Ten Dead in Armenian Post-Election Violence as Protesters Demand New Vote

YEREVAN - Armenian security forces stormed opposition demonstrators early this morning, leaving ten dead and dozens wounded in the worst political violence since independence, as protests over disputed presidential elections erupted into deadly confrontation.

The violence began when riot police moved to clear Freedom Square, where thousands had camped for ten days protesting the February 19 election that gave victory to Prime Minister Serzh Sargsyan over former president Levon Ter-Petrosyan.

“They came at 5 AM with truncheons and shields,” recounted protester Armen Harutyunyan, blood streaming from head wounds. “We were sleeping in tents. They beat everyone - women, elderly, even journalists.”

President Robert Kocharyan declared a 20-day state of emergency, the first in Armenia’s post-Soviet history, banning all public gatherings and imposing media censorship.

Disputed Election

The crisis stems from the February 19 presidential election where Sargsyan, Kocharyan’s handpicked successor, officially won 52.8% against Ter-Petrosyan’s 21.5%. Opposition claims massive fraud, including ballot stuffing, vote buying, and intimidation.

“This wasn’t election but coronation,” declared Ter-Petrosyan to supporters before his arrest. “The people’s will has been stolen by criminal oligarchy.”

International observers noted “serious violations” but stopped short of declaring the election invalid. The lukewarm international response emboldened authorities while enraging opposition.

The Crackdown

The pre-dawn assault on Freedom Square scattered protesters throughout central Yerevan. Running battles developed as demonstrators regrouped, building barricades and fighting police with stones and Molotov cocktails.

“It became war in the streets,” described French journalist Marie Jégo. “Police fired directly into crowds. I saw bodies falling, blood everywhere.”

By evening, hospitals reported ten dead, including one police officer, and over 100 wounded. Opposition claimed higher casualties, accusing authorities of hiding bodies.

State of Emergency

Kocharyan’s emergency decree grants security forces sweeping powers while severely restricting civil liberties. Military units patrol Yerevan streets. Media outlets face censorship. Opposition leaders are arrested or in hiding.

“They’ve shown their true face - dictatorship maintained through violence,” stated human rights activist Artur Sakunts. “Democratic facades have crumbled.”

The restrictions particularly target media, with independent outlets shut down and internet access limited. Only state television broadcasts, showing endless loops of “restored order.”

Ter-Petrosyan’s Return

The protests marked remarkable political resurrection for Ter-Petrosyan, Armenia’s first president who was forced from office in 1998 for proposing compromise on Nagorno-Karabakh. His return galvanized opposition to the Kocharyan-Sargsyan “Karabakh clan.”

“People are tired of corruption, criminality, and stagnation,” explained political analyst Stepan Grigoryan. “Ter-Petrosyan represents alternative to military-oligarchic rule.”

His campaign emphasized economic issues and corruption rather than Karabakh, appealing to youth with no memory of his presidency. The strategy nearly worked until state machinery mobilized.

The Karabakh Factor

The violence highlights how Nagorno-Karabakh continues poisoning Armenian politics. The “Karabakh clan” - leaders from the disputed region including Kocharyan and Sargsyan - dominate through war credentials and militant nationalism.

“They use Karabakh as shield against any criticism,” noted opposition activist. “Question corruption? You’re traitor undermining national security. It’s perfect political weapon.”

This dynamic prevents normal political development. War heroes become untouchable rulers. Security concerns justify authoritarianism. The frozen conflict freezes democracy.

Economic Grievances

Beneath political disputes lie deep economic grievances. Despite macroeconomic growth, poverty remains widespread. Oligarchs connected to power monopolize business. Youth emigrate seeking opportunities.

“My son has master’s degree but works in Moscow restaurant,” complained protester Karine Danielyan. “Here only connections matter. That’s why we protest.”

The gap between official statistics and lived reality fueled protest energy. Sargsyan represents continuity of system that enriches few while impoverishing many.

International Response

International reaction remains muted, reflecting Armenia’s marginal strategic importance and “Ukraine fatigue” after multiple post-Soviet upheavals. The EU expressed “concern” while avoiding concrete actions.

“Armenia doesn’t have oil or strategic location,” observed Western diplomat. “Sadly, that affects international attention to democratic violations.”

Russia, Armenia’s key ally, supported Sargsyan while calling for “restraint.” Moscow prefers stable authoritarianism to unpredictable democracy in its security partner.

Crackdown Continues

As March 11 ends, arrests continue throughout Armenia. Opposition leaders face criminal charges. Ter-Petrosyan remains under de facto house arrest. Fear permeates Yerevan.

“They’re conducting sweeps neighborhood by neighborhood,” reports human rights monitor. “Anyone who attended protests risks arrest. It’s systematic intimidation.”

The state of emergency provides cover for eliminating political opposition. Today’s violence becomes tomorrow’s criminal cases against regime opponents.

Media Blackout

Information control proves crucial to government strategy. With independent media silenced and internet restricted, authorities shape narrative unopposed. State television portrays opposition as “attempting coup.”

“They’re rewriting history in real-time,” notes media analyst. “By controlling information, they control perception. Truth becomes casualty.”

Citizens rely on word-of-mouth and foreign broadcasts. The information vacuum breeds rumors and fear, exactly what authorities intend.

Deeper Implications

March 1 violence may fundamentally alter Armenia’s trajectory. The pretense of democratic transition has ended. The ruling clan has shown willingness to kill to maintain power.

“We’ve crossed rubicon,” reflects veteran politician. “After shooting citizens in capital’s center, there’s no return to normal politics.”

The opposition faces existential choice - accept defeat or radicalize further. Neither option promises stability.

Lost Innocence

For many Armenians, particularly youth, March 1 represents loss of innocence about their country’s direction. The generation that knew only independence discovered their state could kill them.

“I believed we were different from Azerbaijan or Belarus,” said wounded student Arman Sargsyan. “Now I know we’re just another post-Soviet dictatorship.”

This disillusionment may have lasting consequences. Brain drain will accelerate. Civil society will wither. Cynicism will deepen.

Karabakh Consequences

The crisis inevitably affects Nagorno-Karabakh dynamics. Internal instability weakens Armenia’s negotiating position while hardening Azerbaijan’s stance.

“Why compromise with unstable, illegitimate regime?” asks Azerbaijani analyst. “Armenia’s weakness is our opportunity.”

The violence also discredits the “Karabakh clan’s” claims to unique legitimacy through military victory. If they shoot Armenians in Yerevan, their patriotic credentials suffer.

Future Uncertain

As Yerevan counts its dead and tends its wounded, Armenia’s future appears darker. The promise of democratic development has been betrayed. The social contract lies broken.

“We thought independence meant freedom,” reflects elderly protester. “Instead we exchanged Moscow’s dictatorship for local one. What was it all for?”

Serzh Sargsyan will assume presidency through blood. His legitimacy will remain questioned. The opposition, bloodied but not eliminated, will seek revenge.

Morning After

March 1, 2008, joins dates of Armenian tragedy - 1915, 1988, 1999. This time, Armenians killed Armenians over political power. The wound may prove hardest to heal.

As dawn breaks on March 2, tanks patrol Republic Square where independence was declared. The symbolism is unmistakable - the dreams of 1991 lie as dead as March 1’s victims.

“We won independence but lost democracy,” summarizes human rights advocate. “Perhaps that was always the devil’s bargain.”

The Karabakh clan has kept power through violence. Whether they can keep it through governance remains to be seen. But one thing is certain - Armenia has changed forever.

Ten citizens died believing their vote mattered. Their blood testifies that in post-Soviet space, power flows not from ballot boxes but from gun barrels. Ter-Petrosyan learned this in 1998. His supporters learned it in 2008.

The lesson is written in blood on Yerevan’s streets: democracy is luxury Armenia’s rulers will not permit.