The tumultuous year of 2023 concluded on a alternatively affirmative note for Georgians as the country was granted candidate position for membership in the European Union in December. As 2024 marked an election year, electoral concerns took center phase in the political discourse. Political opposition, civilian society, and the public alike seemed profoundly focused on ensuring the electoral rights of all voters, including those from the diaspora, a recurring subject ahead of elections.
However, with a 4th consecutive word in power at stake, the ruling organization adopted a “disrupt to win” strategy as they entered the election year. On March 1st 2024, the organization introduced a draft law targeting “pseudo-liberal ideology” introducing homophobia as a run pillar. Subsequently, the ruling organization unequivocally supported repealing of sex quotas in parliamentary election lists, undoing reforms implemented in 2020 and undermining advancement towards gender-balanced politics in Georgia.
A dangerous game
As if this was not adequate to infuriate the Georgians (and let’s be honest, it surely did), the Georgian Dream (GD) further intensified their efforts to polarize and divide by launching the electoral run with a sharp escalation of conflict. On April 3rd, the ruling organization reintroduced a highly contested “law on transparency of abroad influence” widely known as a Russian-style law on abroad agents, despite having previously promised not to revive it. Most recently, on April 19th, the Georgian parliament approved the “offshore law” in its 3rd reading, fuelling fears that the country will become a black money hub to benefit the party’s billionaire leader, among others, possibly as a pre-emptive measurement against impending sanctions.
Arguably, the rushed and non-transparent passage of this law presents a strategical diversion of public attention towards debates on the transparency of abroad influence, allowing the offshore law to pass unnoticed, possibly putting Georgia at hazard as it may become a centre of gravity for sanctioned Russian money amidst ongoing Russia’s war in Ukraine.
“Georgia is not ready to join the EU,” declared Irakli Gharibashvili, erstwhile prime minister of Georgia on April 20th, amidst renewed tensions between Brussels and Tbilisi. alternatively than shocking Georgians, the majority of whom aspires to join the EU, specified statements from the Georgian Dream representatives seem to infuriate them. These remarks hazard eroding any remaining trust that the ruling Georgian Dream organization genuinely desires EU membership. While the ruling organization pledges not to retreat the bill again, even if pressured by protesters, they hazard facing a more crucial humiliation than in 2023. The ruling party’s strategy risks alienating parts of its voter base and damaging Georgia’s reputation internationally. Whether these factors will translate into the results of the upcoming parliamentary elections remains to be seen.
The ruling organization has consistently employed deceptive and manipulative tactics to sow confusion and keep control over the masses, a trend that has intensified in fresh days. Despite facing crucial criticism from civilian society, the opposition, and western partners concerning democratic backsliding and its implications for Georgia’s EU integration efforts, government representatives and controlled media outlets (such as Imedi TV, PostTV,) have increasingly adopted a pro-European “fake stance” in their rhetoric, claiming alignment with European values. This shift is evident in their repeated communication messaging, encapsulated in the slogan “towards Europe with dignity,” while concurrently advancing laws that blatantly contradict EU standards and are criticised by the EU and strategical global partners. This strategy constitutes a form of misdirection, where the government frames its actions to obscure the reality of its divergence from European values and integration agenda. By doing so, they aim to deceive the public and deflect criticism, presenting a false facade of alignment with European ideals while pursuing policies that undermine them.
Why are the 2024 parliamentary elections important?
Upcoming parliamentary elections in Georgia are assessed across the expert circles as “the most important”, “crucial”, or even “decisive”. This seems to be actual especially in the context of the ongoing widespread and permanent protests. However, sadly, the subject of elections seems to have rather virtually disappeared from the discourse. With little than six months before the elections, which Georgia conducts for the first time with an EU candidate status, the expectations are set advanced both from the Georgian people and the opposition, and the EU. In a complex triangle, the stakes are equally advanced for the current Georgian government.
The decision of the EU to grant Georgia the fresh position on its membership way marked a temporary decrease in the Georgian government’s year-long anti-western rhetoric, but contrary to expectations, did not manage to calm political tensions in the country, as perhaps, expected in the West. Navigating Georgia’s journey towards EU membership inactive presents the bloc with a strategical dilemma: whether to incentivise the nation amidst democratic backsliding or hazard leaving it susceptible to Russian influence. Striking a balance is imperative to prevent disillusionment among pro-EU Georgians.
Once a front-runner of the EU’s east Partnership policy, Georgia, under its current leadership, is now reservedly perceived as a mischievous “troublemaker”. This perception has been reinforced by the government’s reinvigorated anti-western rhetoric, statements of “disappointment with the EU”, as well as announcements of the highly contentious Russian-style laws in Georgia inciting societal conflict and polarization.
As the parliamentary elections on October 26th approach, delicate topics are being highlighted and escalated within the home agenda. The ruling organization is expected to strategically leverage these topics to appeal to conservative voters and bolster their chances of securing a parliamentary majority, even under the recently introduced full proportional electoral system. alternatively than prioritizing the implementation of EU recommendations to better align with the pro-European sentiments of the majority, the Georgian government appears one more time focused on employing manipulative pre-election tactics – strategies that have proven successful in erstwhile terms – to safe a 4th consecutive term. This approach could lead the country towards the setbacks which cannot be afforded.
Why the elections should substance to the EU
Despite a feeble political will, the Georgian people exhibit 1 of the strongest levels of support for EU integration among the candidate countries. A fresh public opinion poll commissioned by the global Republican Institute (IRI) and released on November 15th last year has revealed that 86 per cent of Georgian citizens support EU membership. For comparison, in Ukraine, the most fresh IRI poll, conducted in September 2023, indicates that 81 per cent of the population prefers EU membership, while in Moldova, support stands at 63 per cent.
The Georgian people’s embrace of its European aspirations fills the regular lives of the country, evident in all occasion possible – from demonstrating in the streets filled with EU flags to intimate household gatherings; from formal discussions to casual conversations about the European friends of Georgia; and last but not least, through the social media engagement. The EU’s fresh decision to grant Georgia candidacy position sparked an outpouring of joy, magnified across popular platforms like Facebook. The triumph in a historical qualifying match to the UEFA European Football Championship saw even non-football fans joining in the celebrations, underscoring the shared enthusiasm for getting closer to the EU.
In fresh years, Georgian society, peculiarly the younger generation, has emerged as a liable and critical force, rejecting political agendas that deviate from their envisioned EU path. Georgian youth, including Generation Z, have been at the forefront of fresh pro-EU street protests in Tbilisi and across the regions. This marks a crucial shift in political engagement, a fresh form of civic activism is born in Georgia as Georgian youngsters, who previously considered themselves non-political, avoiding engagement in political life, take to the streets. This evolving engagement amplifies the authentic and overwhelming voice of the people, which is crucial for all forthcoming processes in Georgia. Ignoring this sentiment could undermine the EU’s efforts to reenforce its influence in the region and foster stableness by aligning with its core principles. Only by actively supporting and amplifying these voices, the EU can rejuvenate its commitment to European ideals, as demonstrated by the passionate belief in European values exhibited by the people of Georgia. Whether proudly waving EU flags during demonstrations or displaying them on social media profiles, Georgians service as a powerful reminder to EU associate states and their citizens of the transformative power and privileges of European citizenship.
The ramifications of the Georgian Dream securing power for a 4th consecutive word will leave Georgia increasingly under Russia’s influence, posing a threat to both the region’s and European security.
Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine has demonstrated how closely the home political developments in the EU’s neighbourhoods are linked with abroad policy yet affecting the EU’s interior political dynamics. It has equally shown the (in)ability of the EU to deal with specified crises as well as the request to reform. In light of rapidly changing regional dynamics, shifting priorities by the ruling organization in Georgia ahead of elections is an effort to apply akin tactics of diverting attention from real problems, specified as economical hurdles faced by the majority of people as shown in the fresh IRI polls. This, coupled with a disregard for the will of the people, unmistakably signals impending danger to practice democratic processes in the country, including elections. These developments harshly uncover that the aspirations of the Georgian Dream organization diverge from the chosen European trajectory of the people.
The draft law on the Transparency of abroad Influence law sparked serious concerns within the EU, emphasizing its negative impact on Georgia’s EU accession process and falling under Russian influence. The fact that the law is labelled as “Russian” is not accidental. It is supported by the Russian ruling elite and holds long-term strategical importance for Russia, serving as a means not only to progressively suppress opposing voices within its own borders but besides as a propaganda tool to exert Russian hegemonic influence over the region, facilitating a shift towards governance resembling that of Russia. This makes it easier for Russia to exert its influence across the region. The fresh adoption of a akin law in Kyrgyzstan in March 2024 serves as a clear example of this trend.
Much like its counterpart in Russia, this law seeks to stifle dissenting voices, contributing to an atmosphere of uncertainty and fear among the citizens, thereby pushing the country toward full authoritarianism. Much like in Russia in 2012, the introduction of this law in Georgia will limit the voice of civilian society and the media which will monitor upcoming elections in the country. The government does not require widespread monitoring and assessment of the electoral processes.
Finally, a weakened Georgian democracy in the vicinity poses an immediate threat to the safety of the European Union. It is crucial for EU officials not only to monitor ongoing developments in Georgia but besides to research ways for exerting influence on the government. This is essential to prevent the escalation of Russian influence and to begin implementing the recommendations provided for initiating negotiations on EU membership.
Intensive support to Georgia in fighting against an imposed authoritarian government would guarantee the efficient usage of already invested resources.
The upcoming elections represent a pivotal minute for the Georgian people, as they invest their beliefs and hopes in the possible of democratic change. As 1 of the major donors to Georgia since 1992, the EU has been instrumental in fostering economical growth, improving infrastructure, promoting democratic reforms and improving the overall quality of life of the Georgian citizens. However, due to its strategical location and historical ties, Georgia has continuously been a mark for competing regional powers, peculiarly Russia. The EU has a vested interest in promoting democracy, human rights and stableness in its neighbourhood, making it crucial to closely monitor Georgian politics and navigate through the strategical challenges to guarantee the protection of its investments and prevent any undue influence that may hinder advancement towards European integration and regional stability.
Ongoing developments in Georgia, including laws that endanger democracy, freedom of speech, and human rights, as well as the ultra-conservative rhetoric from government representatives, along with events orchestrated by Kremlin-affiliated entities, are endangering the advancement made towards establishing a European, democratic state. If left unchecked, the authoritarian government to which the Georgian government steers its people has the possible to undermine the fresh ideas, enthusiasm, and energy presently demonstrated by the youth as it happened in Russia or Belarus. Despite people placing considerable hope in the elections, they find themselves compelled to defend their will in the streets.
The EU must act beyond its soft power toolbox
The EU’s soft power approach is no longer sufficient. While soft power has been a cornerstone in EU-Georgia relations, fresh evidence suggests its diminishing efficacy. The dialogic approach associated with the soft power policies assumes genuine goodwill from all parties involved. However, the recurrent endangering of EU values and its fundamental principles in Georgia requires a more differentiated strategy leveraging available restrictive measures under the EU’s CFSP. It is time for the EU to recognise that the Georgian Dream organization in Georgia does not align in actions with its proclaimed commitment to European values and Georgia’s European integration. This argument gains credence from the ongoing war in Ukraine, showcasing that the EU’s neighbours not only search economical support (soft power) but besides crucially depend on the political backing of the EU (hard power). As neighbouring countries aspire for EU membership, the EU should shift beyond its soft power toolbox and adopt a more assertive stance, utilising the sanctions government in order to importantly affect the regime’s behaviour. Amid its own interior challenges, the EU should muster the political will to articulate possible consequences, beyond specified political rhetoric.
The EU should capitalize on enlargement. Another evidence that Russia’s war in Ukraine has brought to light is that the enlargement mostly remains the most effective abroad policy toolbox in EU’s possession. The EU should capitalize on this and usage the historical window of chance to hold its geostrategic relevance and credibility by reforming and preparing itself for the enlargement. Georgia has historically presented its goal to become an EU member, thus, remaining an inseparable part of the revived EU enlargement process, and should be seen as specified in the bloc’s improvement process.
The EU should rethink the cooperation format and adapt it to the crisis mode currently expanding in Georgia. An increased engagement in innovative, flexible formats on the policy level with all actors, especially with the civilian society and grassroots organisations is needed. These critical actors should be included in the discussions and supported not only during the ongoing protests but ahead of the elections. These groups have a strong capacity to tackle disinformation and mobilise widespread election monitoring missions and campaigns, something that would be limited if the ‘foreign agent law’ is introduced in Georgia.
The EU must stay vigilant in its commitment to upholding democratic values at all costs – both internally and externally. The European Commission’s Defence of Democracy package aiming to “strengthen resilience against covert abroad interference (…)” is referred to by Georgia’s ruling organization as 1 of the exemplary justifications for introducing the “foreign agent” law in Georgia. It is best visible in times of crises that interior EU debates, procedures and fact-checked information discussed in expert circles do not always scope the wider public, hence, manipulation efforts by certain governments. With all attention towards the upcoming European Parliament elections, the EU not only neglects to address civilian society’s repeated criticisms of the draft directive but besides risks tarnishing its image and role, not only within its associate states but besides abroad. This includes countries like Georgia, where the EU has long been regarded as a champion of democratic values. Ultimately, the EU’s ability to influence affirmative democratic change in its neighbouring countries may be affected. The EU cannot ignore the spillover effects, not after it has been extensively warned both from within the EU and from non-EU countries alike. It should take its fair share of work already now.
The EU should communicate better. For the second year in a row, tens of thousands of Georgians are defending their European future in the streets. In 2024, it is their biggest accomplishment so far – the EU candidate position – which is at stake. The EU has always been expected to aid “fix” things and clear the gathering clouds – an anticipation that received criticism from the side of the EU, perhaps, rightfully so. What is undisputed nevertheless is that the EU is expected to communicate clearly what the consequences of not defending Georgia’s democracy will be. Those protesting for weeks in a row request support in communicating this clearly and plainly with the wider public – currently, not supporting the protests. The EU plays a strategical function in better informing the public narratives in Georgia. Successes and failures of communication efforts are best visible during crises. Meaningful citizen participation necessitates the creation of effective communication and the provision of an inclusive public sphere where diverse viewpoints can thrive, facilitating independent electoral decision-making. By proactively fortifying interior democratic resilience and countering external interference, the EU can effectively support Georgia’s aspirations for democratic progress.
If the above-mentioned issues are not addressed, a possible 4th word for the Georgian Dream could undoubtedly push the country towards authoritarianism. The ruling organization appears well-equipped for this shift, with politicians adept at crafting distracting narratives to divert attention from their actual intentions, neutralising possible oversight or watchdogs. They besides keep full control over state resources and access to state institutions, and the ability to rewrite rules to their advantage. Against these persistent threats, whether we proceed hoping for reasonably fair parliamentary elections, remains to be seen.
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the organization position of their employers, or that of the NEE.
Ia Khodeli specializes in the European Union’s abroad policy, with a peculiar focus on the east Neighbourhood. Based in Brussels, she serves as a task officer dedicated to enhancing trade relations between the EU and east Partnership countries. Prior to this role, Ia contributed to various EU initiatives that fostered social, economic, and educational transformations in the EaP region.
Kristina Pitalskaya is a civic activist based in Brussels, concentrating on EU democracy support policies and projects. She has collaborated with civilian society organisations across the east Partnership, Central Asia, Russia, and the EU in various capacities. Kristina besides regularly writes blogs on European and Georgian politics for an global audience.
Irakli Jgharkava is simply a specialist in global Relations and Security, with investigation interests spanning national security, cybersecurity, disinformation, information warfare, and Georgia-EU relations. Over the past 5 years, he has been actively active in promoting democracy by strengthening civilian society in the east Partnership region. Additionally, Irakli specializes in European Union Public Policy.
Please support New east Europe's crowdfunding campaign. Donate by clicking on the button below.
