fellows, the threat of reprisals, as well as the sowing of enmity and mutual hatred in society, have reached a very dangerous level.” After the elections, parliamentary speaker and ARF party leader Vehan Hovhannesyan resigned from office out of frustration with the alleged election violations. Although the ARF later stated it would not dispute the results of the elections, this caused some tensions in the governing coalition, two parties out of which had supported winning candidate Sargsyan and were thus indirectly criticized for the election fraud.

The ARF has a very extensive network of local organisations, also beyond the Armenian borders, and is structurally well-functioning.

The party is part of the governing coalition and holds 16 seats in the National Assembly.

OTHER POLITICAL PARTIES

Republican Party (RP) - Hayastani Hanrapetakan Kusaktsutyun (HHK)
Leader: Serge Sargsyan

Seats: 64

The conservative Republican Party was founded in 1990 and sees itself as the follower of the ideas of the Armenian national hero Garaghin Nzhdeh. According to his teachings, the trust in the nation's power, will, capacities and future depends on the recognition of the nation. The party therefore stresses the importance of the nation over other religious, social or partisan entities.

The party has its roots in the National Independence Party founded in the 1970’s in Soviet Armenia, pursuing Armenia’s independence as it’s goal. The main founder, Ashot Navasartian, as well as former and now deceased leader Antranik Margaryan were political prisoners in Soviet Times. The current leader, Serge Sargsyan has been a Comsomol leader in Karabagh.

Currently, there are two main fractions of the within the RP: those who have been a member of the Republican Party since the foundation, and those who joined the party during the waves of 1998 and 2006 with Vazgen and Serge Sargsyan respectively. The new wave is then “noveau riche”, which not had any economic power prior to the break-up of the Soviet Union.

Political stability is the biggest interest for the RP. Other important issues are growth of GDP, increase of number of jobs and a growth of the retirement payments. The RP is conservative in its values, but rather neo-liberal in its economic policies.

In 1998, the small RP was joined by the political branch of the Yerkrepah Union, an organisation of Karabakh war veterans, and became one of the more influential parties of Armenia.

The RP has been in governance since 1998, when it was part of the Unity bloc, a coalition of the RP and the People’s Party. This bloc was dissolved in 2001 as a result of different opinions about new president Kocharian. After the 2003 elections, the RP became the biggest party in parliament when many non-partisan deputies aligned with the RP. These deputies generally are wealthy local elites and have the same interests as the RP: stability in their powerful position.

In 2003, The party formed a coalition with the ARF and in 2007, the party increased its number of seats in parliament up to 64. The party formed a coalition with “Prosperous Armenia”.

Prosporous Armenia Party (BH)
Seats: 24

This pro-Kocharian party was formed in January 2006 by millionaire businessman Gagik Tsarukian, who is a close associate of the President. In August 2006, Victor Dallakian, a prominent member of the opposition Artarutiun (Justice) bloc, defected to join the BH (however, in the end, Dallakian didn’t became a member of BH). The party is as rather a pro-president party than a pro-coalition party. The faith of the Prosperous Armenia Party is therefore closely aligned to the future of president Kocharian.

After the 2007 elections, Prosperous Armenia formed a coalition with the Republican Party.

Country of Laws - Orinats Yerkir
Leader: Artur Baghdasarian

Seats: 9

This centre-right party was founded in 1998 and aims to reform the state’s legal system. The young party leader, Baghdasarian is in his mid-thirties, has put human rights, reform of the court system, improved availability of legal representation for citizens, and a economic liberal policy high on the agenda.

In 2006, the party ceased to be the third party of the ruling coalition.

“Heritage”
Leader: Raffi K. Hovannisian

Seats: 6

The Heritage party was founded in 2002 and nationally registered in 2005. It first competed in the national elections of 2007, in which they entered parliament and won six seats.

Their foreign policy can be characterised as balanced, but also as pro-Western. The Heritage party underlines the good relationship with Russia, China and India, but sees European integration and cooperation as the key to progress. European integration is not a goal on its own, but rather a tool for improved well-being, prosperity and security. With Turkey, Heritage advocates an open and honest dialogue.

Domestic policy goals are legal reforms, the development of civil society and the economic policy of Armenia. Heritage sates that sustaining the competitiveness of the market helps the Armenian economy grow.

Furthermore, the party believes that reducing poverty and building good social services are very important for the future of Armenia. By taking these measures, Heritage has the objective to reduce emigration from Armenia and stop the “brain drain” from the country.

It is generally assumed that the “Heritage” party has the only party leader with clean hands and a clear track record in Armenian politics.

People’s Party of Armenia (PPA) - Hayastani Zhoghovrdakan Kusaktsutyun (HZhK)
Chairman: Stepan Demirchian

Karen Demirchian, who was the leader of Communist Armenia from the 70’s to the 90’s, founded the People’s Party in 1998. When he was killed in the 1999 attack on the National Assembly, his son Stepan took his role. This leftist party aims to establish government of the people and the strengthening of the Armenian independent statehood. The PPA was the most important party in the Justice Bloc, which ceased to exist just before the 2007 elections.

The party’s main issues are: a 100% proportional electoral system, the implementation of a new administrative-territorial division in Armenia and the support of closer cooperation with the CIS.

National Democratic Union (NDU) - Azgayin Zhoghovrdavarakan Miutyun (AzhM)
Chairman: Vazgen Manukian

The NDU was founded in 1991. Its party leader, Vazgen Manukian, was a candidate in the presidential elections of 1996, 1998 and 2003, but was not successful. In 1996, Manukian was the candidate of the opposition, which included the ARF, and was considered to have won the elections, which the authorities disregarded. The NDU supported Demirchian in the run-off presidential elections and later that year joined the Justice Bloc to participate in the parliamentary elections.

Republic Party of Armenia - Hanrapetutiun Party
Chairman: Albert M. Bazeyan; Leader: Aram Sarkisian

The conservative Republic Party of Armenia was formed in 2000 out of former RP members. Its leader, Aram Sarkisian, also used to be part of the RP. He was appointed prime minister after his brother and predecessor Vazgen Sarkisian had been killed in the attack on the National Assembly in 1999. In May 2000 however, president Kocharian already discharged him as Sarkisian appeared to be an opponent of his policies. The RP continued to support the president but Sarkisian left the party to found his oppositional Republic Party. In 2003 the Republic Party joined the PPA to which it was already close, and became part of the Justice Alliance.

Democratic Party of Armenia - Hayastani Demokratakan Kusaksutyun (HDK)
Chairman: Aram Sarkisian

The Democratic Party of Armenia, founded in 1991, is a party based on the principles of democratic socialism. After independence the goals were set to create a sovereign, democratic, economically developed state. The party strives for social justice and the rule of law. One of the most important aspects of the party is to ensure the social protection of workers. The motto of the party is: “Freedom, Equality and Solidarity”

National Unity Party (NUP) - Azgayin Miabanutyun Kusaksutyun (AMK)
Chairman: Artashes Gergamyan

No seats

The National Unity Party was the second largest opposition party in Armenia. Artashes Gegamyan, former Yerevan mayor and third runner-up in the 2003 presidential elections, is however a controversial figure among the other opposition parties. The party has some populist characteristics and support for the party shifts from different groups. Most of the supporters are former urban elites.

The NUP promotes tax reductions, state control on exports and natural resources and the increase of production. In his presidential elections campaign, Gegamyan called for Armenia’s economic inclusion in the Russia- Belarus Union.

The NUP is in opposition and has boycotted the National Assembly since January 2004. In May 2007, it lost all its seats (9) in parliament.

United Labour Party (ULP) Miavorvats Ashkhatankayin Kusaksutyun (MAK)
Chairman: Gurgen Arsenian

No seats

The United Labour Party is a pro-governmental party and holds six seats in parliament. It was established in 2002 was one of the newcomers in the 2003 parliamentary elections. Its leader, Gurgen Arsenian, owner of the Arsoil Petrol Company, was an unaffiliated member of the outgoing parliament. Arsenian used to own Kenton TV, a pro-establishment television station, but this was sold before the 2003 elections.

The subjects of the party’s campaign were mostly centred on the issues of a legal state, human rights and basic freedoms. In May 2007, it lost all its seats (6) in parliament.

Armenian Communist Party (ACP) - Hayastani Kominstakan Kusaktsutyun (HKK)
Chairman: Ruben Tovmasyan

No seats

The ACP, founded in 1920, was the leading political force in the Soviet Republic of Armenia, but lost its power to the Armenian National Movement in 1989. The ACP stopped functioning in 1991, but was re-established in 1994. The 2003 parliamentary elections were the first in which the ACP took part without obtaining any seats.

The current program of the ACP is more or less comparable to that of Soviet times, stipulating for instance the superiority of state ownership and calling for protection of home markets. On the issue of Nagorno Karabakh, the ACP is in favour of self-determination for the region.

Party leader Vladimir Darbinyan participated in the presidential elections, but did not make it to the runoffs. The party supported Stepan Demirchian in the second round. Officially the party supported Artashes Geghamian/National Unity

Armenian Pan-National Movement (APNM) - Haiots Hamazgain Sharzhum (HHSh)
Chairman: Ararat Zurabian

No seats

The APNM was founded in 1988 as the political successor of the Karabakh movement and won the 1989 parliamentary elections in the Soviet Republic of Armenia. One of the party’s leaders, Levon Ter-Petrossyan, became president in 1990. The period following that was marked by major reforms, including the introduction of the multiparty system and the market economy. When Ter-Petrossyan was forced to resign in 1998, the party entered a period of political isolation.

The party has a rather nationalistic platform-ANM was always condemned by the political opponents for being antinationalistic, as was implementing/promoting rather balanced foreign policy based on establishing peace and good relations with all its neighbours. and stands for political reforms, guarantying basic rights and creating a social state. The party is an opponent of the current Kocharian regime, calling it “illegal” and favours more independence from Russia.

SOURCES

Government sites
- The Government: http://www.gov.am/
- The Parliament: http://www.parliament.am/

General information
- International Crisis Group, Armenia: Internal Stability Ahead: http://www.icg.org//library/documents/europe/caucasus/158_armenia_s_internal_instability_ahead.pdf
- National Statistical Service of the Republic of Armenia http://www.armstat.am/
- Radio Free Europe/ Radio Liberty, several articles: http://www.rferl.org/
- Transitions online, several articles: http://www.tol.cz
- Wikipedia, Politics in Armenia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Armenia

Information on Elections
- The Central Election Committee: http://www.elections.am/
- Wikipedia, Elections in Armenia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Armenia
- OSCE, Parliamentary Elections 2007, Final Report: http://www.osce.org/documents/odihr/2007/04/23888_en.pdf

Human Rights
- Amnesty International: http://www.amnesty.org/
- Human Rights Watch, world report 2006: http://hrw.org/englishwr2k7/docs/2007/01/11/armeni14726.htm
-Freedom House (NGO): www.freedomhouse.org

International Relations
- NATO: http://www.nato.int/
- European Commission,
-European Neighbourhood Policy: http://europa.eu.int/comm/world/enp/index_en.htm
-EU relations with Armenia: http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/armenia/intro/
- Armenian Assembly of America: http://www.aaainc.org/info/

Political Parties
-Armenian Revolutionary Federation – Dashnaktsutyun: http://www.arfd.am/armenian/index.php
- Democratic Party of Armenia: http://dem_party.tripod.com/
- Republican Party of Armenia: http://www.hhk.am/en/main.htm
- Political resources on the net: http://www.politicalresources.net/armenia.htm
- Central Election Committee, Parliamentary Elections 2003, Parties and Blocs: http://par03.elections.am/?lan=eng&go=cand_info2

News
- Armenia Liberty: http://www.armenialiberty.org/
- Armenia News Network ‘Groong’ http://groong.usc.edu/
- Eurasia Net http://www.eurasianet.org/
- Armenia Now http://www.armenianow.com/eng/