On December 9th, 2024, SpecialEurasia’s broadcasted an online event to provide an in-depth analysis of Georgia’s political crisis.
Giuliano Bifolchi, SpecialEurasia’s Research Manager, moderated a discussion featuring insights from Cesare Figari Barberis, Leiden University postdoctoral researcher, and Leonardo Zanatta, PhD candidate at Corvinus University and research fellow at the OSCE Academy in Bishkek.
The session examined the recent Georgian elections, addressing allegations of electoral fraud, the ensuing protests, and the broader geopolitical context.
Georgia: Background and Electoral Context
The discussion began with a review of the controversial elections in Georgia. Georgian Dream, the ruling party, claimed victory amidst allegations of voter intimidation and fraud. Cesare Figari Barberis highlighted that while vote counting itself was not manipulated, intimidation tactics and breaches of voter secrecy, particularly in rural regions, raised serious concerns. Allegations of coercion against public sector employees to endorse the Georgian Dream party have emerged, resulting in an environment that violates democratic principles.
Leonardo Zanatta underscored how Georgian Dream effectively employed narratives portraying external and domestic actors as pushing Georgia into a conflict with Russia. Simultaneously, the opposition framed the elections as a decisive moment in Georgia’s EU integration journey, setting up a polarised contest between European aspirations and perceived Russian influence.
The Role of Narratives and Public Sentiment
The session explored the public’s pro-European sentiment, which Figari Barberis characterised as deeply ingrained in Georgian identity. Many Georgians see themselves as inherently European, linking EU membership with cultural and civilisational belonging rather than mere institutional alignment. However, the hosts and speakers noted a dichotomy: while urban areas vocally support EU integration, rural and conservative segments often resonate with Georgian Dream’s messaging.
Both the speakers emphasised that the European Union’s position on Georgia remains fragmented. While some EU lawmakers have criticised the elections and expressed solidarity with protesters, the bloc’s institutional response has been more reserved. This divergence has contributed to a perception of inconsistency in EU-Georgia relations.
Georgian Dream’s Political Trajectory
The discussion shifted to Georgian Dream’s evolution from an anti-corruption movement to a party criticised for autocratic tendencies. Figari Barberis attributed this transformation partly to the geopolitical shift following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Georgian Dream prioritised economic stability over European alignment, avoiding sanctions against Russia to protect Georgia’s trade interests. He questioned whether the EU genuinely seeks Georgia’s membership, speculating that Georgian Dream might have recalibrated its approach because of perceived EU ambivalence.
Zanatta added that Georgian Dream’s calculated moves, such as the controversial foreign agent law and anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric, signal an attempt to consolidate domestic power rather than align with any particular foreign bloc.
Zanatta criticised the Georgian opposition’s inability to capitalise on public discontent. Over 12 years, opposition groups have failed to produce a charismatic leader capable of challenging Georgian Dream’s dominance. Instead, opposition movements have often relied on NGOs and civil society initiatives, which Georgian Dream has sought to curtail through legislative measures like the foreign agent law.
Geopolitical Dynamics and Protests
In this section, Figari Barberis described the protests as a reaction to Georgian Dream’s announcement to delay EU membership discussions until 2028. This decision, perceived as a betrayal of pro-European aspirations, reignited public dissent. The speakers noted that while the protests captured media attention initially, events in the Middle East, such as the collapse of Assad’s regime, have since overshadowed them, diminishing their momentum and international support.
Zanatta highlighted potential scenarios for Georgia’s future, drawing parallels with Poland’s martial law in 1981 and Belarus’s 2020 crackdown on protests. Both experts agreed that Georgia faces a critical juncture: if Georgian Dream consolidates power, the country risks sliding further into authoritarianism and potentially closer ties with Russia.
The Role of Abkhazia and South Ossetia
The territorial disputes over Abkhazia and South Ossetia remain a continuing feature of Georgia’s political identity. While Figari Barberis noted that these issues rank lower than economic concerns in public priorities, they continue to symbolise national integrity. Hypotheses regarding Russia’s potential return of South Ossetia to Georgia within a wider geopolitical agreement were deemed improbable, considering the region’s intricate dynamics and local autonomy.
Zanatta indicated that certain Georgian factions perceived Russia’s troop repositioning toward Ukraine as a chance to retake lost territories. However, such a move would entail significant risks and is not widely supported within Georgian society.
Conclusion
The session underscored the multifaceted nature of Georgia’s political crisis. Georgian Dream’s policies reflect a pragmatic yet controversial balancing act between economic priorities, domestic stability, and international expectations. The EU’s inconsistent stance, the opposition’s fragmentation, and the enduring significance of territorial disputes complicate Georgia’s path forward.
Both speakers agreed that the coming months would be critical in determining whether Georgia can navigate these challenges without further polarisation or external interference.
For further reports and risk assessments about Georgia and the Caucasus, contact us at info@specialeurasia.com and request information about our products and services.
