The discourse on the joint candidate for presidential elections start by inertia, and only then come the reasons and preconditions but even if they don’t exist, the issue goes on being discussed.
We have a similar situation in place right now.
No doubt the joint candidate nominated by different opposition parties would be the most effective measure to fight the ruling regime.
But this measure will be effective only in case it is built on real preconditions, which satisfies the claims of the society and which answers all the questions.
Now, talks on the joint candidate are underway in Armenia, the bases of which are mutable, mildly speaking. The axis of the joint candidate is considered the PAP, ANC and ARF format. A joint headquarters was formed for the parliamentary elections in this format to monitor the frauds.
Now, the discussion of a joint candidate continues by inertia. The joint election staff, besides its ineffective activities, didn’t show anything else to the society. The three parties were even unable to sit around the same table and sign a memorandum or an agreement on the level of the first figures of the parties.
Are the talks on the joint candidate serious after this precedent?
Besides, it is beyond doubt there will be one more oppositional candidate – Raffi Hovanisian who may generate some union. I mean, Raffi Hovanisian could be another joint candidate to some extent.
Can there be more than one joint candidate? Of course, there can, but it will not be serious, especially that even one joint candidate does not seem to be serious.
It is also possible that the idea of the joint candidate is generated by the government which can later tell the society that there is no unity among the oppositional forces.
But the important thing is that if the government benefits from it, then the oppositional or alternative forces don’t even try to close this issue. Consequently, either they speak of something which they do not understand, or the joint candidate is a political benefit to the oppositional and alternative forces. It can be beneficial if these forces, in terms of the content, have no potential of public mobilization and the discourse on the joint candidate may fill the content gap.