“Skeptics’ fears are based on the fact that in their opinion, attempts to obstruct free elections will be organized. The nomination of the candidates for the parliament will take place under the dictation of the state machinery: heads of companies and enterprises in abuse of their power should try to nominate their own people for their headed collectives; the public rights in the polling stations will be ignored, the candidates pleasant to the state machinery will be nominated in remote rural areas and so on.” It sounds quite contemporary, isn’t it? But this is a quote from sociologist Gevorg Poghosyan’s article which he wrote for the “Communist” newspaper dated March 2, 1990 (exactly 27 years ago).
Recall that the elections of the Supreme Council of the Armenian SSR were held in two rounds: on May 20 and June 3, 1990. The ANM reported an impressive success in these elections, but formally, the Communists had the majority. However, some of the delegates of the “apparat” quickly figured out from where the wind is coming, and eventually, refrained from the communist professing, of which (let’s state for the sake of fairness) they were not particularly clung. And when I am saying about the “wind blowing”, naturally, I mean the public opinion which was truly consolidated at that time but not against the communists, many of them were members of this party but around the idea of saving Artsakh from ousting Armenians.
The elections held by 100% majoritarian system, the Communist absurd laws, without the approval by the Venice Commission, without international and local observers, as noted by the sociologist, had all the chances to become unfair, formal and impasse. But 27 years later, we are talking about these things as a culmination of the Armenian democracy.
The problem, consequently, is not the law, nor the observers and their reports, nor the fact that the communists were kind and did not cling on their seats, while all the subsequent authorities were evil and clang from their seats. The problem is the objectives, which the society has put before itself. If the goal is “to get rid of this criminal regime a day early”, which the oppositionists like to indicate for more than two decades, then this does not work, and the “state machinery” will do what it usually does. If the problem is going after the savior and the miracle man like a herd, then it will not work either.
Read also
To formulate a serious goal, our politicians must work with the society for five years and have a certain level of intelligence. The pledges to raise salaries, remove the speedometers or not taking to the army are not counted.
