As the first significant election to be held since last year’s bitterly disputed and highly controversial presidential vote, the conduct of the poll to determine Yerevan’s mayor should have provided the authorities with the sorely-needed opportunity to improve Armenia’s democratic credentials in the international arena. However, while a small team of European observers considered the municipal election to be “largely conducted in compliance with European standards,” local observers and analysts were not impressed.
Speaking to Osservatorio, Armenian National and International Studies (ACNIS) Director Richard Giragosian is one of many critical of the vote. “It was outrageous and yet another example of the systemic abuse and misuse of administrative resources, the power of incumbency in this country, and yet another lost opportunity for Armenia to actually turn the page after the 1 March fiasco. However, the real hypocrisy comes not from the Armenian government, but from the European observers who once again endorsed a fragrantly abusive election.”
[…]
“It was strict confirmation that things are still unacceptably bad and we’re going in the wrong direction. Armenia is approaching a crossroads where it might become even more authoritarian by following a Belarus model. However, the real determinant here is not politics, but economics. The political stalemate and polarization can sustain the system, and it can be managed, but an economic crisis would be the tipping point. If the government can’t handle that, then this will pose more serious challenges.” link

Georgia has seen long-standing protests, now lasting for almost 5 weeks. Some opposition supporters have expressed surprise why so few people continue to come to the protests, with only a few thousand coming out onto the street for current protest events. “How is it”, one supporter wondered, “that we talked to people in February and March and practically everyone was dissatisfied, but now we only have a handful actually out supporting us? Did we get it wrong?”
They got it right and wrong at the same time. […] The key to the political contest is winning over those that are undecided, many of whom voted with the government in the last two elections. They are dissatisfied with certain aspects of the government, but also not committed to any current alternative. link

The second is from Anna Dolidze’s blog:

Observing events from Georgia, I feel that there is a need and space for a Third Platform. This should be a group of political forces and individuals that are not AGAINST someone by FOR something, for reforms, for better healthcare, for reduced military budget, for negotiations with Abkhazs and Ossetians and with Russians, for reforms and more money in education, for integration with the European institutions etc. This group would come up with a positive, progressive platform and would engage with everyone- not just Georgian- Orthodox population. It should be based on respect and not on swearing, cynicism and aggression. It would try to change current discourse. There are people that share these values within Georgian opposition now, yet they have been completely silenced by radicals from both sides. They should be helped so that they sound as “sexy” and grassroots as do the radicals. They are the ones’ that should reinforced. Because the two existing platforms of Saakashvili and anti-Saakashvili do not instill much hopes for a better, more democratic future. link

All that said, despite my concerns with Ter-Petrossian’s rhetoric, there’s also no doubt he’s resurrected what was an impotent opposition. He lacked the numbers he needed in this vote, but the dedication he does have from supporters is something no other politician in Armenia has.
Incidentally, yesterday I remarked to some journalist friends that a big question mark now hangs over the opposition’s future. As you say, it really needs to own up to and address its shortcomings and work out a strategy that does represent a real alternative based on concepts and ideas.

Putting aside for a moment the issue of election violations and fraud, and its effect on people’s turnout at rallies or election itself, I have to agree with Hraparak daily’s assessment today that effectively Armenian opposition failed to garner a widespread support needed for success. Even with the ballot stuffing, turnout for votes was too low (slightly over 50%), especially considering that the Yerevan election was billed as one of national importance and a “2nd round of presidential election”. This is an indication of need for fresh faces and/or new tactics/strategy. Current ones do not work. Most Yerevan residents effectively boycotted elections due to apathy or not being satisfied with current choices on offer. link