CAUCASUS ANALYTICAL DIGEST No. 91, 7 February 2017 2

No. 91 7 February 2017 Abkhazia South Ossetia caucasus Adjara analytical digest Nagorno- Karabakh www.laender-analysen.de/cad www.css.ethz.ch/en/publications/cad.html ARMENIAN PROTESTS AND POLITICS Special Editor: Alina Poghosyan, Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography, National Academy of Sciences of Armenia ■■The Electric Yerevan between Reproduction and Change 2 Arpy Manusyan, Yerevan ■■A Self-Repeating Crisis: the Systemic Dysfunctionality of Armenian Politics 5 Armen Ghazaryan, Yerevan ■■Civic Processes in Armenia: Stances, Boundaries and the Change Potential 8 Sona Manusyan, Yerevan ■■BOOK REVIEW Anna Zhamakochyan, Zhanna Andreasyan, Sona Manusyan, and Arpy Manusyan (2016): Փոփոխության Որոնումներ (Quest for Change) 11 Reviewed by Armine Ishkanian, London Paturyan, Yevgenya Jenny and Gevorgyan, Valentina (2016): Civic Activism as a Novel Component of Armenian Civil Society 13 Reviewed by Karena Avedissian, Los Angeles, CA ■■CHRONICLE 8 December 2016 – 6 February 2017 15 This special issue is funded by the Academic Swiss Caucasus Network (ASCN). Research Centre Center Caucasus Research German Association for for East European Studies for Security Studies Resource Centers East European Studies University of Bremen ETH Zurich CAUCASUS ANALYTICAL DIGEST No. 91, 7 February 2017 2 The Electric Yerevan between Reproduction and Change Arpy Manusyan, Yerevan Abstract In reaction to the decision of the government of Armenia to raise the electricity tariff by 16.9 percent, several hundred young people gathered in Freedom Square and protested against this robbery on June 18, 2015. In the early morning of June 23, the police used water cannons to brutally disperse the demonstrators and arrested 237 of them. These events [unexpectedly] brought thousands of citizens to Baghramyan Avenue, which remained closed for approximately two weeks. As various emerging movements in Armenia, the Electric Yerevan was instantly characterized as “new”, “unprecedented” and sometimes even “revolutionary” by researchers, publicists, the media, and activists who were referring to its scale of involving various layers of Armenian society and the repertoire of the protests. “The Electric Yerevan between reproduction and change” is the retrospective analysis of the movement that attempts to reveal and rethink its potential of creating social change in Armenian society. To reconsider and reveal the Electric Yerevan’s potential to affect social change, the analysis reflects on two aspects—the question that was targeted by the movement and the methods of challenging it and the links between plurality and diversity in the movement. When the world the sun shines on is always new, how could Various studies that analyze movements, protests everyday life be forever unchangeable, unchangeable in its and riots in post-Soviet Armenia often describe them boredom, its greyness, its repetition of the same actions? as “new”, “unprecedented” and sometimes even “revolu- Henri Lefebvre, Critique of Everyday Life tionary”, which indicates that this society is on its way to becoming a political subject that addresses pressing Delineating the Problem social, political, and environmental issues in the country. Movements and protests are often the signifiers of mod- In reaction to the decision of the Armenian govern- ern societies and modernity itself. They frame a new ment to raise the electricity tariff by 16.9 percent, several political juncture where the public consciousness of fun- hundred people gathered in Freedom Square and pro- damental social change appears. Movements appear tan- tested against this alleged robbery on June 18, 2015. In gible and vital especially at a time when political actors the early morning of June 23, police brutally dispersed do not articulate new discourses, and cultural and social the demonstrators by using water cannons and arrested spheres experience transformations that lead to various 237 of them. These events led to an unexpected flow of public debates (Touraine 2006). In this situation, polit- thousands of citizens to Baghramyan Avenue, which ical actors begin to heavily control the social order, and remained closed for approximately two weeks. movements are thus forced to become more dynamic The Electric Yerevan was instantly characterized as and capable of resisting oppressive authorities. On the “new” and “unprecedented” by researchers, publicists, subtle line of the demarcation of continuity on the one the media, and activists who were referring to its scale hand and political order and stability on the other hand, of involving various layers of Armenian society and the subjects experience and participate in the origination of repertoire of the protests. movements and social change. What are the implications of the abovementioned Societies where movements emerge vary in their characterizations? Does the engagement of manifold political, social and cultural contexts, but the dimen- layers of Armenian society in the Electric Yerevan nec- sion of [discursive] similarity should be acknowledged essarily mean a variety of discourses and social prac- when analyzing them (Ishkanian, Glasius 2013: 2). tices? Does the presence of thousands of citizens in the In response to rising inequality within a society and Electric Yerevan protests designate wider social change among societies, the dominant capitalist system, dis- in Armenia? trust towards governments and the idea of democracy “The Electric Yerevan between reproduction and often lie at the heart of the discursive similarity of var- change” is the retrospective analysis of the movement ious movements and riots worldwide (Ishkanian, Glasius and attempts to reveal and rethink its potential of cre- 2013: 2). Furthermore, the birth of a movement often ating social change in Armenian society. To reconsider requires a trigger point that Neil Smelser calls an “initi- and reveal the Electric Yerevan’s potential to affect social ating event”—an event that can lead to a chain reaction change, the analysis reflects on two aspects—the ques- and the mobilization of society (Smelser 1962). tion that was targeted by the movement and the reper- CAUCASUS ANALYTICAL DIGEST No. 91, 7 February 2017 3 toire to challenge it and the links between plurality and of resistance in the Electric Yerevan often prevailed and diversity in the movement. was considered a sufficient and substantial action that led to tangible changes in society. Electric Yerevan’s Question “The question is not the park …”, “The problem is not “Blocking Baghramyan was the most important action the electricity tariff …”, “The question is not about the that was done against it during the years of independence: elections …”—these claims are continuously repeated neither Levon [Ter-Petrossian] nor Raffi [Hovhannisian] by the various groups of the Armenian public who are had ever blocked Baghramyan for two weeks”. engaged in protests and movements. Excerpt from an in-depth interview, activist of the Elec- tric Yerevan movement Anyway, I think that such initiatives have positive outcomes. The Electric Yerevan was a process of empowerment and The Disruption between Plurality and development for its participants. Regardless of the outcome, Diversity in the Electric Yerevan Movement there was a lot of benefit from the movement. The Electric Yerevan assured that various layers of Arme- Excerpt from an in-depth interview, activist of the Elec- nian society can be engaged in protests and uprisings tric Yerevan movement while they simultaneously shared a public space for several days. Moreover, the uprising could have become Considering the abovementioned general attitudes more severe with police violence. Still, the Electric Yere- towards uprisings in Armenia and their concrete man- van’s potential to bring thousands of people into the ifestations in the discourse of the Electric Yerevan’s activ- streets should be observed in the frames of two questions. ists, a relevant question arises: what is the urgent issue First, did the plurality also contain many discourses and that challenges Armenian society if various economic, social practices within the movement? Second, did the political and social problems that affect the daily prac- presence of thousands of people on Baghramyan Avenue tices of the general public often appear purely as a means mean the expansion of the potential for social changes of manifestation, communication, and self-representa- both in terms of the Electric Yerevan and other move- tion for the majority of the movements and their par- ments that would emerge in Armenia? ticipants? In the activist discourse where problems are The main discourses that were being circulated dur- not actually defined as such, actions are not truly com- ing the Electric Yerevan uprising usually separated two mitted to facing and overcoming problems. main actors—the creative youth who were open to the In this regard, the ability to stay in the street was world and free of stereotypes and the “masses”. This a key point in describing the Electric Yerevan as a “rev- classification was also pronounced during the in-depth olutionary” movement. Baghramyan Avenue acted as interviews that were conducted with the young Elec- an occupied space where citizens attempted to redefine tric Yerevan activists. its political meaning by converting the seat of illegiti- mate authorities to a public space through direct action. I didn’t even communicate with the large masses. I commu- When we emphasize the action of blocking Bagh- nicated with those small groups

Load more