Opinion: The Karabakh elections go to second round on 14 April

Elections were held in Nagorno-Karabakh on 31 March but since no candidate secured the necessary amount of votes a run-off is now expected between the two leading candidates in two weeks time. In this commentary for commonspace.eu, Benyamin Poghosyan argues that the elections have brought out nuances in the relations between Yerevan and Stepanakert.

On March 31, 2020 Presidential and Parliamentary elections were held in Artsakh (Nagorno Karabakh). Elections are not something new for Karabakh. Since the mid-1990s regular general as well as local elections have been held there. However, this time almost everything was different, such as the record number of candidates (14 running for the office of President and 10 parties and 2 blocks for Parliament) and the fully proportional electoral system. However, the key difference was the ambiguity of the position of Republic of Armenia's leadership. Till now everyone both in Armenia and Karabakh was well aware what candidate was supported by official Yerevan. This time the Armenian political leadership including Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan avoided to publicly support any contender.  Yet, the "Velvet revolution" in Armenia has created new nuances in the relations between the Armenian political elite and Karabakh leaders.

The incumbent President of Karabakh, Bako Sahakyan, has held office since 2007 being elected twice through direct vote, and the third time by Parliament in 2017, for a three years transitional period as specified in the new Karabakh constitution approved in a referendum in February 2017. He was perceived as a staunch ally of the second and the third Presidents of Armenia, Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan, and the fact that Kocharyan was arrested in July 2018 and remains in jail, could not positively contribute to the atmosphere between Armenia and Karabakh.

Bako Sahakyan, alongside with another former Karabakh President Arkadi Ghukasyan appeared in the court and presented personal guarantees for Kocharyan's release in May 2019 which raised controversial feelings among Armenia's new leadership. Almost immediately after the Velvet revolution in Armenia demonstrations erupted in Stepanakert, capital of Karabakh, demanding political changes, and the situation calmed down only after President Bako Sahakyan's public announcement that he was not going to run for office in 2020 (the constitutional amendments of 2017 provided him such possibility by annulling his two previous terms). Thus, many experts were viewing the 2020 elections in Karabakh as an opportunity for a transition of power from the so called old elites connected with former Armenian leadership, to the new ones.

There were three key contenders in the 2020 Presidential elections: Arayik Harutyunyan, the richest man in Karabakh, a former Prime Minister and State Minister from September 2007 to June 2018, and who more recently served as President Bako Sahakyan's advisor from July 2018 to February 2019; General Vitaly Balasanyan, a war hero who served as Secretary of Karabakh Security Council from November 2016 to June 2019; and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Masis Mayilyan, who assumed office in September 2017. Mayilyan run against Bako Sahakyan in the 2007 and Balasanyan in the 2012 Presidential elections.

Arayik Harutyunyan had close relations with both Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan, however, after the Velvet revolution in Armenia, and his resignation as State Minister,   Harutyunyan publicly endorsed the revolution and the policy of the new Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, presenting himself as a candidate favorable to the new Armenian leadership.

General Balasanyan also had good relations with the two former Presidents of Armenia and during the electoral campaign has strongly criticized Prime Minister Pashinyan's position on Karabakh. In July 2016 he was the key mediator between the Armenian authorities and the 'Daredevils of Sassoun" group during the two weeks hostage crisis in Yerevan after the group stormed a police station.

Probably Masis Mayilyan had less personal connections with the  previous Armenian leadership, although it is obvious that he could not have been appointed Karabakhi Minister of Foreign Affairs in September 2017 without the tacit consent of the then Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan. However, Mayilyan participated in these elections with the vision of a "New Artsakh", replicating Pashinyan's "New Armenia" slogan. He was supported by the former Karabakh Defense Minister General Samvel Babayan. Babayan was the de facto strong-man of Karabakh in the 1990s but was arrested and accused of organizing an assassination attempt against then Karabakh President Arkadi Ghukasyan in March 2000. In 2001 he was sentenced to 14 years jail term but was pardoned by Ghukasyan in 2004, and by and large disappeared from politics till the April 2017 Parliamentary elections in Armenia. At that point he emerged as a supporter of one of the opposition alliances, but was arrested in March 2017, weeks before Election Day, and was released in June 2018 after the Velvet revolution.

There was thus an ambiguity regarding the preference of the Armenian leadership during these elections, and it cannot be excluded that some in Pashinyan's circle were supporting Arayik Harutyunyan, and others, mostly those who are perceived as pro western forces with strong connections with different Western NGOs before the Velvet revolution, backed Mayilyan.

The information that the Russian special services banned Mayilyan's entry into Russia, disseminated several weeks before the elections, put additional geopolitical context to the contest. Mayilyan denied that information as "fake news", but definitely the news added additional doubts concerning his 'pro-western" attitude, and his possible connections with some in the West.

The COVID - 19 outbreak has brought additional uncertainty into the campaign. Many figures, including Vitaly Balasanyan and Masis Mayilyan asked the authorities to declare a national emergency, and postpone the elections. However, the government rejected these calls arguing that all necessary measures would be taken to prevent the virus spreading as a result of the voting process. It should be noted that as of April 1 no COVID - 19 cases have been reported in Artsakh, although Armenia had 571 cases and lock down was declared there on March 24.

Prior to the elections rumors circulated concerning a vote-buying process organized by Arayik Harutyunyan, which was vehemently rejected by the candidate. 

Given the number of candidates many experts were confident that a run-off was inevitable, and the only question was who will compete with Arayik Harutyunyan: Mayilyan or Balasanyan? The results confirmed these assessments, though Harutyunyan was very close to winning outright, securing 49.26% of votes, while Mayilyan received 26.4% and Balasanyan 14.7%. Thus, according to the electoral legislation, given that none of the candidates secured the support of 50% +1 of votes cast, a run off will take place on April 14.

In the Parliamentary elections five parties and blocks have overcome the 5% threshold for parties and 7% for blocks. The Harutyunyan led block will have 16 MPs, Samvel Babayan led "United Motherland" party 9 MPs, Vitaly Balasanyan's "Justice of Artsakh" party and Armenian Revolutionary Federation will have 3 MPs. The party of National Assembly speaker Ashot Ghulyan, who has held this role since 2005, will have 2 MPs. However, it should be noted that the 2017 constitutional amendments created a "Super Presidency" system in Karabakh, and Parliament has limited power.

Thus, Karabakh prepares for the run off elections between Arayik Harutyunyan and Masis Mayilyan, scheduled for April 14. Given the growing COVID - 19 crisis elections may be postponed, but the Karabakh authorities appear inclined to organise the run-off as scheduled.

We may assume that as before the Armenian Prime Minister will avoid to publicly endorse either of the candidates. Arayik Harutyunyan has already stated that as long as General Vitaly Balasanyan does not change his attitude towards the current Armenian government, there could be no formal cooperation with him.

As for the other candidates who received more than 2 percent of votes, namely the Speaker of Parliament, Ghulyan, and the representative of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation Davit Ishkhanyan, they will either remain neutral or support Harutyunyan. Given that, Arayik Harutyunyan is better positioned to win the second round of elections than is Masis Mayilyan.   

related content on commonspace.eu:

  • Karabakh Elections read it here
  • In Nagorno-Karabakh elections take place amid pandemic concerns read it here

source: This commentary was prepared for commonspace.eu by Benyamin Poghosyan, the Founder and Chairman of the Center for Political and Economic Strategic Studies in Yerevan.

The views expressed in opinion pieces and commentaries do not necessarily reflect the position of commonspace.eu or its partners

 

 

 

 

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)