President Sarkissian’s Resignation Triggers a Crisis within a Crisis

Armenian society is extremely polarized and that situation affects the entire political spectrum. However, surprisingly, there seem to be unanimity of views about the president’s resignation. Indeed, many of the opposition leaders, interviewed by the media, expressed critical views about the president’s performance, though for different reasons.

The news media is extremely biased and polarized. One thing the diaspora can provide to Armenia is objective coverage of news and fact-based and independent commentary. So often in Armenia the stories seem to be devoid of concrete facts and are instead rife with rumors.

There are few unbiased analysts and objective commentators but their fare has few takers in a desperately divided society. Each camp savors the diatribe spewed by his side and this situation characterizes the political culture of the country. Unfortunately, in this climate, the government is taking advantage and starting to silence the free press.

Kapil Komireddi, an independent writer, in an article in the Spectator World, provides the following comparison between the president and the prime minister: “Pashinyan is an exceptional figure in world politics for what he has achieved in this part of the world. He is sincere and idealistic but he can be incredibly persistent and stubborn. Sarkissian is in a different league. He is a scientist. He’s a capitalist but he did not have his finger in the pie here. He made his fortune by working hard in the West, a Soviet Thatcherite who wants Armenia to turn into the Israel of the Caucasus. He cultivated really strong relationships as a diplomat. With the exception of [Recep Tayyip] Erdogan and [Ilham] Aliyev and maybe Imran Khan, he can get a meeting with almost any world leader. For a tiny country, that is a huge asset. He was just not utilized during the war. He tried to do his best — he reached out to everybody — but he was sidelined and constrained within Armenia. The prime minister ran the show. And it was, I am sorry to say, a disaster from start to finish.”

Unfortunately, very few citizens in Armenia share this view. From the first day of Sarkissian’s appointment, he was characterized as a “British spy” or a “Russian agent,” depending on one’s tastes and political agenda.

Incredibly, the president learned about the war in 2020 from the news media. The disconnect was that deep within the government.

The president, through his broad contacts, brought in significant investments into the country. But it looks like nobody needed or appreciated that kind of help.

One thing was obvious from the onset: he was a holdover from the old regime. Pashinyan’s team has never been interested in experience; all it needs is obeisance.

In addition, provincialism is rife in the country’s political culture as evidenced by loutish debates in the parliament.

I will hazard to extrapolate from the same situation which applies to Armenia’s musical life. Over the years, Armenia has lost many world-class musicians and conductors from the diaspora who left the country in disgust. Among them are stars such as Valery Gergiev, Ohan Durian, Aram Gharabegian, Loris Tjeknavorian and Constantine Orbelian.

Provincialism is the standard and society cannot connect with the extraordinary. We can see that trend spill over into politics. This may be symptomatic of small countries that have little tolerance for global celebrities.

One of the president’s complaints was that prominent talents from diaspora could not get involved in Armenia because of constitutional constraints. He cited the example of Noubar Afeyan, the man behind the Moderna COVID vaccine.

During the Velvet Revolution, President Sarkissian played a moderating role; although Serzh Sargsyan had installed him in the president’s office, he had the audacity to call on him to resign. “That was a wise move,” Sarkissian said. But on the other hand, he made a fatal mistake of calling on Pashinyan to resign during the turmoil resulting from the 2020 war. It was not his place to join the masses calling for the premier’s resignation, just as it was not the place of Catholicos of All Armenians Karekin II to do so. It was a moment where these leaders could play a crucial role by extolling unity. Those calls were never forgotten by Pashinyan’s team, and therefore today, no tears are shed for the president.

In accordance with the constitution, the new president will be elected in February.

Pashinyan was looking for such an occasion to get someone from his own team to the post to further consolidate his grip over the government, after pushing the old guard out of the constitutional court and placing his own supporters in the Foreign Ministry and Defense Ministry ranks.

Pashinyan’s decision not to change the constitution means a brief reprieve from giving in to Turkish demands to delete the reference to Historic Armenia or Western Armenia, although he shirked his responsibility for Genocide recognition. He said recently that Hay Tad has never been on the government’s agenda. The locomotive of the Hay Tad has been the diaspora, he added, a statement which has to be taken with a grain of salt. Indeed, after President Robert Kocharyan made the recognition of the Genocide a part of Armenia’s foreign policy agenda, a number of countries recognized it, with the most recent being the United States.

Now Armenia has to prepare itself for fateful negotiations with Turkey and with Azerbaijan.

In the case of a failure, maybe the president will regret his decision forever, mistiming his resignation at a very crucial juncture in Armenian history.