Trump or Clinton? Who will win at the U.S. presidential elections and what issues should the Armenian Community set forward?—Concluding remarks by Suren Sargsyan

Interview with Suren Sargsyan, Teaching Assistant, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, on the forthcoming presidential elections in the USA, as well as victory possibilities of Republican Donald Trump or Democrat Hilary Clinton.

Mr. Sarsyan, if we conclude the heated campaign on the threshold of presidential elections, followers of which we’ve been for a lasting period, what did this campaign show about the U.S. political life, i.e. what it was noted by?

While assessing the campaign, we should stress that this was really an exceptional campaign in the history of the U.S. presidential elections. It was distinguished by aggressiveness, the candidates were more focused on persons, rather than on main issues currently existent in the USA. Republican candidate Donald Trump was exceptionally aggressive in the whole period, offending both other candidates and his electorate, i.e. this was a rather aggressive and phenomenal campaign.

International media outlets, the expert community, are discussing what was the guarantee of Donald Trump’s success until this stage. Politicians, political scientists in the U.S. consider the possibility of his victory ridiculous, however, currently he concedes his contestant Clinton. How do you explain his phenomenon?

The main reason was that he wasn’t taken seriously. Secondly, Trump performed a rather professional work, his political team implemented a serious work to lead Trump to the point that he became the main candidate for the Republican Party, as the latter paid a very high price for that, and there was a discrepancy around Trump’s candidacy inside the political party again. I consider, professional work of Trump’s campaign should be distinguished, as very serious work was being conducted, and from the perspective of social quests, marketing, it was being perfectly analyzed what a simple American wants to hear from Trump or the Republican Party candidate, and was exactly expressing that.

Surprisingly enough, when he was touching upon banning of Muslims’ entrance to the USA, i.e. there are people in the USA, who consider, that migration of Muslims to the USA should be prevented, the index of Trump’s popularity was remarkably growing among the Muslims living in the USA and they comprise about 3 million. This was a curious, but a working variant. The same was recorded with the Latin Americans, when Trump stated that a wall should be constructed and entrance of Mexicans to the USA should be banned, his rating was raising again. Thus, serious, professional work has been implemented by Trump’s campaign office, which gave its outcomes, and Trump was able to win a giant candidate like Jeb Bush, whose father and brother were U.S. presidents.

At the moment what’s your assessment to the possibilities of the candidates to win, on account of the fact that quests show that their chances are almost equal?

U.S. electoral system has peculiarities. It should be taken into consideration that two processes are taking place—it’s people’s choice and election by the electors. When people go and take part in elections, they vote for their candidate, in fact, they give that vote not to the candidate, but to electors, who go and vote for the candidate of their political party, i.e. at large, this is a two-step electoral system, which has repeatedly proven in the history of the U.S., that even if the majority votes, suppose, Trump, then more probably, due to the mechanism of those electors, number of which is 270, i.e. that many votes are necessary for the next president to be elected, and the outcome of elections was different. Cases are known in the history of the U.S., when, for instance, John Kerry gained more votes, however, as a result, winner was George Bush, as electors gave 4 more votes for Bush. This is a peculiarity, which needs deep study and comprehension of its sense and purpose.

I consider, victory will be given to Hillary Clinton, however, with great difficulty. It should also be taken into consideration, Hillary Clinton’s supporters are rather sure that Hillary will win, and this may be a rather dangerous phenomenon, as maybe many people will be sure, that Hillary will win and not participate in the elections, which will directly raise Trump’s possibilities, as the latter’s supporters are more aggressive and will actively take part in the elections, voting for their candidate.

In the candidates’ plans we’re interested in the South Caucasus, NK conflict, Armenia-Turkey relations, steps towards Section 907. If you have studied, what should be anticipated in the South Caucasus from the policy pursued by the U.S. in case of each candidate? If in case of Clinton that policy is somewhat shaped on account of the period of her stay in the Office, then Donald Trump’s attitude towards this region is unknown.

Any of the candidates didn’t make a statement on Armenia, NK issue, the South Caucasus countries. Separate statements on Russia, Iran, relations with Turkey have repeatedly been heard, however, they have been in geopolitical or bilateral context.

As for the candidates, I consider, elected as the president, Hillary Clinton will develop the policy adopted by the Department of State, when she was heading it, and the same policy Barak Obama pursues today. Basically, we are aware of particularities of this policy, in particular, if we take into consideration, that Clinton knows the region, twice visited Yerevan, has position linked to the Genocide issue, which she never expressed, is aware of NK issue rather well.

Donald Trump isn’t aware of all these issues, doesn’t have any view of the region, regional issues, that’s why he didn’t make any statement.

However, we should reflect to the third component—role and importance of the Armenian Community in these elections. First and foremost, I should mention, that the Armenian Community assumed a rather passive role, that of a voter only. Armenian organizations only stated that they will support neither Hillary Clinton, nor Donald Trump, however, our community should have already formulated an issue and state that currently Armenia faces rater serious security issue. All Armenians should submit a united demand to the newly elected U.S. president to support Armenia’s security or guarantees for Armenia and NK. This is a rather serious challenge, that Armenia and NK currently face. This issue may be raised on the level of bilateral/multilateral relations, this may be within MG format, however, in any way the USA should stress security of Armenia and NK, as the April developments showed that currently their number one challenge is the direct threat of war, which may lead to numerous implications, including Genocide repetition.

In 1992 the U.S. Senate and Congress passed Section 907, co-authors of which were incumbent Secretary of State John Kerry and Vice President Joe Biden. Those times are a past now, they weren’t consistent in this project, that very way representatives of the Armenian Community have been inconsistent. Section 907 generally bans the USA in supporting Azerbaijan. After the development on September 11, 2001 the U.S. president asked the Congress and the Senate to provide him the opportunity to assist Azerbaijan in joint fight against terror. Every year the U.S. legislative body allots that possibility to the president, conditioned that Azerbaijan won’t use it against the people of Armenia and NKR.

However, Azerbaijan received military support from the USA in the form of military education, i.e. annually programs costing millions of dollars are being implemented by the USA for the training of Azerbaijani officers. However, the most crucial here is the point that during the developments in April two professional Azerbaijani saboteurs have been destroyed by Armenian armed forced in NK Talish village, the saboteurs, who received professional education in the U.S. higher military and military-reconnaissance facilities. Thus, a serious issue has emerged here, as Aliyev cheated Pentagon, and the latter, in its turn, violated the law. Accordingly, if we perform persistent work, I consider, it’ll be possible to demand that the USA didn’t provide support to Azerbaijan in any way. It’s a rather crucial issue to which our community should attach attention to and exclude military cooperation between the USA and Azerbaijan, as the latter isn’t a trustworthy partner, and as a result of its activities the U.S. legislation has been violated.

What tools do you observe for the strengthening of Section 907?

We have a serious lobbyist influence in Washington, we have successful facilities, which implemented essential work throughout these years for Armenia and solved serious issues both for Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh. Let’s not forget that after Armenia, the USA is the only state, which provides direct support to NKR. This is the result of the very lobbyists, as well as some works, which were rather productive. Currently, it’s high time for the Armenian Community and Armenian lobbyist facilities unite and claim from the USA use its influence towards Azerbaijan, Armenia, possibly restricting Azerbaijan’s possible aggression, which erupts from time to time and we know what implications it may lead to.

Mr. Sargsyan, to conclude, do you think that in case of Hillary Clinton’s victory we won’t observe any considerable change in the foreign policy pursued by Obama in the South Caucasus?

I anticipate that the policy by the U.S. will remain unchanged in NK negotiations, i.e. what the USA says, does and states, it implements within OSCE MG. It’ll remain unchanged. As for Armenia-Turkey relations, in case of victory, Hillary will return to the settlement of Armenia-Turkey relations, although at the moment I can’t say within which format—records or something else, however, I’m sure that the U.S. leadership will implement such an experience.

By Araks Martirosyan