CEU eTD Collection Minority Integrationin Transition States: the In partial fulfilment of the requirementsfor the degree of Master of Arts Department of International Relations and European Studies Case ofPost-Soviet Georgia Supervisor: MatteoFumagalli Supervisor: Central European University European Central Word Count: 16,709 Budapest, Hungary Rachel Rachel Bending Submitted to Submitted 2012 By CEU eTD Collection a lack of effective local governance and low awareness of low persist. values, awarenessof a lack and local civic of effective governance including long stall from over carried will transition to the so askeyfeatures period, continue minorities national of integration the that today.society shape Georgian concludes thesis The to continue of that transition features main the itlocates so, of doing In each. integration the facing obstacles chief the identifies and minorities, Azeri and Armenian the on transition Through qualitative interviews in–depth and research, this thesis examines theimpact of in has date integration assisttheir success Georgia,to the been integration minority of poor. to in Kartli. Kvemochanges of However,policy various spite Azeris the of and Javakheti of Armenians the namely minorities, national largest country's the of integration the through state Georgian the consolidate to been has administration Saakashvili the of objectives of national minorities in country.the Since power coming to in of 2003, one key the Abstract This thesis considers the impact on This thesis considersthe of Georgia's integration post-Soviet transition the i CEU eTD Collection Bibliography...... 64 Conclusions...... 59 Chapter 4: The Integration of Minorities in Georgia: Policies and Perceptions...... 49 Chapter 3: the Armenian and Azeri Minorities in Georgia...... 26 Chapter 2: Historical Background...... 16 Chapter 1: Theoretical Framework...... 6 Introduction...... 1 Table ofContents 4.2: Perceptions of Minorities in Georgia...... 55 4.1: Government Policies towards the Integration of National Minorities...... 49 3.3: Comparative ...... 45 Summary 3.2: The Azeris ...... 37 ofKvemoKartli 3.1: The Armenians of Javakheti...... 27 2.3: Post-Independence Georgia ...... 23 under Shevardnadze 2.2: Nationalism ...... 20 and Ethnic Conflict 2.1: Roots of Corruption and Ethnic Favouritism ...... 17 in the Georgian SSR 1.3: Minority Responses to Integration...... 13 1.2: Transition and State-minority ...... 10 Relations 1.1: States in Transition ...... 6 and Nation-building Appendix 2: Household Economic Situation by Respondent Ethnicity...... 63 Appendix 1: Family Member Living Abroad by Respondent Ethnicity, ...... 62 Georgia ii CEU eTD Collection Table 2: Population of Kvemo Kartli by region and ethnicity, ...... 38 1989 and 2002 Table 1: Population of Samtskhe-Javakheti by region and ethnicity, 1989 and 2002...... 28 List of Tables iii CEU eTD Collection List of of List Abbreviations UAWG – Union of Azerbaijani Women of Georgia Georgia” “Multinational Movement Public – PMMG OSCE/ODIHR –Organization for Security inand Co-operation Europe/Office for OSCE HCNM – Organization for Security and Co-operation in High Europe IPS – Institute of Policy Studies GOC –Georgian ChurchOrthodox Minorities National of Protection the for Convention Framework – FCNM ECRML – European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages ECMI –European Centre for Minority Issues Commission Election District – DEC Centre Resources Research CRRC –Caucasus CIPDD – Caucasus Institute for Peace, Democracy and Development Relations Inter-Ethnic and Integration Civil for Centre – CCIIR Democratic Institutions and Human Rights Minorities National for Commissioner iv CEU eTD Collection independence era.Thus,independence are: thequestionsmy guidingthroughout research of in post- the society define structure and is characteristics that the expectedto period transition the is it since minorities, national of integration the on paid be transition will of effect the to attention regard, this In Georgia. post-Soviet of context the in minorities national from carried period. transition over Georgia's features and societal however,efforts, hasthis been hamperedincludingby variousprocess obstacles, thestructural and the promotion of a civic national identity in country.the Inspite of government'sthe minorities national Georgia's of integration the through state the of integrity the strengthen to endeavoured has government current the all, Above state. the consolidate to attempts markedin anewperiod Georgia's recenthistory, and byintense reforms characterized resulting failurethe near in of state the 1990s.However,the theRose Revolution of 2003 statements belie Georgia'shistory, recent fraught with ethnic nationalism,and conflict ethnic national minorities. Unfortunately,in spite of comfortingthis andoft-quoted analogy, such harmonious relations enjoyed between Georgianthe population and the country's many Georgians point closeto the proximity these of buildingsasproof religious of uniquely the this small country. of diversity and ethnic away religious from another, thehistoric one throw reflecting stone's When questioned on the anArmenian a church Jewish Apostolic areall and aMuslimmosque Synagogue, located nature of interethnic relations in Georgia, local Therefore, the aim of this thesis is to assess the conditions inhibiting the integration of integration the assess inhibiting conditions the aim isto the thesis this Therefore, of On Leselidze Street in the old town of Tbilisi, Georgia, a Georgian Orthodox church, a I NTRODUCTION 1 CEU eTD Collection ethnic nationalism of latethe 1980s that tore republicthe from Sovietthe Union,followed by past twodecades have been forthecountry, especially turbulent includingdissidentvirulent the In particular, reasons. anumberof for minorities national in of integration hardthe case the ResearchCase selectionRelevance of and different experiences of minority regions of the transition period. of integration for differentminorities in country the is expected beto influenced by the informed also is by uniquefeatures toGeorgia’s experienceitself of in transition 1990s.Meanwhile,the thesuccess integration of process the era, Soviet the from transition the completing and state the consolidating towards step is necessary a minorities national of integration the while Thus, country. in the minorities national of integration the affecting transition of features aswell of in integration, dominant the policiesas terms of state approach how interms both integration, minority inform to continues period transition the that is anticipated integration. hindering identify minority It features respectiveof their situation and to the each compare national soasto minorities, of case studies two question be through approached will shapeGeorgian continueGeorgia's to society transition today.and which process Thesecond early identifypost-independence periods to features prevailing the effectivelythat delayed In order to answer firstquestion, the thesis this will adetailed look take at Sovietthe and As compared with other former Soviet Republics, Georgia represents aparticularly Republics, Georgia formerAs compared represents other Soviet with 2. 1. in Georgia? minorities national of integration the obstructing presently are conditions What minorities in Georgia? has hadintegration effect of What experience the of transition onthe national 2 CEU eTD Collection case. integration of these national the on of impacttransition tooutline the attempt Iwill my based studies on case Therefore, minorities, as well as the majorwarrant comparison. to issufficiently different minorities these of of transition experience the obstacles to integration inkin states (Armeniaeach and Azerbaijan). Moreover, while they are similar in size and composition, their in ethnic on bordering largestminorities andarecompactly territories settled Georgia, the represent they since process integration the to relevant most are – Kartli Kvemo of Azeris occurrence. their re- issues andprevent these to resolve bythedesire are driven integration efforts at state andindeed region, the as security of the disputes, concerning Georgia'scontinuing territorial bearin mind that problemthe inminority integration of Georgia is part of a larger issue to important is it Thus, states. transition multinational in integration of problems the exploring academic the of onconditions focus andminority by instead conflictethnic secession multiethnic countries and undergoing also state- nation-building. intends counterbalance It to facing hurdles the understanding to contribute will thesis this that is hoped it minorities, national of integration the on transition of impact the assessing By history. recent Georgia's of light in challenging particularly is also but observe, to interesting only is not Georgia by state fosteringunity. national the in minority consolidate integration projectof the Thus, in to and country the national minorities effort integrate it madeaconcerted to has credentials, Mikheil hasSaakashvili in numerous ways failed to live up to its professed democratic transition remaineduntil dormant RoseRevolutionthe of 2003. While the government of early As a result1990s. of in features, outlinedthese in detail two,Georgia'sChapter in the collapse state near and Abkhazia, and Ossetia South over conflicts ethno-territorial the The minorities selected as case studies – the Armenians of Samtskhe-Javakheti and the ascase –theArmeniansof studies Samtskhe-Javakheti The minoritiesselected 3 CEU eTD Collection Interviews with national minority representatives also revealed personal experiences of the of experiences personal revealed also representatives minority national with Interviews integration. to obstacles the and integration minority to relating issues main the on opinions informing governmentpolicy, allowed me to access informationup-to-date informedand languages, this did not seem to hinder the quality of the ideas expressed therein. English Russian. While or none of interviewsthe wereconducted in native interviewees' the and hour,one betweenminutes twenty-five interviews lasted and usedwaseither language the and of attitudes both Georgianthe public andnational minorities tointegration efforts. The integration purpose of the tointegration, in aswell main the Georgia, minorities as obstacles touched questions on effectivenessthe policiesgovernment of aimed atintegrating national my area according tothe In general,of interviewee. of expertise adjusted sometimes the and nationalities. Armenian Azeri range of viewpoints on issue.the interviewed Those included representatives of Georgian, a gather me to allow to varied sufficiently were interviewees the of minorities national with expertise and experience in fieldthe ofminority issues. The individual positions and relations office. Using apurposive strategy, sampling I selected intervieweesthe basedon their NGOs, policy analysts, international organizations andpersonnel of publicthe defender's local of representatives including in Georgia, issues in minority involved people of variety inhabited region of Samtskhe-Javakheti. During thistime Iconductednineinterviews a with Tbilisi, although I madeGeorgia inApril 2012. Fortheduration my of in time Georgia Iwas based in the capital city a two-day excursion to the town of Akhalkalaki in the Armenian- Methodology Conducting interviews with specialists in the field, some of whom are responsible for responsible are whom of some field, in the specialists with interviews Conducting consistingThe interviews of weresemi-structured, whichwere questions open-ended In order to enrich my research and gather empirical evidence I made a short trip to 4 CEU eTD Collection of transition of the two minorities in question. in minorities two the of transition of in society, differentGeorgian the minorities experiences toshedlight on areexpected as these country. Thisfinal will chapter consideralso prevailing the national attitudes towards minoritiesinintegrate in policies years designed to the recent introduced state consider fourwill Chapter while informintegration, their that determine characteristics major to the demographic,the of economic andpolitical two minoritiesthe in circumstances studied order focus of on and Chapter three structural willcharacteristics the period. societal this present followed,period weakness a turmoil early with the that of subsequent of 1990s and the state provides an overview of Georgia’shistory, recent including thelegacy Sovietthe era, the of two integration. affecting Chapter minority to responses factors outline potential and to context post-Soviet in the minorities national of integration the impacting conditions establish to in order integration, minority and relations, state-minority transition, on background Outline transition. of experience national in minorities towards Georgia andthe country’s especially attitudes regarding thesis, used these interviews primarily as a source insightwithof informwhich to focus of the this I have hand. at issues of the awareness enhance their to whichserved process, integration This thesis consists offour main Chapter looks at chapters. one theoretical the 5 CEU eTD Collection lacking and consolidate state state rule.lacking consolidate and is it where consciousness national promote to in order levels, international and macro micro, so, he argues states that emergingfrom ‘colonial’ rule must revive national identity on the experience of post-colonial applyingsettings, it tohis study of Ukraine.post-Soviet Indoing minorities. national on nation-building of effect the consider and context, post-Soviet in the transition section will review the work of scholars focusingthis on theThus, nation-building nation. the of dimension characteristics of internal the also but borders external their only not required emerging areoften toredefine settings andfrom states colonial redefinition, implies issues of national identity have space,few contemplated scholars in post-Soviet of the transitions countries building made salient by transition. state- and marketization However, focus while hasbeen democratization, much on the This absence is puzzling, as transition 1.1: States in Transition Nation-building and 2 new state as well as to legitimize the leadership of Inboth of as well a newstate. abovecases, leadership the new the tolegitimize state as independent state. its rule, by approach how eliteindemonstrating the hasKazakhstan nation-building used tolegitimize following their own transformation from loyal party cadres to leaders of an 1 Bhavna Dave, 'Kazakhstan: Ethnicity,Language andPower', New York: Routledge,2007, 91-94. Taras Kuzio and Paul D'Anieri, 'Dilemmas of State-led NationBuilding in Ukraine', Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2002, 10-11. Taras Kuziosees paradigm transition particularly quadruple the tothe as relevant years.in interest area recent been of have scholarly Studiesa particular of transition 2 Asnation-building aresult, is by justified both consolidate needthe a to C HAPTER 1: 1 Bhavna Dave, on the other hand, takes an actor-driven an takes hand, other the on Dave, Bhavna T HEORETICAL 6 F RAMEWORK CEU eTD Collection 8 7 6 5 seea likely were more system.of democraticthe to overhaul and USSR, the from independence seek to first the both were which movements liberation nation-building. during minorities national reinforce the Soviet nationalities policy, multinational states cannot ignore the issue of emerging context is and from in usedto colonial states post-Soviet rule, the consolidating for in all citizenship nationalities a state. andpractices, institutions musttake place.” norms, of political crafting democratic “considerable instate, amultinational successful 4 3 andstatehood astrong national identity. This truein holds casethe of Georgia, although the independent ahistory of movement, nationalliberation wasastrong wherethere republics Consequently, both democratization and nation-building should befound in former Soviet causemobilizing as nationalism such helped leaders. topple to which authoritarian identity was weak(such as Belarus), transition was impeded by absence of a strongthe arepublic. of majority institutionalized national identity in formerthe Soviet republics by favouring the ethnic nation poses serious problems for 'stateness'. for problems serious poses nation and between the in states,asincongruence and state building the multinational democracy of policy the through which policy, nationalities Soviet Soviet republics. Thus, nation-building isfor some post-Sovieta continuation states of the nation-building in occurs spite of alreadythe privileged position of titularthe majority in the Kathleen Mihailisko, 'Belarus: retreat to authoritarianism', in authoritarianism', to retreat 'Belarus: Mihailisko, Kathleen Steven Eke and Taras Kuzio, 'Sultanism in Eastern Europe: The Socio-Political Roots of of Authoritarian Roots Socio-Political The Europe: Eastern in 'Sultanism Taras Kuzio, and Eke Steven Linz and Stepan, 33. Linz and Stepan, 29. Ronald Suny, 'The Revenge of the Past', Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1993, 102-106. Juan Linz 1993, and Alfred Press, Stepan, 'Problems University of Stanford Democratic Transition Stanford: Past', and Consolidation', the of Revenge Baltimore:'The Suny, John Hopkins Ronald Press, 1997, 240. in Russia,Ukraine, Belarus, and Moldova, Populism inBelarus', University 1996,Press, Chapter 2. Eke and Kuzioremark it how was namely Sovietthose republics with strong national Europe-Asia Studies 3 Meanwhile, Linz and Stepan consider the compatibility of nation- of compatibility the consider Stepan and Linz Meanwhile, , 52(3), 2000, 528 Karen Dawisha et al. (ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Cambridge Cambridge: (ed.), et al. Dawisha Karen 6 Therefore, while nation-building is essential for essential is nation-building while Therefore, 7 5 4 This necessitates policies that grant equal grant that policies necessitates This Thus, in order for democratization to be Democratic changes and authoritarian reactions 7 Thus, in states where national where states in Thus, korenizatsia ('nativization') 8 CEU eTD Collection Georgia', 11 10 9 achieve. difficultto areextremely and consolidation then democratization state”, of the borders and the building states. As has been argued, unless there is “congruence between identity of the nation in nation- minorities national 'disenfranchised' ethnically of position the to isgiven attention abovethe theories linkthe highlight less between national anddemocratization,independence differences between the majority's fears of secession on the one hand, and the minority's fear minority's the and hand, one the on secession of fears majority's the between differences undercurrents in Georgian society provoked by seemingly irreconcilable ideological 1990s served todelay Georgia's transition anddemocratization. prevent failure of national the movementliberation achieve to weakness stability and thestate of the statehood for managing minority issues. by Georgia’sposed difficulties the weak anddemonstrate integration, minority to barriers structural Wheatley the emphasize andJonathan Broers Laurence period, post-independence itscoupled experience weakness. with of andstate conflict ethnic Writing Georgia on in the Armenian and Ukraine),Georgia is in unique termsits highof level of ethnic diversity Baltic States, (the movement liberation national suchas a strong states, post-Soviet other with similarities some sharing While country. the of experience nation-building the of terms fostered. be must identity national inclusive an context, in this minorities national integrate casein aswasthe Conversely,Georgia. ethno-nationalism, to in of strain exclusive order in was especially by independence accompanied countries wherenational acute a virulent is This dilemma difficult. extremely national minorities of making theintegration state, multinational in a nationalities minority and majority between conflict for potential high is a Jonathan Wheatley, 'Georgia from National Awakening to Rose Revolution: Delayed Transition in the Former the in Transition Delayed Revolution: Rose Awakeningto National from 'Georgia Wheatley, Jonathan Wheatley, 2005(a); Laurence Broers, 'Filling the Void: Ethnic Politics and Nationalities Policy inPost-Conflict Monica Duffy Toft,'Multinationality, Regions and State-Building: The Failed Transition in Georgia', in Cass Publishers, 2002,124. Ethnicityand Territory in the Former Soviet Union: Regions in Conflict, SovietUnion', Aldershot: Ashgate PublishingLimited, 2005(a). WithGeorgia, post-Soviet regards few have examined Georgia’s scholars in transition Nationalities Papers: The Journal ofNationalism and Ethnicity 10 In this way,long so asnation-building isfounded on exclusive ethnic identity, there 11 illiberal tothe drawsattention In particular,Broers 8 , 36(2), 2008. James Hughes et al., London: Frank London: etal., Hughes James 9 Aboveall, although CEU eTD Collection 12 country. in the minorities national of integration the tracing the by begin experience will thesis this Thus, authors. these by raised not is minorities national of different transition informed has in transition of post-Soviet experience the how exactly of question the However, minorities. Georgia, to consider making ethnic Georgiaconflict, an 'hard' especially case for integrationtransition's the of national effect on memory of recent and the territories with contested especially states, those multinational of assimilation on other.the of assimilation Broers, 299. Broers, 12 in nation-building of dilemma the underscores This 9 CEU eTD Collection 15 14 13 interests. problem allowingaffectingmobilize ethnicgroup the groups, to and advance group control of a peripheral minority region. regain attempt weakness, to states state which,having experienced relevant to particularly is andminority theory This centre a region. the between relations to strain expected ruledirectrule is by to a from indirect centre the Therefore, transition interests. ethnocultural rule”, direct facilitate, legitimize, by and since“cultural to colonization helps centre, to the uniformity of cultural rule by direct Thisisfollowed centre outlying by attempted regions. the the induced bya from nationalism indirectto from emerges competition shift centre-periphery the Michael Hechter, According to salient. is made nationalism and conflictual become relations state-minority why and when assess to nationalism state-building and nationalism minority inA national between Georgia. minorities towards relationship the of number explore scholars policies state of nature the ascertain help will as this relations, state-minority affects building nation- how determine to out sets section this Thus, context. post-Soviet in the especially 1.2: Transitionand State-minority Relations conflict, the onus is on the Centre to prefer cooperation with the region over exploitation, a exploitation, over region the with cooperation prefer to Centre the is on onus the conflict, agreement. the renege on willnot Centre the ensure that to unable is often region minority the however, problem, commitment classic the to According Hale argues that minority-inhabited regions may prefer to cooperate with the host state. Hale, 70-72. 62. 2000, Henry Press, Hale, ‘The Foundations University Oxford of EthnicOxford: Politics’, Cambridge: Nationalism', Cambridge'Containing UniversityHechter, Michael Press, 2008, 25. As established above, nation-building is an important component of transition, of component important is an nation-building above, established As According to Henry Hale, ethnic identity is used to resolve the collective action collective the toresolve is used identity ethnic Henry Hale, to According 14 However, advancing group interests does not necessarily entail secession; instead, secession; entail necessarily doesnot interests group However, advancing 13 resultingin backlash a of nationalism from periphery the defendwishing to its 10 15 Therefore,in order avoid to CEU eTD Collection 21 20 19 nationalism as a cloakrhetorical potentially to device illiberal designs. civic of language the employ may minorities national and states nation-building both isliberalizing. state the whether to accommodate national minorities andpreserve ethnocultural diversity, on depending 18 17 16 need for caution when applying categories such ‘ethnic’ as and ‘civic’, as such termsladen are threatened. culture, so long as the state adopts a liberal course, the position of national minorities is not However, how state. in even Will contextsocietal of the a dominant demonstrates Kymlicka policy,in language especially fateof multinational minority the a culture national determine “societal ethnic group. predominant of “societal the culture” forcing ethnocultural politicizes nevertheless national toacceptgroups, minorities the by driven Centre’sthe decision ‘timehorizon’ of exploitation. costs and expected the groups” impossible.groups” having an official languagestate make the “separation between state and ethnocultural of theimplications since isquestionable, nationalism neutrality of civic the arguethat scholars ethnicity but on common principles justicesocial of democracy. and nationalism is inclusive ostensibly minority of cultures, as citizenship isfounded noton identity endorsed by In state. the this respect, while ethnic nationalism is exclusive, civic affects the willingness of the minority to cooperate. this theory highlights how the policy of the state ultimately drives state-minority relations and Rogers Brubaker, 'Ethnicity without Groups', Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004, 134-135. Kymlicka, 42. Kymlicka, 22-27. FarimahDaftary and François Grin, 'Nation Building, Ethnicity, and Language Policy in Transition Countries', Will Kymlicka, 'States,Nations and Cultures', Assen: VanGorcum, 1997, 23. Hale, 68. Budapest:Open Society Institute, 2003, 8. While the concept of civic national identity has been promoted as a liberalhas While identity been national conceptof civic the promoted paradigm, Another issue affecting a state’s relations with its minorities is the type of national is of type the its minorities with astate’s affecting issue relations Another 20 Therefore, a state engaged in civic nation-building may be more or less inclined less or more be may nation-building in civic engaged a state Therefore, 18 Thus, in spite of civic nationalism's emphasis on minority inclusion, it inclusion, minority on emphasis nationalism's civic of in spite Thus, 11 19 and publicpolicies, respect, this In 21 This underscores the underscores This 17 someHowever, 16 Thus, CEU eTD Collection 23 22 characterize an entire state, or an entire national movement, as civic national”. or movement, an entireor national entire state, an characterize normative ambiguities. analytical with both and of nation-building and its impact on national minorities. national on impact its and nation-building of consider nature foundations the onwhichto nevertheless literature good provides the others, than integrate to inclined less be might minority one why consider scholars above-mentioned nation-buildingthat implies favouring interests the of titularthe group.While none of the and liberalism; of legacy a enjoys state the whether on depend may which minorities, national access to collective donot ethnic necessarily asthemost viewsecession groups preferable way obtaining of goods; that much directly; that begin rule may regions ofinterestto peripheral states conflicts when emerge depends on the state’s willingness state. of the to cooperatecomposition ethnic the of specificities the fit will that withpolicies devising in and identities state such in as Georgiastates transition particularly are true stillthat in formulating of process the Brubaker, 2004,135. Brubaker, 2004,136-144. To summarize, the following points can be drawn from the above discussion: that discussion: above the from drawn be can points following the Tosummarize, 12 22 Thus, “it is often impossible...to often is “it Thus, 23 This is This CEU eTD Collection 24 26 25 the minority to its territoryschism' of minority.the A levelhigh ‘ethnicof defined attachment’, by historicalthe of roots as well as proximityan minority'sethnic choice of behaviour, isthedegree of attachment’ 'ethnic and 'ethnic to a kin state, identity...becomes affiliation”. “ethnic a secondary is bound to make an ethnic language tolearnwillingness theofmajority, state culture acceptthedominant and so that quo. status tothe attitude more compliant manifested invariousincluding ways, language demandsfor and politicalrights, as a well as emigrating, orby mobilising for greater autonomy even independence.or Voice may be by 'exits' andso in position its either state, the not tolerate minority does ethnic whereby the integration. and voice exit, namely transition, in minorities to available options three identifies and Ukraine, in post-Soviet Russians ethnic minorities. of national context consider theapplication AlbertO. Hirschman'sof paradigm exit,of voice andloyalty in the in will this minority thesis.presented casesIt integration to apply tothe of studies also these pertaining toconditions ofminority inintegration the post-Soviet in context, order attemptto building. This is morelikelyefforts orless of engaged integration acceptthe a state minority in to nation sectionminority will discuss rights requires institutionalised degreeof recognition minorities andnationalising states of astrong studies by the state.undertaken Therefore, by Ian Minority Responses 1.3: toIntegration itBremmer is useful and Tarasto examine Kuzio under what conditions a Ian Bremmer, 'The Politics of Ethnicity: The Russians in the Ukraine', New the in Russians The ofEthnicity: Politics 'The Bremmer, Ian Ibid. Bremmer, 263. 261-283. Thus, Bremmer considers the implications of interethnic relations on the behaviour of national between cooperation that deduced be can it discussion above the From 25 Integration, meanwhile, is characterized by the is characterized meanwhile, Integration, 24 13 Exit is primarily an expression of nationalism, of expression an is primarily Exit 26 According to Bremmer, what determines what Bremmer, to According Europe-Asia Studies, 46(2), 1994, CEU eTD Collection 28 27 voice isin fact strengthened. voiced, possibility the exitmayof oneavenue provide through which effectivenessthe of whiledemonstrates, theexit option often likelihoodthe of weakens dissatisfaction being example political due to marginalization language barriers.and Meanwhile, asHirschman for dissatisfaction, voice to opportunities fewer has minority a when differently functions and schism.fails attachment However, Bremmer voiceto considerhow the mechanism also may be manifested differently in the case of different minorities with different levels of ethnic by ethnicities produced historical factors. analyse sources other of 'schism', suchas antagonismthe betweenmajority minority and to fruitful be may it features, religious and cultural besides Also, minorities. differentiated more with variable schism ethnic the test to be able will I study, in this considered minorities the to variables two these applying By negligible. almost is ethnicity minority and majority the between schism ethnic Ukraine, in the Russians ethnic to model his applies Bremmer minority and alsogroups, makes anethnic majority minority less amenable tointegration. the between differentiation cultural and linguistic religious, of measure Meanwhile,minority tointegrate. unwilling ahigh degree of ethnic schism, asa defined to mobilize lacked lines, Crimean the to the because they along asdid Russians, ethnopolitical able Donbass didsecede whileargue that werenot They not. to other Russians the attempted group one why explain to Crimea and Donbass in the Russians the of integration the 'resignation', as opposed to an active attempt at integration. resemble may behaviour minority concerns voice to recourse without that is likely Equally voicesecede maybe asa then for minority construed viable recourse obtaining demands. Albert Hirschman, 'Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations and States', and Organizations Firms, in Decline to Responses Voice, Loyalty: and 'Exit, Hirschman, Albert Bremmer, 264. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970, 83. Once examples againapplying the of inUkraine,Russians Kuzioand Meyercompare Thus, itThus,can be thatthe expected function voiceexit, of integration and behaviours 28 to threat make acredible is ableto if minority a Therefore, 14 27 sinceHowever, CEU eTD Collection 29 in arole have of integration. played theGeorgiain response minorities national to determining and ethnic mechanisms well ethnic attachment resources, the of 'exit' schism,as as and 'voice' integration by national minorities in Georgia, andconsider to ifinstitutional and demographic to examine responses the be to will thesis this of objective one integration. Thus, to response minority, have the of each resources affected transition features of and their hence structural inam interested In howI the thisintegration. respect arefortheir implications what the determine whether theregional institutional resourceslines.cooperate withDonbass mobilize andRussians to centre the to insteadalong and political of theThis minorities typology in question differ,can alsoand if so, be applied to the cases analysed in this thesis to institutional required doso.resources to Taras Kuzio and David Meyer, 'The Donbass and Crimea: An Institutional and Demographic Approach to Approach Demographic and Institutional An Crimea: and Donbass 'The Meyer, David and Kuzio Taras Hampshire: MacmillanPress, 1999, 299. Ethnic Mobilization in two Ukrainian Regions', in 29 The absence of these resources compelled the State and Institution Building inUkraine, 15 Kuzio et al. (ed.), CEU eTD Collection independence era. independence inbuilding this period. Finally, the third partoutlines themain features of post- the period analyseto maininfluence the of ethnic nationalism collapse and state nation-on post-1989 tothe turns two experience. of Part Georgia's Soviet aspects certain of discussion into three parts. The first part includes toresolve is delaying national theissueof attempts This minority integration. divided chapter a brief summary of Georgia's pre-Soviet of latethe Soviet served period, toprolongits nation-building transition into the 2000s, period and a weakness throughout 1990s,by the andperpetuating some structural the of social conditions and thus ethnic hegemony, of the Georgian SSR. Meanwhile, Georgia's continued state- quite suddenlyquite during titular nationality in the marginalizeserved to while national minorities feeding “greatchauvinism” the power of the republic. In this way, andstructure culture of clientelism laidduring down Soviet the period. Together, the factors these ethnic nationalism history of ethnic nationalism andthe wars of early the 1990s, butalsothat by administrative the seemed to emerge how the process of national minority integration is complicated not only by Georgia's recent in will minorities country.the of thisnational chapter demonstrate marginalization Therefore, Georgia today,contributed tothe it examine that ishistorical factors necessary the to In order to assess the current issues affecting the integration of national minorities in minorities ofnational integration the issues affecting current toassessthe In order glasnost' C HAPTER can infact can be large traced to the degreeof political autonomy, 2: H ISTORICAL 16 B ACKGROUND CEU eTD Collection allowed for the 'Georganization' of local government and the favouritism of local elites in elites local of favouritism the and government local of 'Georganization' the for allowed benefited from privilegedthe afforded status language their and culture, while thepolicy republics”oriented of Sovietthe Union. Georgia's above,documented andcontributed to as development one of morethe “nationally- In the Georgian SSR, however, thegrowthfostered of nationalism in nationally-definedthe republics Sovietthe of Union. this policy was given anditwell-documented, is widely to havefurnished institutionsacknowledged the which a head-start as a result of the process serve to galvanize claims forindependence on the eve of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Meanwhile, Georgia's between independent experiencestatehood of 1918 and 1921would in withcountry.the other nationalities interests arose out of of a perceivedpart conflict 35 34 33 32 Soviet policy of by 19 the the bredanimosity Armenians,period towards 31 30 community. merchant Armenian a mostly to home was Tbilisi capital the while largely rural, was Georgian population ethnic the century twentieth the of beginning the until Empire, Russian the of protectorate a still modern Georgian nation duringdeveloped 19 the history history independentof and statehood adistinct national culture andlanguage. 2.1: Roots of Corruption andEthnic Favouritism inthe Georgian SSR Wheatley,2005(a), 30. Suny, 1993,102-106. Suny, 1993,61-62. Suny, 1994,115. Ronald Suny, 'The Making of the Georgian Nation', Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994, 299. Indeed, 299. 1994, Press, University Indiana Bloomington: Nation', Georgian ofthe Making 'The Suny, Ronald Suny, 1993,58. in thecapital only 1975.in before 1921, all but two of Tbilisi's mayors were Armenian, while ethnic Georgians only became a majority The The Georgian SSR was unique among the national republics of the SSR as it enjoyed a th century century Georgian intelligentsia all morethe pressing. korenizatsia korenizatsia policy of the Soviet Union towards its national republics has been ('nativization'), Georgia ('nativization'), hadundergone anational in that revival 31 The increasing Armenian wealth the of bourgeoisie in this 35 As the titular nationality of the republic, Georgians republic, the of nationality titular the As 17 32 and made the task of 'national emancipation' 'national of task the made and th and early 20 th centuries when Georgia was 33 Therefore, even before the before even Therefore, 30 Although the Although 34 CEU eTD Collection Laitin finds no correlation between the absence of cross-cutting social ties and the outbreak of outbreak the and ties social cross-cutting of absence the between correlation no finds Laitin post-independencethe period. institutionalized realm Georgianasentiment of whichprivilege”, ethnic carry intowould over in local networks This would minoritiesgovernment. causenational toperceive “Georgia asa benefit not fromcould minorities national theGeorgians, ethnic among necessaryintermarriage of level low the kinship Georgian tothe family Dueto ties. favouring andhierarchy kinship was adapted of tradition and social connections that formed the basis of patron-client 40 39 38 SSR, thereby intensifying the prerogatives of ethnic Georgians in republic.the and Jews,while Georgians in Sovietthe Union almostresided exclusively in Georgian the republic. Moreover, Georgianthe SSR sawconsiderable outmigration of Russians, Armenians and by relatively the low level intermarriageof betweenGeorgians and ethnicities other in the language among ethnic Georgians; by concentration the of ethnic Georgians in republic; the ethnicitiesother in republic.the This wascharacterised by a resistance to learning theRussian and ethnic Georgians between social ties of weakness cross-cutting the was particularism extension of power andprivilege toone's personal networks. the through flourish to clientelism allowed loyalty and honour family of values Georgian Georgianfeatures specificto to andsociety.attributed culture deeply embedded the Thus, 37 36 made factors morecertain durable these features in Georgianthe republic. were endemic in the Soviet Union and an intrinsic part of SovietUnion partof the intrinsic intheSoviet were endemic and an withfilling posts their government co-ethnics. Suny, 1994,299-300. 132. Toft, Wheatley,2005(a), 35. JohnKramer, 'Political Corruption in the U.S.S.R', in Suny, 1994,298. Heidenheimer et al. (ed.), New Jersey: Transaction Publishers, 1989, 449-466. In particular, the strength of patron-client networks in Georgian hasbeen the networks SSR of patron-client In particular, strength the Another feature of Georgian society that increased the likelihood of of likelihood increasedethnic the of that society feature Georgian Another 39 18 PoliticalCorruption: a Handbook, 36 Therefore, while corruption and clientelism and corruption while Therefore, 38 As a result, the rigid Soviet rigid the result, a As nomenklatura 37 Arnold 40 While David While system, CEU eTD Collection providing food for the dissident nationalist movement that emerged in later years. later in emerged that movement nationalist dissident the for food providing wouldlong-term implications have fortheadministrative structure of republic,the while titular nationality an to even greaterextent in than republicsother of Sovietthe Union. This with especiallycloseamongGeorgianprivilege kinshipties the the servedto the population, Party. networks power which clientelistic in the evident favouritism national the of criticism to linked cameclosely under fire fromShevardnadze in 1972, the system was already firmly in place.the Efforts to curb corruption were new first secretary of the in republic. the andcorruption in growth way forclientelism the anespecially virulent Georgian CommunistThis situation wouldlead totheconsolidation local of of power elites in regionsthe and paved 41 Party. AccordingRonald to Suny,Mzhavanadze's rule of Vasili tenure nineteen-year of Georgian secretary the asfirstCommunist Mzhavanadze allowing indirect rulefor andby the ashift centre, the power decentralization of towards 44 43 42 the onset of dissident nationalism in response to the venality of the local elite. spurred also national Georgians. of the corruption widespread ethnic Meanwhile, prerogatives prevalence of ethnic particularism in local power structures in Georgian the structures in local SSR. power particularism of ethnic prevalence ethnic conflict in the former republics of the USSR, their absence could explain the David Laitin, 'Secessionist Rebellionin the Soviet Union', Suny, 1994,309. Suny, 1994,307. Suny, 1994,301. 839-861. “aided theestablishmentof entrenched local authorities developedwho their own ethnic 43 By By timethe Mzhavanadzewasremoved from office and by replaced Eduard To summarize, the Tosummarize, This policy ethnicof favouritism intensified underKhrushchev as a result of the Thus thefightagainstincorruption was understood nationalist affrontterms asan to political base from which they could “negotiate” with central with authorities.” central “negotiate” basefrom which they could political korenizatsia policy of the early days of the Soviet Union, combined 19 Comparative Political Studies , October, 2001, 34(8), 44 41 42 CEU eTD Collection 49 48 47 46 45 outstripped by creation the of various nationalist from opposition groups 1987. weaknessthe whoseof intelligentsia moves liberal toestablishthe were Front aPopular by explained by of the events success The the April of reflected also 1989 alone. nationalism ensuedviolence that helpedtofuel fears of separatism.ethnic demands from thefrom Abkhazthe USSR. Moreover, ASSR safeguard Georgian linguistictocultural, heritage andreligious since and toachieve independence raise the April to the seeking demonstrations intellectuals Georgian leading by formed status movement opposition nationalist inof Tbilisithe hadregion beenbetween theCommunist authorities and opposition. the prompted to that by of transition anegotiated republic,facilitated havemight that Georgian Front moderate Popular of a the opposition movementand lentit widespread whilesupport, crucially blighting the formation collapse wouldfacilitate. This stoked event growingthe radicalization of Georgianthe the that conflicts asthe ethno-territorial aswell republic intheGeorgian power of Soviet Army, in marked history the of Georgian collapse awatershed andthe the both SSR heralded 2.2: Nationalismand Ethnic Conflict Gamsakhurdia and Kostava. Merab Gamsakhurdia of politics aspersonifiedby nationalist nature “highly of figures personalized” Zviad the actor-driven explanation for the popularity of the dissident nationalists may be found in the distinguished heritage, madedissidents popular by of intheirtime prisons, experience spent Soviet their Zviad Gamsakhurdia was the son of an acclaimed Georgian writer, Konstantin Gamsakhurdia. Konstantin writer, Georgian acclaimed of an son the was Gamsakhurdia Zviad Suny, 1994,324. Wheatley,2005(a), 50. Thomas de Waal, 'The Caucasus: Introduction',An Oxford: Oxford University 2010,Press, 131-132. Wheatley,2005(a), 45. However, the radical nationalism that emerged towards the end of the 1980s cannot be cannot end the 1980s emerged of the that towards nationalism However, radical the The 9 th April in1989, when protests brutallyTbilisi were repressedby Sovietthe 49 inand caseof ineffablethe acertain Gamsakhurdia, charisma. Thus, 48 Gamsakhurdia and Kostava were veteran nationalist veteran were Kostava and Gamsakhurdia 20 45 46 This paved the way for the 47 Moreover, an CEU eTD Collection 52 51 50 following the growth following of growth the rival andhis factions opposition growing unpopularity, country the Georgiaafter its independence declared from USSRinthe 1991. However, regions. of these status changemade the to were instead. governor asdistrict leaders movement's the of one appointing district, Akhalkalaki the to governor of choice Gamsakhurdia's defied movement ‘Javakh’ the Javakheti, of region Armenian-populated the In regions. Kartli,local were movements created to protect the national minorities inhabiting these Kvemo and Javakheti in Meanwhile, Ossetia. South of control lose to him causing country, republic. the of integrity territorial the to minorities Bolnisi in late 1989, Gamsakhurdia's policies, includingtheforced exodusof Azeris thousands of from of town the declining for the support Sovietauthorities following April 1989. However,many of reflected also but alone, sentiment anti-minority indicate necessarily not did nationalism objectivethe ofnational fromliberation Sovietthe Union. Thus,popular supportfor dissident Georgians in republicthe todisadvantage ofnational minorities, this wascombined with tonoteimportant whilethat Gamsakhurdia's platform clearly privilegingadvocated ethnic Georgians in republicthe and as“guests” “Georgiafor proclaiming theGeorgians”. Itis non- all describing for renowned was who Gamsakhurdia, of rhetoric anti-minority hostile increase for support to the mobilization inAbkhazia served place ethnopolitical taking the ethnic Azeris from from Azeris region.ethnic the ‘Geyrat’ in Kvemo Kartli engaged indialogue with governmenttopreventthe exodusthe of Jonathan Wheatley, 'Obstacles Impeding the Regional Integrationof the Kvemo Kartli Regionof Georgia', Jonathan Wheatley,'Obstacles Impeding Regionalthe Integrationof Javakhetithe Regionof Georgia', ECMI 'Georgia's Armenian and Azeri Minorities', International Crisis Group (ICG) report, 178,2006, 16. ECMI Working Paper, 23, 2005(b), 13. Working Paper, 22, 2004, 13. 2004, 22, Paper, Working Gamsakhurdia's popularity eventually led tohis being popularly elected president of in minorities the repelled rhetoric nationalist Gamsakhurdia's of such tactics, Because 50 clearly reflected the desire to banish the 'threat' posed by national by posed 'threat' the banish to desire the reflected clearly 52 However,South Ossetia unlikeinattemptsno andAbkhazia, 21 51 Meanwhile, the ethnic Azeri movement Azeri ethnic the Meanwhile, CEU eTD Collection period, mostperiod, notably corruption and clientelism. weaknessstate lead would resurfacing tothe structural from inherited of traits Sovietthe for aparticularly inlong Georgia,transition drawn-out post-independence whilecontinuing permissiveness of permissivenessunder of dissent benefitedfrom asthat minorities nation, tothe survivalof a threat employingthe the rhetoric was able garner popular to by support presenting both Communistthe authorities and national in collapse preconditionsthe conflict state country.created for the andethnic Gamsakhurdia centre Soviet the with comprise a achieve to opposition nationalist the of unwillingness the markedGeorgianweakness andthat inceptionindependent conflict the the of state. throughout 1990s the Shevardnadze'sleadership would continue toberiddled bythestate of in Thus, outbreak morewar inAbkhazia. and the armedTbilisi faced with clashes was Shevardnadze power on assuming of country.the Asaresult, incertain regions control of disintegration, as paramilitary andgroups forces loyal Gamsakhurdiato still vied for country. Following this, EduardShevardnadze was invited back tolead acountry on vergethe hisin weakness, contested leadership forcing of flee winter the 1991, to Gamsakhurdia the paramilitary commanded who, byGamsakhurdia'sgroups taking of opponents advantage state Gamsakhurdia's leadership became increasingly untenable. Thisled to mobilizationthe of To conclude, combination the of nationalismdissident in a multi-ethnic country and glasnost' . Therefore, the experience of civil war would make 22 CEU eTD Collection precipitating the Rose precipitating the Revolution of 2003. benefited from corruption inand eyesthe of reform-minded politicians, eventually perpetuated underminedperpetuated the government's authority both in eyesthe of the certain sectors and regions. certain sectors influence over andincreasetheir interests advance wereable their actors to private other asgovernors and ofpower', led towhatWheatley Thisthe 'feudalization corruption. terms allow line pockets to Shevardnadze wasforced ministers to government their own through lacked budgetwithfinance government astate its administration. which to was that situation, meaning the by post-conflict exacerbated Georgia's particularly economic Georgia dire in corruption of level the societies, post-Soviet many in featured corruption in while Again, of Georgia. governance more becameamode once corruption elite, sothat by new state the of the exploitation era andthe capture' communist of the 'state tothe return influence would gradually Soviet old expensestability was atthe the co-opting of sap the ability of the new state to reform itself.” 58 57 56 55 54 53 largely impotent. were by Gamsakhurdia appointed by president(“ the executive. strong already an strengthen to helping thus president, new the to loyal overwhelming control by many appointing formergovernment communists to posts, most of whowere Georgiaunder Shevardnadze 2.3: Post-Independence ChristopherStefes, 'Understanding Post-Soviet Transitions: Corruption, Collusion andClientelism', New York: Wheatley, 2005(a), 109-110. Wheatley, 2005(a),109. Wheatley,2005(a), 103. Slider, 186. in Georgia', in ‘Democratization Slider, Darrell Caucasus, Given the fragmented political political Given scene inthecountry, fragmented the restore Shevardnadzesoughtto 53 Karen Dawisha et al. (ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997, 189. by governors dominated regionswas in the local government Meanwhile, 57 The systemic and decentralized corruption that this clientelism this that corruption decentralized and systemic The gamgebeli ”), since the local assemblies (“ since local ”), the assemblies Conflict,Cleavage, and Change in Central Asia and the 58 54 State capture also allowed local elites to control this government, stable a provided this While 23 nomenklatura, sakrebulos nomenklatura “whose continued “whose 55 56 This meant a result, a As ”) created that CEU eTD Collection 62 61 60 59 spite ofinstitutional inreform Georgia under the Saakashvili manyadministration, the of lines,asin alongethnic case the In of defined bylocal Javakheti. sometimes elites controlled 'feudalization meant the of impeding transition. regionspower' Meanwhile, were that undermined the president's hold while on power thwarting economicand development weakness corruption bymakingstate a mode of systemic This anddecentralized governance. corruption impedingand further development. economic local government in these regions especially difficult, thus increasing the likelihood of isolation and especially infrastructure. poor senses greater, owinglinguistic inminority barriers aswell their tothe regions as geographic land. extortions most bylocal rent susceptible were from to to farmers wereforced whom officials agricultural includingregions, theminority-populated regions of Kvemo Kartli and Javakheti, example, For of corruption. consequences the to vulnerable wereparticularly minorities repelling foreign investors, and imposing barriers local to entrepreneurs. In some respect elite, political the of hands in the wealth by concentrating development economic frustrated transition by law rule the undermining of weakness. and state sustaining Asunderstated. Stefes systemic demonstrates, corruption impacthad amajor on Georgia's political and economic resources of of region. the andeconomic resources political the both on monopoly a held centre the to loyal 'clans' economic where 1990s, in the region in Javakheti the prevalent wasparticularly feature which a in regions, the resources economic Jonathan Wheatley, 'The Integration of National Minorities in the Samtskhe-Javakheti and Kvemo Kartli Kvemo and Samtskhe-Javakheti inthe Minorities of National Integration 'The Wheatley, Jonathan Stefes, 142. Stefes, 119-120. Wheatley,2004, 16-17. provinces of Georgia', ECMI Working Paper, 44, 2009(b), 11. Palgrave Macmillan, 2006, 117. 61 Moreover, the distance between minority-inhabited regions and the centre wasin andcentre some the regions minority-inhabited Moreover, distancebetween the Toentrench underShevardnadzesummarize, period to served post-independence the be society cannot onpost-Soviet effectof systemic the corruption Therefore, 62 24 Such factors made oversight by the centre of centre by the oversight madefactors Such 59 60 Corruption also Corruption CEU eTD Collection explaining the administrative structure in today. regions the structure administrative the explaining local of elites Shevardnadze havethe era in remained power, a crucial factor towards 25 CEU eTD Collection integration of each, followed by short a comparison of cases. acomparison of two by the of short followed each, integration aswell level of the as andinternational actors, local, state role of the representation, political each minority in including turn, their geographic demographic, and economic situation, of situation the by examining begin I will minorities. these of integration the impeding factors other as well as in question, minorities two the of integration the on above outlined transition areas.Thus, Georgian-populated this willconsider chapter theeffect issues of structural of the from andeconomic isolation integration geographic challenges because their to of greatest the They pose also efforts. of main integration government's andthe the target arethus as beenselected they have are thecompactly-settled and largestThese minorities two most in minorities Georgia, andpresent greatest the facingobstacles tointegration minority. each The following chapter will focus on the situation of the Armenian and Azeri national Azeri and Armenian the of situation the on focus will chapter following The C HAPTER 3: THE A RMENIAN AND 26 A ZERI M INORITIES IN G EORGIA CEU eTD Collection 67 66 65 64 “demographic balancing”. as partof a policy of in wereresettled Samtskhe-Javakheti Georgian eco-migrants 63 declined (from declinedin 113,347 (from 128,204 1989 to in2002),mostly a as resultof permanent population. the of 54.98% at Kartli, Kvemo in district Tsalka the in majority a represent and they 94.3% 95.8% represent of population the respectively.Armenians also Ethnic majority of populationthe in Akhalkalaki the Ninotsmindaand districts (Javakheti), where Armeniain south the of country.the In Samtskhe-Javakheti, Armenians make upan absolute Georgia,most of which inhabit regionthe of Samtskhe-Javakheti, bordering Turkey and Demographic, GeographicandEconomicSituation of Javakheti 3.1: The Armenians in its ethnic make-up, including asmall increase in Meskhetianrepatriated Turks, 4). Chapter (see region in the churches of heritage the to as Churches Armenian and Orthodox Georgian to have in ahistory far region the that pre-dates this period, sparking arguments between the claim Armenians local However, in1915. Empire Ottoman the from Armenians of expulsion region the in following the Russo-Turkish war of while more1828-29, arrived following the forced settled Armenians that observe accounts most origins, historical their of terms decrease in numberRussian of the Justin Lyle, 'Resettlement of Ecological Migrants in Georgia: Recent Developments and Trends inPolicy, Trends and Developments Recent Georgia: in Migrants ofEcological Lyle, 'Resettlement Justin The Meskhetian Turks of Samtskhe-Javakheti were exiled to Central Asia in 1944. in Asia Central to exiled were of Samtskhe-Javakheti Turks Meskhetian The Hedvig Lohm, 'Javakheti after the Rose Revolution: Progress and Regress in the Pursuit of National Unity in ECMI, The Implementation, Perceptions', and ECMIWorking Paper,53, 2012, 3. Georgia', ECMI Working Paper,38, 2007, 36-37. Dukhobors According tothe2002 census, ethnic make Armenians up5.69% of populationthe of Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Samtskhe-Javakheti changes has experienced Union, Samtskhe-Javakheti Since Soviet of the collapse the ECMI Caucasus, 64 are ethnic Russians who settled in Georgia to escape religious persecution in the 19 the in persecution religious toescape Georgia in settled who Russians ethnic are accessed: 30.05.2012, 67 Finally, the Armenian population of Samtskhe-Javakheti has also Dukhobors. 27 66 ethnic 1990s, earlier the inMoreover, th cntry. tur cen 65 and a 63 In CEU eTD Collection Ninotsminda Borjomi 42.81 36.59 46.78 61.72 6.25 Akhaltsikhe Akhalkalaki Aspindza Adigeni Javakheti Samtskhe- 72 71 70 69 68 Armenian population regime. a special passport subject to of Javakheti and prohibit aNATO bordered region as the restricted, Javakheti was was and country travel to period their contact withhampered and bypoorroads an unreliable supplyof electricity. Moreover, during Soviet the Georgian society, are andcommunications rest astransport of Georgia, from the isits isolation feature while a abroad. living member family a have Armenians as approximately abroad, who73% of ethnic from haveof relatives remittances emigrated majorwhile local source of another income subsistence-level comesagriculture, intheform Javakheti. of secession Armenian-populated was incorporatedbut into regionthe of Samtskhein 1990s, the arguably preventto the Table 1:Population of Samtskhe-Javakheti by andregion ethnicity, 2002 1989and Russiaand to migration Armenia. ICG report,21. See Appendix 1. Wheatley,2004, 14. Ibid. ECMI, In spiteinfrastructural of improvements in years,recent Javakheti's distinguishing region of Georgia, distinct ahistorically represents of Javakheti region The highland ECMI Caucasus, 9.95 19.1 5.81 1989 2002 1989 2002 1989 2002 1989 2002 % Armenians 89.63 91.29 accessed: 30.05.2012, < http://www.ecmicaucasus.org/menu/info_stats.html#> 9.64 82.020.34 17.47 80.06 3.36 95.78 94.33 68 71.99 84.21 4.54 71.99 84.21 1.38 91.58 95.70 % Georgians 1.2 4.35 72 Together, these factors have served to isolate the local isolate the to Together, haveserved factors these 70 28 1.39 5.27 The main economic activity in Javakheti is Javakheti in activity economic main The 71 8.34 2.51 % Russians 1.80 0.26 0.49 2.75 0.89 0.26 3.37 0.11 0.11 0.09 0.44 0.1 % Greeks 69 1.67 0.06 0.03 0.01 0.28 0.08 CEU eTD Collection 79 78 77 76 75 74 73 demonstrations in Akhalkalaki in 2005. mass causing 2000s, the throughout centre the and population local the between contention Lari Georgian month. per while theaddedeconomic of value basethe tothe wasregion between and1,000,000 500,000 (of a population of 60,000)dependedaround directly on basethe in post-Sovietthe period, trade and employment opportunities.has It been that estimated between people7,000-8,000 closurethe of has had which anegativelocal the impacton economy, it depriving vital of Georgian Lari inwas thecurrency region. used the the not and Rouble Russian the that meant it as especially isolation, economic region's USSR. of the collapse the long after policy “benign underof neglect” Shevardnadze served toprolong the region's isolation until light of Russia’s moves to protect its ‘citizens’ in South Ossetia. andpassports an alarming proportion localof citizens with Russian citizenship, especially in base wererequiredadopt Russian to in resulting citizenship, a proliferation of blackmarket Armenian-populated districts as of Armenian-populated Javakheti, isoutput by dominated Georgiathe and Glass average in 2007. just country, the national the restof 35.5% the at capita compared annual per with to turnover modest isparticularly output economic Samtskhe-Javakheti's that meant has infrastructure of laggedbehind capital the Tbilisi. However, that theregion's isolation and poor Wheatley,2009(b), 8. Wheatley,2009(b), 39-40. Wheatley,2009(b), 11. Lohm, 40. Lohm, 10. Oksana Antonenko, 'Assessment of the Potential Implications of Akhalkalaki Base Closure for the Stability Wheatley, 2004, 31. in Southern Georgia', a Conflict Prevention Network Briefing Study,Brussels, 2001, 31. Until Until 2008 the Armenian town of Akhalkalaki homewas toaRussian military base, As is the case in much of rural Georgia, economic growth in Samtskhe-Javakheti has in growth Samtskhe-Javakheti economic much of Georgia, As isthecaserural in 79 In fact, these figures give a false indication of the economic output in the output economic the of indication false a give figures these fact, In 75 Consequently, the closure of the base became a major bone of major a became base the of Consequently, closure the 73 76 to the added baseHowever,dependency the on 29 77 the at military personnel Meanwhile, 78 74 CEU eTD Collection posts are posts appointed by so centre, the arehighly appointees that on lessTbilisi dependent and population for a number local the torepresent beenill-equipped bodies these have of structures, administrative local reasons. Firstly, the respectively.and districts Ninotsminda positions of 84 83 82 locally-elected 81 80 are filled by ethnic Armenians. in Javakheti posts executive major as the aswell assemblies, locally-elected governor, district Political Representation andLocalGovernment Javakheti. region's and economic isolation geographic a major impeding factor integration the of for clothes and durables. household does not have sufficientmoney for food, while 52% have enough for food but not Research (CRRC)in Centres Resource 27% 2010, of said Armenianethnic respondents their subsistence-level agriculture. compared to16.5%), isthis misleading as90% of region'sthe inhabitants work in although unemploymentin Samtskhe-Javakheti is lower than Georgianthe average (7.5%as Mineral WaterMineral Company in located ethnic the Georgian of town Borjomi. Wheatley,2009(b), 18. Antonenko,31. See Appendix 2. 'Regional Labour Survey in Samtskhe-Javakheti: Report', conducted by the International Organization for Organization International by the conducted Report', Samtskhe-Javakheti: in Survey Labour 'Regional Wheatley,2009(b), 10. Migration, Tbilisi, 2010, 8. The power of local elites in the Shevardnadze period has meant that the posts has posts period the oflocal meantthat of in The power Shevardnadze the elites sakrebulos, 82 Economically, therefore, the region is particularly weak, with the with weak, particularly is region the therefore, Economically, makingand90% of up87.5% 81 Thus, in a country-wide survey carried out by Caucasus the out carried survey in a country-wide Thus, 83 Moreover,inwell the ethnic represented are Armenians 84 However, in spite of the strong Armenian presence in 30 sakrebulos gamgebeli members inAkhalkalaki members and major executive 80 Meanwhile, CEU eTD Collection appointed to importantappointed to administrative posts, including post the of police chiefin includes members of Javakhthe movement, some of leadersthe of havewhich been region, the pastdecadehas alsowitnessed co-opting the of local movements. political focus of co-optinginfluential wason in elites government Shevardnadze economic the the local loyalty hasfollowingpersisted of government RoseRevolution.the However, while the are procedure, insufficiently representative local of the Armenian population. appointment undemocratic due to the governors, Armenian ethnic govern region,the while or littleto represent power have sum, local elected In representatives bodies. level representative The new law mayevenhave more harm done local to byabolishing village- self-government Affairs. Internal of Ministry by the influenced is strongly governors district of appointment of the power the increased local affairs. local elected contrast to one representative for 3,382Armenians. to contrast representative one so thatinAkhalkalaki is representative one 670Georgianthere for elected in inhabitants 91 90 89 88 87 86 85 lessaccessible. regions in these authorities local the making regions, Georgian ethnic in than regions inhabited Secondly, of ratio the profound knowledge of regionsthe whichthey andgovern trust the localof the population. they are often not locals but Tbilisi Armenians co-opted by the centre, and therefore lack a so on the local population. local the on so Wheatley,2009(b), 17. Wheatley,2009(b), 19. Wheatley, 2004, 11 ICG report, 11. Wheatley,2004, 19. SedaMelkumyan, PersonalInterview, Akhalkalaki, ECMI, 27.04.2012. Wheatley,2009(b), 17. Thus, the system of co-optation employed in the Shevardnadze era to ensure the gamgebeli 89 in2005 introduced Self-Government Local on newLaw While Organic a , the local , the sakrebulos 87 A similar problem relates to the electoral districts in minority regions, minority in districts electoral the to relates problem A similar 85 majoreven Also,though postsareoccupiedby ethnic Armenians, sakrebulos sakrebulos to head of population is many times greater in the minority- in the greater times many is population of head to have limited powers, playing a“supervisory” role in to elect the local electthe to 31 88 Finally, as compared to the centrally- the to compared as Finally, gamgebeli, in actual fact the fact actual in 91 This 90 86 CEU eTD Collection successfully managed to co-opt leaders to managed local organizations of successfully which previously provoked has centre the above, noted As Javakheti. in power of dynamics the understanding to useful Actors andAgency of the on Armenians representation the has rendered centre the by co-optation although period, Shevardnadze the of governance of mode and structure by the lose up to 20% of its votes. integration of minority the wouldberegions unfavourable forruling the party, which could thatimproved Indeed,oneinterviewee centrally actors. suggested or co-opted appointed the ruling party in elections, loyalty which is at least in part accounted for by the influence of to changein region.” to the impediments main the of is one levels central from co-optation of structure “the commented, enter local to newcomers andgovernment. preventing power” fundamentally affected the system of self-government in Javakheti, creating a “lock on doso today.in to 1990s continue whoheldthe same economic elites power has This 1990s is still discernible in currentthe distribution of power in Javakheti, wheremany the of the of clientelism the Thus, centre. the influence to actors local of ability the weakening while cases both has been to underminelegitimacy and the local for support organizations,these 96 95 94 93 92 co-opted whenmade of was government critic the Akhalkalaki. Shalva Tabatadze, Personal Interview,CCIIR, Tbilisi, 25.04.2012. Lohm, 13. Wheatley,2009(b), 23. Wheatley,2009(b), 28. Lohm, 12 A brief discussion on the role of local, state, and international actors in the region is region inthe actors international and state, local, of role the on discussion A brief 92 “UnitedMeanwhile, of akey associate avocal splinter Javakh”and the group 95 Meanwhile, Javakheti has consistently shown overriding loyalty to loyalty overriding shown consistently has Javakheti Meanwhile, 96 Therefore, the power structure in Javakheti is highly influenced ishighly in Javakheti structure power the Therefore, 32 gamgebeli rayon of Akhalkalaki. 94 level superficial. level A n bevr has observer one As 93 The effect in CEU eTD Collection 102 101 100 99 98 97 non-state Therearealso in isinsignificant. state region Armenian the of the political role and categorically does not support independence or autonomy for the region. the for autonomy or independence support not does categorically and In reality, Armenian the isgovernment dependent on maintaining relations good with Georgia andArmenia.” from to attached “keeps Georgiantheir Armenians Javakheti state alienated renovation. to its co-ethnics in inJavakheti, in particular supplying electricity and funds for school as demonstrated by the co-optation of local elites. of exitleads tothe suppression of voice, leaving the minority with only optionthe of 'loyalty', voicethat is by strengthened of threat the exit. influence theleadership. Interestingly, not case this conform does Hirschman'sto argument perceived bythe Georgian haspublic) stifled voice by leading the toco-optandauthorities (as restof country. from the of region the secession in threat the case,the alienate this Indeed, street protests, isthis a very weak form of representation which has only served tofurther local actors in Javakheti may have helped local Armenians find their 'voice' by mobilizing by inadequate self-governance and channels for representation on localthe level. Thus,while appearance of popularity.widespread Infact, forthis demonstrationsisfacilitated propensity mobilize the local population demonstrate aroundto issues of popular concern gave the typically to only amounted a couple active of hundred followers, more Javakh. radical of formation United the extremist views to rise moreallowing However,to increased discontent centre. hasonly this tothe tactic resistance the surface, as the decimation of the Javakh movement led to the Hirschman, 83. Lohm, 16. Wheatley,2009(b), 26. ICG report,18. Ibid. ICG report,19. In terms of international the has some Armenian support In terms ofinternational actors, provided government 100 Consequently, it has been argued that the involvement of the Armenian state in Consequently, Armenian state the of it argued thehasbeen involvement that 33 99 97 Instead it suggests that the (presumed) threat thisorganizationbase of support While the 98 quickly ability to its 102 Thus the Thus 101 CEU eTD Collection 105 104 103 while documents are by while documents handfultranslated the whospeakGeorgian. of employees Georgian at work, workingthe languages local administrationof Armenian Russian,are or ondeaf ears. fallen forfrom garner Armenia Javakheti to and have Russia their international attention attempts itself, from region the emanated have ever than autonomy for regional demands more radical although lackthese widespread supportin region.Whilethe organizationsthese tendtovoice actors in Armenia and Russia which claim to represent the interests of Javakheti Armenians, the Armenian population of Javakheti towards learning the state language. learning to thestate Ascompared Armenian Javakheti towards the population of interviewedof forthose most this thesis,a positive on remarked among changein attitudes understand only a few basic words. haveknowledge no(respectively) of Georgian whatsoever,and while 52.6% 30.3% ethnically homogeneous ofAkhalkalaki districts and Ninotsminda, 47.2%and28.2% knowledge in of so degreeof Georgian inreflect the ethnic diversity that a district, the isthe Javakheti knowledgeArmenians poor statelanguage. of the variations in In general, the Integration intoGeorgian Society power. who, together with the ethnic Georgian regionalgovernors governor, district Armenian enjoyethnic the economic through mediated is andregion the of administrativecontrol However, government, in particular in light of the overwhelming success of the ruling party in elections. Lohm, 31. Wheatley,2009(b), 7. Marina Elbakidze, Personal Interview, CIPDD, Tbilisi, 24.04.2012. As is the case with other national minorities, the biggest obstacle to the integration of integration the to obstacle biggest the minorities, national other with case the is As it can be mostThus, remainstheGeorgian in powerful said the actor region that the 103 104 Thus, although by law state employees must use must employees state law by although Thus, 34 105 However, CEU eTD Collection NGOs and international donors, making their financial sustainability uncertain, while a lack a while uncertain, sustainability financial their making donors, international and NGOs from funding on dependent often are these but Armenian, in broadcast are channels TV local Javakheti. Republic ofArmenia and Russianthe Federation enjoy overwhelming popularity in media As by national for aconsequence,broadcast channels minorities problematic. the knowledge of statelanguage,issues,the with state makes together socio-economic access to were receiving the Russian version of events through their satellite dishes. satellite their through events of version Russian the receiving were ishigher education increasing. tuition fees in these Consequently,countries. the number of national minorities applying for Georgian universities is still goingpreferable to study in to Yerevan Baku,or due higherto the 110 109 108 107 106 them. to assigned places of the minority students in university,but nevertheless minority students are fillingonly 10% around exam in 2005. grasp an inadequate of Georgian, just with 3 from students Javakheti passing the entrance entrance farfewer wereexams in2004, enrol Armenian ablein students to to university due higher education and Following employment. introductionthe of state-wide university be derived thereof. to benefits the andappreciate language thestate learn necessity acceptthe to now most inJavakheti Armenians Armenians, by ethnic assimilation 2005 and earlier, wereviewedasprogrammes when attempted Georgian-language Tobias Akerlund, 'National Minorities and the Media Situation in Georgia', ECMI Working Paper 52, 2012, 18. 2012, 52, Paper Working Akerlund,ECMI 17. Georgia', in Situation Media the and Minorities 'National Akerlund, Tobias increased”, has Exams Unified National the for registered entrants and Azeri of Armenian “Number Tabatadze. Salome Mekhuzla etal., 'National Minorities and Educational Reformin Georgia', ECMI Working Paper 46, of Education and Science of Georgia, 2009, 37. An additional aspect of isintegration An useaspect of media.additional of andaccess Ingeneral,to poor In spite of this, thelanguage barrier still ethnicprevents Armenians from obtaining 109 duringThis meant war with South-Ossetia,Georgian that, 2008 the Armenians 106 Since then, policies have been introduced to increase the number of national of number the increase to introduced been have policies then, Since 108 107 In spite of this, for national minority students enrolment in 29.03.2012, accessed: 30.05.2012, 35 110 Meanwhile, Ministry CEU eTD Collection 112 111 Georgians. linguistic differencescouldheighten to serve schism between Armenians ethnic and ethnic Georgian population beshould weak account of on their sharing religions, similar although minority attachmentthe ethnic of schism to theregion. thenative ethnic Meanwhile, with its and long-standing presence an proximity to arguablyethnic kin state, formakes the strong homogeneity Meanwhile,minority'sin demographic resources. the togetherwith region, the in administrative from particularly isolated restof the Georgia. However,due to theethnic Armenian presence posts, is Javakheti of population Armenian ethnic base, the military on Russian the dependence the minority can be said to enjoyhindering integration. a high degree of inaffairs lifein vacuum awareness affecting state region, public and the andGeorgia thus of institutionalthem. view is timeswheninconvenient unlikely to population the programmes areairedat these newslocal on national channels, the broadcast broadcastingdoes company state while the of funds results in poorly trained journalists andasub-par quality of reporting. Armen Farmanyan, Personal Interview, Akhalkalaki, 27.04.2012. Akerlund, 19. 112 To summarize, as a result of its geographic remoteness and its recent economic recent andits remoteness To its geographic of asa summarize, result Thus, the low-penetration of state media in Javakheti exacerbates the knowledge the exacerbates in Javakheti media state of low-penetration Thus, the 36 111 Moreover, CEU eTD Collection 116 115 114 113 population has almost halved(from 51,844 to28,034). as the Dmanisi hasseen out-migration Since USSR, region of the thecollapse considerable respectively), the district Marneuli and Gardabani located are not farfrom state the capital (at 39km and 42km of Dmanisi is both furtherKartli, from in thethe centredistricts and more of mountainous.Marneuli, Dmanisi, Bolnisi, and Gardabani.Demographic, GeographicandEconomicSituation Kvemo Kartli 3.2: The Azeris of ethnic ethnic 1989andincreased between Azeris 2002. in Shi'ite is in the practice branch of region the Islam, weak. general religious inhistory region backthe dating 11 tothe similarity with Samtskhe-Javakheti is that the regional capital, Rustavi, has only a small a only proportion of ethnic Azeris. has Rustavi, capital, regional the that is Samtskhe-Javakheti with similarity ICG report, 9. Wheatley,2005(b), 5. Wheatley,2005(b), 7. The respective percentages of ethnic Azeris in districts these are: 83.10%, 66.76%,65.98% 43.72%.and ECMI, The Azeri of Georgiapopulation is in predominantly settled region the of Kvemo ECMI Caucasus, accessed: 30.05.2012, 116 Finally,in each district of KvemoKartli the proportion of th century. While most Azeris in Georgia belong to belong Georgia in Azeris most While century. 37 114 a have Kartli Kvemo in Azeris 113 While the towns of 115 Another CEU eTD Collection Tsalka Tertritsqaro Marneuli Dmanisi Gardabani Bolnisi Rustavi City Kartli Kvemo 120 119 118 117 andfrom 2007 67.6% to59.7%. capital iscity great.Infact, Kvemo per capitaKartli's annual turnover droppedbetween 2003 contribution to the income local of the to the population. contribution households have afamily memberliving abroad, making remittances asignificant data. and theeconomic thus output of minority-populatedthe districts is not reflected in abovethe Javakheti, the majority of these enterprises are located in the ethnic Georgian city of Rustavi, Table 2:Population Kvemoof Kartli by region ethnicity,and 1989and 2002 major industrial enterprises are located in Kvemo Kartli. Kvemo in located are enterprises industrial major Samtskhe-Javakheti, owing to the proximity of the region to the capital as well as the fact that See Appendix 1. Wheatley,2009(b), 9. Wheatley,2009(b), 8. ECMI, As with Samtskhe-Javakheti, the economic disparity between Kvemo Kartli and the and Kartli Kvemo between disparity economic the Samtskhe-Javakheti, with As Like Samtskhe-Javakheti, Kvemo KartliLike is Samtskhe-Javakheti, an region, whileagricultural 70%of Azeri ECMI Caucasus 5.13 6.85 6.13 78.72 83.10 0.36 63.86 28.14 31.24 66.76 1.41 42.51 45.66 53.20 43.72 6.80 65.98 21.69 26.82 65.98 7.28 1989 % Azeris , accessed: 30.05.2012, 9.54 6.47 4.29 2002 118 Nevertheless, these figures are an improvement on those of those on improvement an are figures these Nevertheless, 3.63 12.39 5.05 74.03 45.85 10.38 23.06 4.32 65.10 87.77 1989 % Georgians 38 12.02 28.51 21.97 12.02 54.98 61.04 2002 8.04 120 Furthermore, dueto proximitythe the of 1989 2002 11.93 7.89 % Armenians 119 Samtskhe- in as However, 2.41 0.52 0.93 5.81 117 1989 2.52 1.35 6.12 1.33 2.88 % Greeks 2002 0.22 0.33 0.78 0.21 0.59 CEU eTD Collection 124 123 122 121 region remain just as isolated. just remain region Dmanisi aswell proximity Tbilisi,as to more physically the removed communities in the is by facilitated levelsgreater of indiversity ethnic such towns as Gardabani, Bolnisi and in KvemoKartli integration while As remarked, interviewee one particularly difficult. regions issuesinfrastructure as Samtskhe-Javakheti, poor roadsmaking with andfrom travel rural to hassame the from However, alsosuffered Kartli from Kvemo centre. the less isolated is and Samtskhe-Javakheti, of Armenians the than society Georgian with ties closer enjoys provided by Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhanthe pipeline. of ethnic Georgians, population Kvemoof Kartli has left country,the whilethe region Tsalkaof hasseen influx an mostly thatcontrolled regionparamilitaries the in earlythe nineties. eco-migrants local and later protected Azeris which from by intimidation notorious the and from those Azeris Georgia, of emigration wide-scale the with preventing was tasked that Geyrat, who arrived Georgianhomogeneous city. in anticipationethnic Azeri families from city the of Bolnisi in late 1989,making this an ethnically of was its episode make-up. Onesignificant removal demographic forced the 800 around of work society. ofethnic into integration Azeris the withincreaseand enhancing helping Georgian-speakingthe population contact produce, to sell in large whichto has markets accessto Kartli capital city,Kvemo of population rural the Leila Suleimanova, Personal Interview, UAWG, Tbilisi, 01.05.2012. Jonathan Wheatley,'Defusing Conflict in Tsalka District of Georgia: Migration,International Intervention and Wheatley,2005(b), 13-14. ICG report,16. the Rolethe State', of the ECMI Working Paper,36, 2006, 9-10. Thus, inThus, of terms geography and economy, Azeri the population Kvemoof Kartli Since the breakupUnion, of SovietKvemothe Kartli has in alsoexperienced changes 121 124 These events led to the creation of movement, of led creation an Azeri tothe These events popular 39 123 122 Meanwhile, most of the Greek Mkhedrioni CEU eTD Collection 127 126 125 state. of the theauthority undermines society, penetration of state andultimately limits This situation above). minority (see Azeri rural alsoaffects the councils village-level the abolition of the issue concerning ishampered authorities infrastructure poor and byboth language the barrier, while the same Accordingan to OSCE/ODIHR report on Maythe local2010 elections, while the number of vote the count andtabulation of were results only carried out by Georgians. ethnic Commission (DEC) in KvemoKartli Kartli wasin composedrecentin Kvemo appear tohave prominent been also especially irregularities electoral Meanwhile, exclusively years. of influencedethnic by the ForMinistry of InternalGeorgians, Affairs instance, while during local elections of 2006 the District Electionmembers. Marneuli, atmore than 80% the local population, Azeris account for just over a half of council inlocal positions the toone-thirdcouncils, while occupy of in population, Azeris closer assemblies agencies. government heldby are party ruling activists or occupied by with those forexperience working Georgians.ethnic Moreover, posts these are closely tothe rulingtied party,as they are either posts, includingall top the police chief, procurator, and inspectorate, tax arealsoby held regional and district governors of Kvemo Kartli has consistently been ethnic the Thus, structures. Georgians, inadministrative of Azeris absence is complete the minorities Azeri while Political Representation andLocalGovernment ICG report,13. Wheatley,2009(b), 17. Wheatley,2009(b), 32. As in Samtskhe-Javakheti, the appointment of appointment the in Samtskhe-Javakheti, As Perhaps the most striking difference between the circumstances of and Armenian the of circumstances the between difference striking most the Perhaps 126 : Thus, in Dmanisi and Bolnisiethnic where Azeris make up two-thirds of the This under-representation is especially acute in rural areas, where access to the to access where areas, inrural acute is especially This under-representation 125 Ethnic Azeris are also under-represented in the elected local- elected in the under-represented also are Azeris Ethnic 40 , thus weakening the power weakeningthus power the of the gamgebeli in Kvemo Kartli is largely is Kartli Kvemo in sakrebulos. 127 CEU eTD Collection their candidates by the local by local authorities. the their candidates influencelocal managed in to elections leaderswithdraw2006, Geyrat's to were pressurized greater political autonomy for Azeris is basedKvemo the of language rights Kartli, autonomy political and greater radical most Azeri the organization, National the Assembly of Azeris in Georgia (NAAG),which lobbies for Javakheti, with As Javakheti. in than authorities local the to pliable more divide and rule,it causing tosplitinlate the 1990s. of practice the by weakened was legitimacy its in Javakheti movements with as but region, Throughout 1990s,Geyrat the structures. was mainthe society Azeri civil organization in the in administrative Azeris of absence the of because Javakheti in than issue controversial Actors andAgency administration. in local areentirely absent ethnic Azeris Kartli,in Kvemo where weak is minority particularly 132 131 130 129 128 from a fear of reprisal if theirvoting habits changed. It has also loyalty that beensuggested rulingthe to party national among stems minorities forinvariably vote ruling almostthe minorities party. means thattheseArmenians national political candidates and opposition parties amongboth ethnicthe Azeri population and ethnic a single ethnic Azeri in the DEC in Kvemo Kartli. in Kvemo DEC in the Azeri ethnic a single not was there again once in Samtskhe-Javakheti, increased had DEC in the members minority Wheatley,2009(b), 33. Wheatley,2005(b), 14-15. Wheatley,2005(b), 15. Wheatley,2009(b), 24-25. 'International Election Observation Mission; Georgia, 30 May OSCE/ODIHR,2010', 10,accessed: 30.05.2012, In terms of actors and agency, the distribution of power in KvemoKartli is a much less 132 This suggests that local actors in Kvemo Kartli Kartli inKvemoare local actors that This suggests 41 128 130 131 Meanwhile, the low awareness of awareness low the Meanwhile, Thus, representation of the Azeri the of representation Thus, Javakh United while Moreover, 129 CEU eTD Collection Armenian. towns of the with as compared Marneuli), in KvemoKartli (except centres of urban diversity ethnic Akhalkalaki and Ninotsminda in Javakheti which are almost entirely ethnic 137 136 135 134 133 of population by governmentthe Azerbaijan. that apotentialmanipulation exists there forpipelines the Georgia'ssuggests Azeri of between the two governments. However, Georgia's dependence onAzerbaijani oil and gas for incumbent. the to vote Azeris local such Georgian as when government, a delegation was sent tothe region in encourage 2003 to cultural and humanitarian andcustoms. views sphere. minority'sthe activism Whenmeansand of appears representation be suppressedto by traditional it is politicised, directlynot involve them. decisionsimportant head tothe getinvolved of not to familythe andtend inissues which itdo tends to actengagereticence in to among Azeris, whoare ethnic used public discussions to delegating in favour organizationsthese islimited. As intervieweeone explained, exists a there traditional of the issues. by population, andaffairs have Azeri protests the community beenspontaneous overlocal in organizations Javakheti, inbeenKartli Kvemo not have in thelocal successful mobilizing Azeri Azeri arrested and who authorities, jailed its leaderin 2009. inoutsideGeorgia Baku. However, of enjoy this of notorganization support the the does ICG report,14. Suleimanova. Wheatley,2005(b), 43-49. Wheatley,2005(b), 40. Wheatley,2009(b), 34. 134 In spite of this, the region remains firmly in the grasp of the Georgian government, and Meanwhile, the role of the Azeri government in Kvemo Kartli is confined to the In general, there are few NGOs representing the Azeri minority, of Azeri the outreach the fewNGOsrepresenting are while In general, there One explanation for this weak capacity for mobilization might be the increased be the might mobilization for capacity for this weak One explanation 135 136 Consequently, on top of institutional obstacles to representation, to obstacles institutional of top on Consequently, 137 Such actions reflect the traditionally close ties close traditionally the reflect actions Such 42 133 Moreover, unlikemovements CEU eTD Collection 139 138 8%. grasp afluentlanguage with state of of minorities the exceed percentage national the and35.1% 47.0%canunderstandjust afewbasic words.In nodistrict of Kvemo Kartli does and 42.2% 24.5%(respectively) havenoknowledgeminorities national of of Georgian, while proficiency in Georgian poses a particular problem in Marneuli and Gardabani districts, where is poor knowledge of the state language. Thus, among the national minorities of Kvemo Kartli, Integration intoGeorgian Society local from international actors. littleor resistance with relatively Kartli, Kvemo and of minority Azeri of the integration of the speedandnature the determine to able most is who government Georgian is the it Consequently, governors. Georgian ethnic in handsrests the of control centrally-appointed, administrative and economic Unified National inUnified National introduced making were Examinations 2005, knowledgeof forGeorgian When local addressing the whenauthorities. itthe an to comes disadvantaged at even greater Azeri stands minority the structures, in Azeris administrative of absence ethnic overwhelming media.lawstate in tothe Moreover, the having recourse and owing accessing to ethnic Armenians, including in obtaining employment, in accessing higher education,in while fears of assimilation have much been less prevalent than among ethnic Armenians. minority, Azeri among the learn stronger hasbeen Georgian desire the to centre, the Kartli to as itpoor is in areas inhabited by ethnic Armenians. However, dueto proximitythe Kvemoof Wheatley,2009(b), 54. Wheatley,2009(b), 8. 138 as Azerisby isjust languageininhabitedethnic areas state Thus, knowledgethe of As with the Armenian minority, the biggest obstacle to the integration of ethnic Azeris As a result of the language barrier, ethnic Azeris face many of the same problems as 43 139 CEU eTD Collection representation in local administrative structures puts Azeris puts disadvantage. atadistinct in structures local representation administrative lack towns, of the of some Azeri-populated integration centre economic andthe improved the in events Georgia. of awareness in insufficient resulting again once minority, Azeri the among limited is media are beingefforts made to more mediaoffer inanduse Azeri language, accessto the of state and'Moambe'. TV Marneuli including in Azeri, programmes short 145 144 143 142 141 140 broadcasters. small, local station will be able to transmit programmes for a 10 year period, an unrealistic expectation for stationsradio also havedifficulty licenses tobroadcast,asproofobtaining is required that the in TVchannels. local trust diminishes reportedly that factor inmedialack andare outlets particular a often financially resources on state, dependent the Kartli. in Kvemo Azeris of sets television the dominating channels state Azerbaijani with channels, television state where there is an estimated 40% failure rate for school exams.leaving forfailure school is 40% where there rate anestimated teaching,poor asaresult butalso educationof inminority substandard ingeneral,regions than Moreover, assignedthe quota. this one intervieweethat suggested not results only from introduced, haveeducation numberthe is been Azeris of education still entering ethnic less year. that exam entrancehigher into education obligatory, out of only 17 1,012 Azeri candidates passed the Akerlund, 21. 'Advisory Committee on the Framework Conventionfor the Protectionof National Minorities: Opinion on Akerlund, 23. Akerlund, 23. Tabatadze. Mekhuzla, 37. Georgia', a Council of Europe publication, October2009, Article 107,30. To sum up, while the Azeri minority might benefitfrom the proximity of the region to In terms ofmedia usage,theAzeri of KartliKvemo makespopulation limited use of 140 Although policies to improve the chances of national minorities in higher in minorities national of chances the improve to policies Although 142 144 As in Javakheti, here is also the issue of media quality, as local broadcast do stations national local and However,a couple of 44 143 Local minority-run TV and TV minority-run Local 145 141 some although Thus, CEU eTD Collection 146 under Shevardnadze; however,under Shevardnadze; not this does functioninga better reflect andmore thrived elites Armenian ethnic which on localism the of product isa in Samtskhe-Javakheti in local On hand, administration presenceof other to thelocal Armenians the government. which structures, deprives theAzeri communicate needs its community of to opportunity the in administrative Azeris ethnic of absence gaping is the these among Chief differences. and infrastructure rural limited accesstoeducation and there arealso employment, some key Azeri in minorities country,the including awidespread lack of Georgian language skills, poor Comparative Summary3.3: conflictual. less minority Azeri towards Georgianthe than state ethnic Armenians, making with relationship the ethnicthe of the Azeri minority to utilize its voice has led to the perception of Azeris as less antagonistic Consequently, culture. reluctance minority the intrinsic tothe features due to society Georgian into integrating actively from minority the prevents rather but conflict, by generating degree a putatively nation notof host inhibitschism with the ethnic greater does integration respect, this In Armenians. then Christian the interests their represent andcollectively mobilize to likely less are Azeris Muslim distinctive culturally more the indeed, goods; collective minority not conformdoes Hale'sto hypothesis ethnic that identity will be used toobtain more intangible. making problems conflicts and interests, their represent voiceless willing to its concerns, and thusless attempts resolveopen to to their problems and is Azeri the Moreover,community features, above, asnoted asaresultcultural of traditional Wheatley,2009(b), 40. In brief, while there are many similarities between the conditions of the Armenian and 45 146 Thus, the Azeri the Thus, CEU eTD Collection 151 150 149 148 147 discrimination. of grounds corruption incompetenceor isoften as construed ethnically-driven positions. administrative from exclusion prevent not does Armenian did notstand onthis issue. was 'accused' non-recognition of Armenian the inApril Genocide thefact2012. Besides that minister the of being ethnic Armenian by a fellow MP, it is noteworthy that an ethnic perception perception of exclusion amongnational can Theseminorities. features bethus as identified a responsible not only for limiting access the of education and employment, butin driving the education and training. of poor asaresult usually apost, for requirements essential lackthe also minorities national language is not the only obstacle to employment for minorities, but very often, members of issues. onminoritydeputies parliamentary rarely speak out issues, whichare often taboo considered in parliament. MPs Armenians ethnic three and Azeris ethnic three only with equally butonly therural/urban divide. deepens region the of inhabitants all benefit not does this integration economic of interms Javakheti Finally, insignificant. becomes Kvemo while hashandKartli theupper Samtskhe- over capital the lessmountainous, butinand is wherethe infrastructure places poor this advantage Kvemo geographicKartli a slight beingthe is isolation advantage of region, at each closerto In elites. of terms due to system the centrally-appointed of local government representative Lohm, 32. 01.05.2012. Tbilisi, ECMI, Interview, Personal Sordia, Giorgi ICG report,22. Suleimanova. ofParliament”, “Members 148 Moreover, among both minorities there is the perception that knowledge of Georgian of knowledge that perception is the there minorities both among Moreover, Meanwhile, both Meanwhile, both national minorities are poorly represented in central government, A examplerecent of this waswhenaGeorgian MP up brought issuethe of Georgia's 151 Therefore, the language barrier and the isolation of minority are regions minority of isolation the and barrier language the Therefore, 150 Parliament of Georgia, on work from dismissal employedor be However, failureto accessed:30.05.2012, 46 149 As noted, oneinterviewee 147 Moreover, CEU eTD Collection 154 153 152 desire to secede. Indeed, when tensions between the region and the central government were government central the and region the between tensions when Indeed, secede. to desire a equate not to of However,independence region social the does and the greater cohesion population, whileits in hold on administrative power earlythe subdue.harder1990s madeit to to the Geyrat movement issues.Moreover, prominence local unrest over compared greater the of movement Javakh the in Kvemo movement,its Javakh of the provoking economic andpolitical greater as of aswell elite Kartli accounts has co-optation rulehasthe marked, asJavakheti inJavakheti beenmoreindirect experienced for its success afforded independence. fromhas alsomeant regionThis that shiftthe the to greater direct in mobilizing in oflocal in substantial era,which the freedoms Shevardnadze the elites respects some the localSoviet times and its economic dependence inJavakheti, byits economic andgeographicincreased caused isolation special of status on the Russian military base. It is alsoto a resultKvemo of Kartli, posing greater the obstaclesrule of law. to its by iseven if apply imposed centre homogeneity supposed the infactan to the cultural attempt integration. This and centre the minority rule can aminority between of region, cause tension directregions is in part a result to how thetransition on theory Hechter's This supports on local the culture. encroachment of the driven. Thus, failing pay to taxes orforaccepting has bribes alsobeen asbeing understood ethnically- attemptswhich authoritiesthe previously ablindturned eye. to govern havepay surprised to to a hefty fine for bride-knapping according was local asdiscriminatory.of a instance, Samtskhe-Javakheti construed often For are also to state laws are sometimesrelevantfeature of ethnic schism. perceived as an Hechter, 62. Hechter, 33-34. Lohm, Bride-knapping,when agirl orwoman iskidnapped for the purpose of marriage. Overall, the transition period has led to the greater isolation of Javakheti compared as Javakheti of isolation greater the has ledto period transition Overall, the democracy to aspartof the transition law tothe undertaken changes vein,In asimilar 154 47 153 Similarly, the extraction of fines for fines of extraction the Similarly, 152 , a traditional yet illegal practice to illegal practice yet, atraditional CEU eTD Collection policies aimed at integrating national minorities in the country. in the minorities national integrating at aimed policies they will be discussed in followingthe chaptertogetherwith an overview of government level theArmenianbetween contribute to the schism' 'ethnic of and Georgian communities, arebelieved to features these Since integration. to resistant is Javakheti particularly that led have totheperception Georgians factors ethnic also among other population. Meanwhile, however, 'voice'increased the mobilization of local the of minority the by the facilitating 156 155 Meyer's assertion institutionalthat encourage secessionresources notdoes hold. in local presence this hasadministration, not led toanattemptsecede. to Thus, Kuzioand as Armenian a resultof ethnic the institutional resources have greater enjoyed Armenians actually amotion independence. foractually Javakheti's rejected time atthe Javakheti controlled that Council Provisional Javakh-led the in 1991, highest Kuzio and Meyer, 299. Wheatley,2009(b), 14. 48 155 Thus while the Javakheti the while Thus 156 It has, It CEU eTD Collection issues under remitthe of Statethe Ministerfor Reintegration Issues in 2008. numerous structural reforms in the country. One such reform wasLegislative and Institutional Provisions the inclusion of minority promotion of a civic national identity in the country. the with cohere minorities national towards attitudes whether toconsider be, presented, prevailing perceptions andstereotypesminorities ofnational among Georgian the public will the this, Following minorities. national towards policy language government’s the as well as government, current the by undertaken changes institutional and legislative key the of some and on citizenship as rights an opposed to exclusive, ethnicidentity. This will chapter outline the developmentof a civic national identity,encouraged focused on inclusionthe of also differentethnic groups has state the society, multi-faith and multicultural multi-ethnic, minorities by assistingintegration their into Georgian society. In order to cope with Georgia's has Saakashvili attempted to reign in andGeorgia's distant potentially national destabilizing Government4.1: Policies towards the Integration ofNationalMinorities 157 Giorgi Sordia, 'Institutions of Georgia for Governance on National Minorities', ECMI Working Paper 43, Paper Working ECMI Minorities', National on Governance for of Georgia 'Institutions Sordia, Giorgi C 2009, 4. HAPTER Since coming topowerin Saakashvili2004, the administration has implemented of administration the underShevardnadze, From neglect” “benign a policy of 4: T HE I NTEGRATION OF P ERCEPTIONS M 49 INORITIES IN G EORGIA : P OLICIES AND OLICIES 157 However, the However, CEU eTD Collection 162 161 160 159 158 inclusion. minority to amenable identity national is concept valuesto foster with associated democracy,including creation the of a civic consciousness'. 'civic promoting of made isalso mention while provision including of equal right the beopportunities, educatedin to nativetheir languages, minorities for tothe and oftolerance respect' 'environment range from of creation goals the an the Europeanand (FCNM) Minorities National of Protection the for Convention Framework the including Charter conventions, EU and international various in basis legal a have to claims for document This RegionalIntegration. Civic and Tolerance for Concept National is the government current the by and Minority Languagesin practice. effective been always not has this government, previous the then issues minority (ECRML).funds. with minority issues, frequent changes in of mandates the institutions,these and a shortage of projects. minority of implementation ineffective the for making ministries, between coordination in minority overlapissues. between involved in different institutions Thisresults the a lack of while 'civicis more reformshave integration',considerable the to attention there given regions. Moreover, minority separatist between and and implicitdrawn parallels state, the the in national alsoother minorities Georgia. theimportanceminority to of integration It reflects of its efforts integration the to assist be toovershadow which might expected afact regions, chief competence of this institution is tomanage issues relating toGeorgia's breakaway ‘National Concept…’, 4. ‘National Concept for Tolerance and Civic Integration’, Government of Georgia, May 2009, 3-4, accessed: 4. Sordia, 5. Sordia, Interview. Personal Sordia, 30.05.2012, 159 While the objectives of the documents are commendable, the Advisory Committee to Committee Advisory the arecommendable, of documents the objectives While the introduced minorities national concerning provision legislative significant most The 158 institutional muchto more hasspace devoted governmentThus, while current the capacity ministriesinstitution-level Other poor the include problems dealing of 50 162 Thus, the overall aim of the of aim overall the Thus, 161 Concept's The 160 CEU eTD Collection hate-speech in the media and on the streets mediaof in andon streets capital. the the hate-speech in Tbilisi, rally protest provoked resistancefrom Georgianprovoked telling the Church Orthodox minority minority legal inreligions status July 2011. well as rights in laidtheir down Concept. minority the of as theineffective realization provisions exercise to minorities national of inability the including hurdles, practical have improved the position of national minorities on paper, these provisions are beset by authoritiesestablish when trying to placesof worship. practice of minority religions in Georgia, as minorities often face opposition from local broadcasting company. in mediaspeech lack ofby Code the of andthe the Conduct state of enforcement the 170 169 168 167 166 165 164 163 minorities are unaware tocourt in of are brought discrimination Georgia, national because often membersof of their discriminationrights. on the basis of race or religion by law, the Committee notes that very few cases migration to Russia. Javakheti who in Samtskhe- haveArmenians example, for to, be extended obtained not may minority national of status Russian or Armenian citizenship in order to facilitate seasonal minorities, defined asGeorgiaminorities, FCNMthe has noted some apparentflaws in includingthe itsConcept, definition of national “Threat of outburst of inter-religious and interethnic hatred in Georgia: where silence leaded (sic.) us”, Previously, minority religions were forced to register as NGOs. ‘Advisory Committee...', Article 93, 26-27. 'Advisory Committee...', Article 82, 23-24. 'Advisory Committee...', Article 38, 13. Dual citizenship is prohibited by law in Georgia, while travel to Russia has become extremely 'Advisory difficultCommittee...', for Article 9, 6. " 30.05.2012, 25.04.2012. Tbilisi, Office, Georgian passport-holders since the 2008 war. Isabella Osipova,Personal Interview, Public Defender’s Thousands Protest Law on Religious Minorities Legal Status," Civil Georgia, 10.06.2011, accessed: One significant development was the introduction of a legislative amendment giving amendment legislative a of introduction the was development significant One 164 166 from protected minorities are religiousMoreover, and whileethnic 169 In addition, attention is drawn to the continuing obstacles to the to obstacles continuing the to drawn is attention addition, In sparking a wave of anti-minority (and especially anti-Armenian) especially (and anti-minority of wave a sparking citizens 165 with distinct ethno-linguistic features. ethno-linguistic distinct with Also mentioned are the failure to prosecute hate- prosecute to failure the are mentioned Also 51 168 However, the passing of this amendment 167 provisions legislative while Thus, 170 This episode demonstrated the demonstrated episode This ( GOC) , which organized a 163 Tu the Thus CEU eTD Collection 173 172 171 classes for aHowever,classes one-year period. thelack of of highturnover specialised training and assistin totheregions language students to consisted of numbersending alarger of graduate in Kartli Kvemo both Samtskhe-Javakheti. and teacher-trainers However, first involved implemented the from such project, just40Georgian 2004-2006, simultaneously teachingin assist Georgianthe language whilelocal training teachers. usually consist of sending Georgian teachers universityor graduates to theregion to to train introduced languageteachersinminority These programmes Georgian regions. been have programmes various end, To this minorities. national among language state the Language policy in society.consciousness interethnic dialogue properly in to order institutionalize acivic national identity and civic theneedThis highlights move increased to andtofacilitate legislative provisions beyond inhibited by and “informal in intolerance”codes latentthe expression of Georgian society. is of such policies acceptance widespread the nationalism, of inclusive civic a liberal, complicating the promotion of inclusivean civic national identity in country.the loyalty that theGOCininterviewee suggested to Georgia national-identity, overshadows thus facethe of church's the popularity of since breakup the Sovietthe Union. Indeed, one influence of the GOC in Georgian society, as well as the government's relative weakness in Mekhuzla, 12-13. 299. Broers, Nana Sumbadze, Personal Interview, IPS, Tbilisi, 24.04.2012. AnalyticalBrief, PMMG, accessed: 30.05.2012, The main focus of government'sthe policy integration isof improveto knowledge of in terms framed clearly are minorities national towards policies state while Therefore, 52 173 Recent programmes have programmes Recent 171 172 CEU eTD Collection 180 179 178 177 176 175 174 these graduates make these graduates this is a regressionfrom previous programmes. lack an adequate grasp of graspof Georgian. lack an adequate haveresults beenslight,andapproximately 60% of in teachers Georgian-language regions the country. in the schools non-Georgian of in ahandful implemented is only it currently although university in years. recent entering students minority of number the of increase in asteady resulting rules, Examination increase enrolmentminorityof instudents by university therelaxing Unified National 1999, it has yet todo so. governmentpledged toratify ECRML the becomingamember in of on of Council the Europe states. retaining linguistic diversity fosteringwhile knowledge language of state the inmulti-ethnic OSCE HCNMintroduced themultilingual method, which teaching has proved successful in fulfil linguisticdue theirto quota constraints. of forquotas minority students, although minority university applicants still notmanagedo to continuing use of minority languages in Georgia is somehow seen...as an aberration that needs an that aberration in seen...as languages issomehow Georgia use minority of continuing languages than thepresence in other Georgian country,opinion of the rejects “the while ECRML reflects highly-politicizedthe nature of languagethe issuein Georgia, aspublic Jonathan Wheatley,'Georgia and Europeanthe Charter for Minority Regionalor Languages', ECMI Working Civil Integration Programs, Mekhuzla, 17. “Ethnic Minority Entrants at the Unified National Exams”, National Unified atthe Entrants Minority “Ethnic Mekhuzla, 38. Tabatadze. Tabatadze. Paper 42, 2009(a), 4. 17.02.2012, accessed: 30.05.2012, 178 As regards the protection of minority languages in As regardstheprotection minority languages of Georgia, although Georgian the 179 method, multilingual Encouragingly, upthe has taken Education of Ministry the Ministry of Education and Science of Georgia, 176 180 Another positive step in this direction has been the introduction the been has direction this in step positive Another hasitIndeed, been arguedGeorgia's that ratify failureto the 175 However, more positive steps have been made to made been have steps positive more However, 53 177 Also, a recent pilot project funded by the Ministry ofScience and Education of accessed: 30.05.2012, 174 Consequently, the Consequently, Georgia, CEU eTD Collection teaching languages otherthan teachinglanguages is Georgian non-constitutional. 183 182 181 of national minorities. integration the benefit only will and language state the to threat no poses ECRML the of ratification that circles, including the in official voiced is still learning minority-language to resistance Thus, affairs. administrative introducing insteps towards approach the bilingual language Georgia, especiallyin detriment of Georgian. Thiscontradiction somegoes wayin explaining asyet the tentative languagestate andisit promotion where minority the expectedthat of willbelanguages to the inlinguistic integration isunderstanding where Georgia, of emphasis onlearning placed the languages following ratification of the ECMRL could be expected to draw a similar reaction. minority empower religious institutions in country,the changes to status the minority of a particular problem for national minorities, and especially the Azeri minority. Azeri the especially Therefore, and minorities, for national problem a particular represents mechanisms of self-governance lack the local Moreover,representation, in of terms provisions for national minorities are required toimprove into theirintegration society. and application institutional better of already institutional existing arrangements increased this, of spite In country. in the minorities national of integration the improve to ways new find integration. minority state,the continues toprohibit introductionthe institutionalof beneficialarrangements to of 1990sinGeorgiansociety, the ideological remnant still asathreatto minorities that sees endorsed by the government continues to privilege the titular majority of the states, while an be corrected.” to Wheatley,2009(a), 25. Britta Korth et al., 'Language Policy in Georgia: WithFocus a on the Education System',published by Wheatley, 2009(a), 5. CIMERA, Geneva,2005, 45. Indeed, promotion the minorityof languagesstands in contradiction to the Nevertheless, as demonstrated above, the Georgian government is increasing efforts to is efforts increasing Georgian above, the government asdemonstrated Nevertheless, 181 Consideringintroduced popular response the tolegislative amendments to Parliamentary Committee for Education, Parliamentary for Committee 183 In this way, it is clear that the civic national identity national civic the that clear is it way, this In 54 182 arguedbeen ithasHowever, which has declared that declared has which CEU eTD Collection 184 Javakheti might be the 'next Abkhazia'. 'next the be might Javakheti Armenianethnic and Georgian ethnic the between history tense population the as well as region, Javakheti of Georgia's in sovereignty structure itsof theadministrative breakaway the regions, specific the country, minority 'in limelight' the since earlythe 1990s. This, with together ongoingthe issue of has the sustained kept consistently has which years, inrecent minority by the demonstrated mobilization the fear negativedo author the Armeniansthat has perception to withof ethnic for propensity the among ethnicethnic Azerisas beingless confrontational than ethnic Armenians. Itis the opinion of the Georgiansto beless negative than those of the Armenian minority. thatgeneral, In Georgians tend to think of appear minority However,of public Azeri among Georgian the prevalentperceptions the the that Georgian“demonstrated the public is farfrom talk ready seriously to of tolerance.” interviewee, one of words in the religions, minority on legislation the to response the as such events particular, In years. in recent in Georgia negative rather been have groups minority 4.2: Perceptions ofMinorities inGeorgia survival. national to threat latent a as minorities national perceives still which and Georgian society, which struggles to come to terms with the essence of civic nationalpromotion of civic national identity,identity, the governmentis alsofaced with opposition from since the1990s in order to improve minority inrepresentation regions.the In terms of the in hasbeen that place structure theadministrative onchanging be must placed more emphasis Arnold Stepanyan, Personal Interview, PMMG, Tbilisi, 26.04.2012. In particular, the ability of local organizations such as United Javakh to mobilize the for interviewed inMost of thesisagreed that, those this general,attitudes towards 55 184 CEU eTD Collection negative perception of the ethnic oftheethnic minority.Armenian perception negative aparticularly producing for –areresponsible minority Georgian claims regarding society insecurity isolation high level especially andof of deep-seated Javakheti the the of region – the period transition the of consequences two Thus, Georgia. of rest the from isolation region heightened by marginalization feltthe by local the population due to its overwhelming beshouldnot construedas ethnopolitical, butas aproduct of economicthe hardship of the nature of ethnopolitical issues in region.the Thus, mobilizationthe of ethnicArmenians such demands arevoiced only by a handful of radicals. Thiscanbe attributed to taboothe uncomfortable using terms the 'autonomy' 'self-governance', and even beingadd to quick that Armeniansethnic for interviewed this thesis, from andin those particular Akhalkalaki, were autonomy by are expressed only a small minority of Armenians.Javakheti's In vein,this all economic,overwhelming whilefear the of andassimilation increased for demands political 186 185 observer, one to according by in public,due the part representationto the of in events Georgianthe media. Thus, by demonstrations arerarely they concerns, assuch driven are often ethnocultural perceived Akhalkalaki, tax collection, or the poor supply of electricity region. the thepoorsupplyof to electricity or collection, Akhalkalaki, tax in base military Russian the of closure the including issues over discontent voicing of means frequent a become have demonstrations Thus, Kartli. in Kvemo than Samtskhe-Javakheti in aremore frequent visible meant and has vocal local demonstrations that population portrayed as dangerous separatists, rather than discontented Georgian from separatists, rather region thandiscontented the citizens asdangerous portrayed “The only news that ever reaches Tbilisi (from Javakheti) is when another mass meeting has massis meeting when another news everreaches that (from Javakheti) “The only Tbilisi Lohm, 42. Lohm, 40. been arranged, and often the shows are edited in such a way that the entire population is Therefore, it is important to note issues havedisputedis date tonote itthat Therefore, inJavakheti important to been demanding socio-economic improvements.” socio-economic demanding 56 186 185 Wie these While CEU eTD Collection 189 188 187 of Javakheti of Javakheti has beenespecially marked asaresult its of economicinsularity, and geographic both varyingisolate hasbeen regions conflict, However,and to to ethnic the isolation extents. civil society. andrelatively weak structures in administrative representation further adds to theirmarginalization, already institutionalized by theirlow levels of as suggested by this for this minority. research,process nota more successful integration reflect does demonstrative fact, In theless is minority Azeri the reticence that fact the likewise integration; for prospects its dampen of the Azeri minority not does Armenian minority the of and negative perception the demonstrate to propensity to voice concerns of politicization in issues disputed the eyes the of Georgianthe public.in However, the fact have largely been spontaneous and werenot led by a specific thus movement, avoiding the over land distribution disputes. By Azeri the hascontrast, beendriven population to protest only including rare occasions, on on this minority among Georgian the public, affording them reputationthe of trouble-makers. over land and religious monuments, as has been the case with the Armenian minority. effect is of ethnic attachment arguably maderelevantonly when it competingcreates claims Armenian Azeri minoritiesand oughttoidentify highly with they regions the inhabit, the the both while Thus, Caucasus. South in the conflicts territorial ongoing the of result territory. Georgian to claim lay and ethnicArmeniansdisputes, areperceivedusurp as to Georgianattempting national heritage GOC. the with confrontation in direct Armenia in Church the put often disputesconnected regarding the religious identification of churches in region,the which has Wheatley,2009(b), 53. 'Where silence...'. 36-37. Lohm, To conclude, themain effect of Georgia's marked transition period, weakness bystate In this way, frequentdisputes involving the Armenian minority have focused attention thatappears feature to driveAnother of perceptions the minority Armenian are the 189 Akhalkalaki, protests these inUnlike demonstrations the 188 Such arguments runespeciallyin theregion deep as a 57 187 such to Owing CEU eTD Collection facilitate the integration national of minorities. all integration the facilitate make the Georgian wary public institutionalof forprovisions minority thatarerights likely to serveto in of disputes, Georgia's territorial unresolved perceptions, context Thus, these the of perception majority the givedoes appearancethat the minority the is unwilling tointegrate. casethese studies. However, ethnic byhistoric schism antagonism produced and the threat In this regard, ethnic schism based on cultural religiousand differences not does conform to integration. their complicates dissentthat voicein their to their propensity reflected resources, antagonismthe ethnic Armenianstowards as a result of theirhigherlevel of institutional inhibitintegration, but not directly as a result of the availability of such resources. Rather, itis minority. Armenian the than society of margins the on more even remains thus and representation, of deprived entirely is community this that meant has level local the on representatives Azeri of absence institutional inimicalprovisions appear securitythe to of Georgian society. Meanwhile, the thisthat has has minorities'produced inhibited by integration both making increased of Armenian minority the negative in the perception case. Meanwhile, this for representation mechanism ineffective an proven has this if even demonstrations, through 'voice' its find to independenceincreased from restof the country.the has minority impelledtheArmenian This region the lent structures in administrative Armenians ethnic of predominance the while Thus, according Kuzio to andMeyer's typology, institutional increased resources do 58 CEU eTD Collection Therefore, the impact period and the Therefore, are transition obstacles of tointegration the highly the territorial whichconflicts, continue toprolong transition by preventingconsolidation. state minorities residingin Georgia proper largely depends on some form of resolution of Georgia's conflictof ethnic nineties.the This of that successfulintegration suggests the national from ofstate insecurity of weakness and Georgian experience seated society the resulting would facilitate minority integration, such as ratification of the ECRML, arises from the deep- integration. minority obstruct to whichcontinues from period carriedtransition the over feature is another governance institutional structures availablefacility to them.to communicate the Thus,without is because, This in practice. a highlyineffective are but paper, on minorities national centralizedtheir needs system constructively, and lack of arrangementsself- that respect minority cultural and religious minoritiesrights, have improved the position of legislative including minorities, arenational integrate to policies unablegovernment Meanwhile, to make use of the in society.Georgian prevalent ethnicArmenians towards attitudes negative especially the as well itsto voice discontent, as propensity minority's the rest of for Georgia. Thisaccounts the from removed identity an region the lent has structures administrative in the Armenians where the region's special however, isisolation marked inJavakheti, isolation the of communities; especially these status in the Soviet eraFor both the Armeniansand of Javakheti and Azeris Kvemoof Kartli,the state weakness has addedoverwhelming to presence the weakness, hasinfluenced integration its minoritiesattempted national of in various ways. of ethnic Moreover, popular opposition in Georgian society to institutional provisions which Georgia's post-Soviet transition, characterized by ethnic nationalism and state C ONCLUSIONS 59 CEU eTD Collection the dilemmathe multinational of undergoingstates nation-buildingis particularly relevant to widerissues of national consolidationsecurity and state made pertinentby transition. Thus, in is on dependent minorities Georgia of national integration the that realization led tothe has This transition. unresolved yet as arguably and difficult Georgia’s of context the within in the field in Georgia affordedme a insightintounique the embeddedness issuesthese of transition in relation to national minorities. Moreover, conducting interviews with specialists on perspective minority issuethe of integration by focusing nation-building on aspectthe of with existingthe obstacles tointegration. In this way, thesis this has anovel provided me has integration minority on allowed to link interviews upfeatures research of transition in society.Georgian inas outlined Nationalthe and absenceConcept the of widespread acceptance of values civic objectivethe addition, has thisofminority integration thesis between adiscrepancy revealed In in Georgia. minorities national of integration the inhibiting be to appear that minorities, of societal consequences Georgia's prolongedfeatures andnot transition, intrinsic to in case the and of minorities Georgia.Rather,the Armenian Azeri itis and structural the and schism, institutionalattachment have ethnic beennot resources, found todirectly in apply ethnic including integration, minority to obstacles as identified variables the Meanwhile, integration minority realization andinadequate of currentpoliciesthe onintegration. national minorities, whichpartly for accounts lackthe institutional of provisions toassist knowledge statelanguage; of the finally,and overridingthe towards attitudes negative minorities from voicingconstructively their concerns; thelinguistic barriercaused by poor prevents which regions, in minority government local representative of lack the follows: interrelated. Combining anin-depth analysis of Georgia’s transition withperiod qualitative Thus, main the tointegrationobstacles of national minorities in Georgia aredefined as 60 CEU eTD Collection simultaneously. approach whichcomprehensive addresses structural, societal andinstitutional issues a Georgia’s requires integration national sothat minority experience, transition 61 CEU eTD Collection 190 Appendix 1: Family Member Living Abroad byRespondentEthnicity, Georgia Caucasus Barometer 2010, CRRC,accessed: 30.05.2012, 62 190 CEU eTD Collection 191 Appendix 2: Household Economic Situation by Respondent Ethnicity Caucasus Barometer 2010, CRRC,accessed: 30.05.2012 63 191 CEU eTD Collection Hirschman, 'Exit, Alfred, Voice, and toDecline Loyalty: Responses in Firms, Organizations Hechter, Michael,'Containing Nationalism', Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000; Hale, Henry, Foundations ‘The of Ethnic Politics’, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Bremmer, Ian, 'The Politics of Ethnicity: The Russians in the New Ukraine', New in the Russians The Ethnicity: of Politics 'The Ian, Bremmer, in Post-Conflict Policy Nationalities and Politics Void:the Ethnic 'Filling Laurence, Broers, ofAkhalkalaki Closure Implications of Base Potential the 'Assessment Oksana,Antonenko, Working ECMI in Georgia', Situation Media the and Minorities 'National Tobias, Akerlund, Books andJournal Articles: Eke, Steven, andKuzio, Taras, 'Sultanism inEurope: The Eastern Socio-Political Roots of Duffy Toft, Monica, 'Multinationality,de Waal, Thomas, 'The Caucasus: Oxford:OxfordAn Introduction', University 2010; Press, Regions Dave, Bhavna, 'Kazakhstan: Ethnicity,and andPower',New Language York: Routledge, 2007; State-Building: The Failed in Policy Language and Ethnicity, Building, 'Nation TransitionFrançois, Grin, and Farimah Daftary, in Brubaker, 'Ethnicity Rogers, Groups',without Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004; and States', Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970; 2008; Studies, 275-304; Georgia', September 2001; Study, Briefing Network Prevention a Conflict Georgia', Southern in Stability the for Paper 52,2012; Authoritarian Populism in Belarus', James al.,Hughes etLondon:Frank CassPublishers,2002, 123-142; in Georgia', Transition Countries', Budapest: Open Society 2003; Institute, 46(2), 1994, 261-283; Nationalities Papers: TheJournalofNationalism andEthnicity Ethnicity and Territory inthe Former SovietUnion: Regions in Conflict, B IBLIOGRAPHY Europe-Asia Studies 64 , 52(3), 2000,, 52(3), 523-547; , 36(2), 2008, Europe-Asia CEU eTD Collection Stefes, Christopher, 'UnderstandingTransitions: Post-Soviet Corruption, Collusion and Sordia, Giorgi, 'Institutions inSlider, in Georgia', Darrell, ‘Democratization in ofauthoritarianism', to retreat 'Belarus: Kathleen, Mihailisko, GeorgiaECMI Georgia', in Reform forEducational and Minorities 'National al., et GovernanceSalome Mekhuzla, on NationalLyle, Justin, Minorities', 'ResettlementLohm, Hedvig, 'Javakheti after RoseRevolution:the Progress andin Regress Pursuitthe of of EcologicalECMILinz, Juan and Stepan, Alfred, 'Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation', Migrants in Georgia: Recent Developments and Laitin, David, 'Secessionist Rebellion in the Soviet Union', Soviet in the Rebellion 'Secessionist David, Laitin, Kymlicka, Will, 'States, Nations and Cultures', Assen: Van Gorcum, 1997; Kramer, John, 'Political Corruption in the U.S.S.R', in System', Education the on Focus a With inGeorgia: Policy 'Language al., et Britta Korth, Kuzio, Taras and Meyer, David, 'TheCrimea: Donbassand AnInstitutional and Demographic Kuzio, Taras and D'Anieri, Paul, 'Dilemmas of State-led Nation inBuilding Ukraine', Clientelism',New York: Palgrave Macmillan,2006; Working Paper43,2009; Press, 1997156-200; Asia andtheCaucasus, al. Cambridge: (ed.), Cambridge University Press, 1997223-281; authoritarian reactions Belarus,andMoldova, in Russia, Ukraine, Working Paper46,2009; Trends in Policy, Implementation,ECMI andPerceptions', Working Paper,2012; 53, National inUnity WorkingGeorgia', ECMI Paper, 38,2007; Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1996; October 2001,34(8),839-861; Arnold published by CIMERA, Geneva, 2005; Building inUkraine, in inUkrainian EthnicRegions', Approach two Mobilization to Westport: Publishers, Praeger 2002; Heidenheimeral. NewJersey: et (ed.), Transaction Publishers,449-466; 1989, Kuzioet al. Hampshire: (ed.), Macmillan Press, 1999,297-324; Karen al.Dawisha et Cambridge: (ed.), Cambridge University 65 Conflict, Cleavage,Conflict, and Change in Central Political Corruption: aHandbook, Comparative Political Studies Democratic changes and State andInstitution Karen et Dawisha , CEU eTD Collection Stepanyan, Arnold, Personal Interview, Public Movement “Multinational Georgia”, Tbilisi, Georgia”, “Multinational Movement Public Interview, Personal Arnold, Stepanyan, Sordia, G., Personal Interview, for Minority Centre European Issues, Tbilisi, 01.05.2012; Osipova, Izabella, Personal Interview, Public Defender’s Office, Tbilisi, 25.04.2012; Melkumyan, Personal Seda, Interview, Centre for Minority European Issues, Akhalkalaki, Farmanyan, Interview,Personal Armen, 27.04.2012; Akhalkalaki, Democracy for Peace, and Interview, Personal Institute Marina, Elbakidze, Caucasus Interviewees: of List Kvemo and Samtskhe-Javakheti in the Minorities National of Integration 'The ------'Georgia and the European Charter for Minority or Regional Languages', ECMI ------'Defusing Conflict in Tsalka District of Georgia: Migration, International ------'Obstacles Impeding the Regional Integration of the Kvemo Kartli Region of ------'Georgia from National Awakening to Rose Revolution: Delayed Transition in the of Region Javakheti the of Integration Regional the Impeding 'Obstacles Jonathan, Wheatley, Suny, 'The Makingof Ronald, Georgianthe Nation', Indiana Bloomington: University Press, Suny, 'TheRevenge Ronald, of Past',Stanford:the Stanford University 1993; Press, 26.04.2012; 27.04.2012; Development, Tbilisi,24.04.2012; Kartli of Georgia',provinces Working ECMI Paper,44, 2009(b); Working Paper, 42,2009(a); Intervention and the Role of the State', ECMI Working Paper, 36, 2006; Georgia', Working ECMI Paper,2005(b); 23, Union', Soviet Former Publishing Ashgate Limited, 2005(a); Aldershot, Georgia', Working ECMI Paper,2004; 22, 1994; 66 CEU eTD Collection “Number of Armenian and Azeri entrants registered for the National Unified Exams has Exams Unified National the for registered entrants Azeri and of Armenian “Number ECMI, “Threat of outburst of inter-religious and interethnic hatred in Georgia: where silence leaded in wheresilence hatred Georgia: interethnic inter-religious and of of outburst “Threat ‘Nationalfor Concept Tolerance andCivic Governmentof Integration’, Georgia, May 2009, of Parliament”, “Members 'International Election Observation Mission; Georgia, 30 May 2010', OSCE/ODIHR, 10, ECMI, Web Sources: Tabatadze, Personal Interview, Shalva, Relations, and Civil for Centre Interethnic Integration Sumbadze, Nana, Personal Interview, for Policy Institute Tbilisi,Studies, 24.04.2012; Tbilisi, Georgia, Women of Azerbaijani of Union Interview, Personal Leila, Suleimanova, ECMI, increased”, (sic.)us”, Analytical Brief, PMMG,accessed: 30.05.2012, accessed:3-4, 30.05.2012, 17.05.2012, accessed: 30.05.2012, http://www.ecmicaucasus.org/menu/info_stats.html#> Tbilisi, 25.04.2012. 01.05.2012; ECMI Caucasus, ECMI Caucasus, ECMI Caucasus, MinistryofEducationandScience of Georgia, accessed: < 30.05.2012, accessed: 30.05.2012, accessed: 30.05.2012, Parliament ofGeorgia, 67 accessed: 30.05.2012, 29.03.2012, accessed: