Analysis of post-Soviet elections and plebiscites in Armenia, the
balance of power among the branches of government enshrined in
Armenia's 1995 Constitution, and both the process of amendment and
the substance of the amended Constitution adopted through a referendum
in December 2005 indicate that the country is in the throes of a
creeping authoritarianism, a pseudo democracy with a de facto autocrat
at its helm. (36) Despite the apparent wide-ranging changes in the legal
and political landscape since 1991, rule of law reform and the spread of
democracy is largely superficial and formalistic. (37) The people of
Armenia are experiencing a simulacrum of democracy that has dashed their
hopes and expectations of post-Soviet transformation.
Part II of this Article summarizes Armenia's recent economic,
social, and political history. Part III summarizes and analyzes trends
in the conduct of Armenia's post-Soviet elections, describing the
events surrounding elections, including alleged and documented
violations and the popular demonstrations against the results. Part IV
employs narrative devices to give the flavor of the Armenian
presidential elections of 2003, of which the author was an observer.
Part V examines Armenia's Constitution, centering on the status of
the Judiciary and the process and looked-for benefits of the
Constitution's 2005 amendment as a mechanism to evaluate adherence
to the rule of law. Part VI attempts to identify the "joker in the
pack," while Part VII concludes by assaying the steps required for
transition to democracy and adherence to the rule of law in Armenia.
II. ARMENIA AFTER THE U.S.S.R.
A strategically important country (38) with which most Americans
are unfamiliar, for a period of time after dissolution of the Soviet
Union, Armenia reportedly received the second largest amount of annual
aid from the United States on a per capita basis, only behind Israel.
(39) Since 1993, the Republic has received grants and loans from
international monetary and lending institutions, such as the
International Monetary Fund, totaling more than $1 billion (USD). (40)
In addition, since 1992, the United States alone directed more than $1.6
billion (USD) in aid to Armenia. (41) Although the relationship with the
United States is a close one and Diaspora Armenians defend
Armenia's interests in the United States, (42) Armenia also
maintains close ties with Russia (43) and Iran (44)--strategic
alignments that provide a buffer from the hostility of its Turkish and
Azeri neighbors. (45)
A. Geography and History of Armenia
Landlocked in mountainous territory between the Caspian and Black
Sea, today's Armenia is a mere fragment of the Armenian
people's historic territory, which once stretched from eastern
Turkey through the Transcaucasus. (46) A region of contested dominance
among the Persian, Ottoman, and Tsarist Russian empires, (47) the
territory that is now Armenia was conquered and annexed into the Russian
Empire in 1828. (48) A brief independence from the Russians, lasting
from 1918 until 1921, was followed by absorption into the Soviet Union.
(49) It was after the conquest by communist Russia that the current
borders between Armenia and Azerbaijan were delineated in their current
configuration, (50) laying the groundwork for the current conflict with
Azerbaijan.
B. Post-Soviet Political Developments; Conflicts & Consequences
Armenia remained a Soviet Republic until 1991, when the Republic
declared its independence based on a plebiscite, during which citizens
of Soviet Armenia voted overwhelmingly in favor of independence from the
Soviet Union. (51) Since gaining its independence, the people of this
tiny (52) Transcaucasian republic have engaged in fierce conflict with
their neighbor, Azerbaijan. (53) As a consequence, Armenia has also
continued to endure a closed border and economic blockade (54) by
Azerbaijan, as well as Turkey, its large neighbor to the west. It has
also experienced the traumatic assassination of Members of its
Parliament broadcast live on public television. (55)
In 1988, the Supreme Soviet of Nagorno-Karabagh, the majority
Armenian Autonomous Region within Azerbaijan's borders, (56)
delivered a request to Moscow that the region be transferred from
Azerbaijan's to Armenia's control. (57) The request was met
with strong public reactions in both countries--an outpouring of large
public demonstrations in Armenia in support of the request (58) and
anti-Armenian pogroms in Azerbaijan. (59) Tension and allegations of
mistreatment and massacre escalated on both sides, leading to the
outbreak of hostilities. The situation deteriorated with more
demonstrations, pogroms, exchanges of population and military conflict.
(60) Armenia's Azeris fled the Republic and Azerbaijan's
Armenians fled Azerbaijan. (61) The U.S.S.R., unable to contain the
conflict, and further preoccupied by its own woes, switched support from
Azerbaijan to Armenia (62) on the basis of geopolitical imperatives (63)
and as its own leadership changed. (64)
The conflict increased following the collapse of the Soviet Union,
and continued until 1994, when a ceasefire was brokered under the
auspices of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in
Europe's (OSCE) Minsk Group. (65) The conflict left Armenia
cleansed of its Soviet-era Azeri population (66) and holding one-fifth
of Azerbaijan's internationally recognized territory, (67)
including the Lachin corridor between Armenia and Nagorno-Karabagh. (68)
During and subsequent to the conflict, Armenia endured a blockade
by Azerbaijan and Turkey which interrupted its communications,
transport, and energy supply links with Russia and the wider world. (69)
Armenia also suffered a devastating earthquake in 1988 that killed
25,000 people. (70) The energy crisis that began with the 1989
imposition of the blockade (71) contributed to a ruinous shrinkage of
its economy, epitomized by a 60% decrease in GDP between 1991 and 1993.
(72) The energy crisis ended only with the reopening of the Medzamor
nuclear plant in 1995. (73)
C. Political Leaders and Assassins
Armenia's leadership is inextricably linked with the
Nagorno-Karabagh conflict; it was from the group of leaders who
supported Karabagh's bid to rejoin Armenia (the Karabagh Committee)
that the nation's post-Soviet leadership arose. (74) Levon
Ter-Petrossian, Armenia's first post-Soviet president who served
from 1991 to 1998, as well as key figures in his government, led the
Karabagh Committee as it transformed into the Armenian National
Movement, which spearheaded the call for Armenia's independence
from the Soviet Union. (75)
Ter-Petrossian's willingness to negotiate with Azerbaijan and
Turkey about Karabagh's fate (perhaps even allowing Karabagh to
remain an autonomous region of Azerbaijan in return for a lifting of the
crippling Azeri-Turkey blockade) (76) led to his resignation in 1998.
(77) Ter-Petrossian was replaced by Robert Kocharian, a Karabagh-born
prime minister, and ardent defender of Karabagh's right to decide
its own status.
On October 27, 1999, five gunmen entered the Armenian parliamentary
Assembly, killing Prime Minister Vazgen Sargsian; the President of the
National Assembly, Karen Demirjian; and six other officials. (78) The
gunmen surrendered the next day after holding the surviving Legislative
body hostage overnight. (79) Soon after the capture, the
prosecutor's decisions regarding the indictment of the gunmen and
the nature of the charges to be brought against them ended any zealous
official investigation into a potentially wide-ranging plot. (80) The
five gunmen were charged as individuals, and the public investigation of
unapprehended conspirators ceased. (81)
The power behind the gunmen, if any, has not been revealed. Mr.
Nairi Hunuanian, the leader of the gunmen, was convicted of murder in
December 2004 and sentenced to life imprisonment. (82) The war, the
trauma of the assassination, and the farcical trial of the accused
perpetrators left deep scars on the Armenian psyche and public life.
(83)
The killings removed in one fell swoop Robert Kocharian's most
influential opponents, (84) arousing the enduring suspicions of
Armenians regarding his involvement in the assassination conspiracy.
(85) The elimination of his opponents allowed the consolidation of more
power within the office of the president. (86)
D. Apparent Progress
Despite this tumult, Armenia appears to have made astonishing
progress on the road toward democracy and international standing.
Armenia sought international legitimacy by, among other things, signing
international conventions and carrying out amendments to its Soviet-era
legislation. For example, Armenia acceded to the following international
conventions: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
(87) the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,
(88) the Convention on the Rights of the Child (89) and the Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. (90)
In 2001, the Republic made significant strides in its efforts to
strengthen its relationship with Europe, acceding to the Council of
Europe and ratifying the European Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. (91) In January 2003, Armenia became a
member of the World Trade Organization. (92) To the cursory Western
observer, adoption of these new international obligations reflects a
movement toward recognition and enforcement of fundamental international
norms.
COPYRIGHT 2007 Houston Journal of International
Law Reproduced with permission of the copyright holder. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
Copyright 2007, Gale Group. All rights
reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.
NOTE: All illustrations and photos have been removed from this article.