Change of Government in Georgia. New Emphases in Domestic And
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Introduction Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik ments German Institute for International and Security Affairs m Co Change of Government in Georgia WP New Emphases in Domestic and Foreign Policy Sabine Fischer and Uwe Halbach S In autumn 2012, Georgia underwent a development that is already being described as historical. Following an emotional and at times hostile election contest, the Georgian parliamentary elections on 1 October led to a change of government, which the country is hailing as proof of its democratic maturity. President Mikheil Saakashvili’s United National Movement party, which had been in power for the last nine years and held a two-thirds majority in the last parliament, suffered a clear defeat against a coalition of six opposition parties, none of whom had been represented in the previous parliament. Saakashvili will remain in office until 2013. What course will the new coalition govern- ment under Prime Minister Bidzina Ivanishvili now set in domestic and foreign policy? Will the incumbent president, who is endowed with a wide range of powers, and the new government be able to work together in the run-up to the 2013 presidential elec- tions or will they become entrenched in bitter rivalry? If the opposing political camps led by change that has not been brought about by President Saakashvili and Prime Minister a coup d’etat. Ivanishvili succeed in working together Before the elections, voices warning of a peacefully up until the presidential elec- polarisation of society were getting louder tions (due to be held in October 2013), this both in Georgia and abroad. The country’s change of government could justifiably be highest moral authority, the head of the considered exceptional. Around 120 par- Georgian Orthodox Church Ilia II appealed liamentary and presidential elections for maintaining peace. The West also fol- have been held in the former Soviet Union lowed the elections with concern. The gov- region (excluding the Baltic republics) since ernment vilified the opposition as a politi- 1991. They have usually resulted in the cal force wanting to take Georgia back into re-election of the ruling government and the past and into Russia’s political orbit. many have been clouded by suspicions of The opposition labelled the incumbents fraud. A peaceful change of government “fascists”. From October 2011 (when multi- by means of an election process remains billionaire Ivanishvili entered politics) to the exception. In Georgia, this is the first August 2012, Transparency International Dr. Sabine Fischer is Head of SWP’s Russian Federation / CIS Division SWP Comments 3 Dr. Uwe Halbach is a Senior Associate in SWP’s Russian Federation / CIS Division January 2013 1 Georgia documented cases of intimidation ment and reform. Then there are the other of opposition activists, political arrests, three parties, whose spectrum of ideology unequal treatment of government and and policies range from entrepreneurial opposition parties with regard to illegal interests (Industry will Save Georgia) to party financing, and prevention of oppo- nationalistic views (National Forum). How- sition party activities by the police. State- ever, the Georgian Dream parties still only ments from the opposition camp fuelled have a weak footing in Georgian society fears that conflicts would break out after and are barely institutionalised. This may the elections. The Georgian Dream elec- threaten the coalition and make it difficult tion coalition, centred around Ivanishvili’s to consolidate the party system. Georgian party (Georgian Dream − Democratic Dream owes its election victory first and Georgia), criticised the president’s authori- foremost to the popularity of the coalition tarian leadership style and pledged an “end leader and the social unrest caused by griev- of the Saakashvili era”. Ivanishvili made ances against the former government elite. his unexpected entrance onto the Georgian The election results varied widely at political stage in autumn 2011. Until then the regional level, with the capital Tbilisi he had lived a secluded life, although his emerging as the stronghold of the opposi- name was well known in connection with tion. With the exception of some regions various charitable projects. He earned his like Ivanishvili’s home constituency, where fortune as an entrepreneur in Russia before 93 percent of the vote went to Georgian returning to Georgia in 2002. Saakashvili’s Dream, people in rural areas in the Arme- party consequently did its best to paint nian and Azerbaijani minority enclaves him as a Kremlin stooge, and the president tended to vote for the ruling government attempted to sideline his opponent by with- party, although the results were not as deci- drawing his Georgian citizenship. sive as in previous elections. That is surpris- ing given that Georgian Dream’s main criti- cism of the previous government was that Realignments in political power it had neglected the development of rural Up until shortly before the elections, regions. opinion polls were predicting a victory for the ruling government. However, they also showed that many voters were still Georgia in the transition phase undecided. A video released two weeks With a solid majority in the new parlia- before the elections showing torture scenes ment, which moved its seat from Tbilisi to in a prison also stirred up anti-government the country’s second largest city Kutaisi, sentiment among the public. Ivanishvili was able to secure the position The elections on 1 October created sur- of prime minister for himself and form a prising realignments of political power in government. Although it is still the respon- parliament and brought the opposition sibility of the president to appoint the into government. Eighty-five of the 150 prime minister, Saakashvili announced he parliamentary seats went to the Georgian would respect the electorate’s demand for Dream coalition. Of the six parties in the a change of government. A constitutional coalition, two others beside Ivanishvili’s amendment, passed in 2010, transferring party are significant: Our Georgia – Free executive powers from the president to the Democrats led by the new Minister of prime minister and the parliament, will Defence and Deputy Prime Minister Irakli only come into effect after the 2013 presi- Alasania, and the Republican Party of dential election. After two terms in office, Georgia headed by David Usupashvili, the Saakashvili will not be able to stand for new chairman of the Georgian parliament. re-election. Until then, however, he will Both are advocates of democratic develop- still be the chief executive in a system that SWP Comments 3 January 2013 2 endows the president with great power. announced its plans to set up a parliamen- It remains to be seen how Saakashvili will tary committee to investigate cases of abuse cooperate with his rivals in the upper eche- of office among the former government lons of government during the transition elite. Bacho Akhalaia, who served as prisons phase. chief from 2005 to 2008 and subsequently The beginning of this phase has given as minister of defence, followed by a brief cause for optimism. President Saakashvili spell as minister of the interior, has been conceded his party’s defeat on the day of arrested on charges of mistreating soldiers, the election. He said that although there as have Giorgi Kalandadze, chief of joint were fundamental differences between staff of the Georgian armed forces, and the new and outgoing governments, he, as another senior official. Other high-ranking president and guarantor of the constitu- civil servants in the Ministry of the Interior tion, would ensure that the transition of have also been charged with abuse of office. power would be as civilised “as never before They are accused of taking “extralegal sur- in Georgia’s history.” However, the decisive veillance measures” against Ivanishvili question is still whether the current presi- during the election campaign. in the latest dent is really prepared to give up the politi- edition of the annual report Freedom in the cal leadership of his country in 2013. If so, World 2013, released January 16, Georgia’s he would cut a striking contrast with the status was upgraded to “electoral democ- Putins, Lukashenkos, Karimovs and Nazar- racy”. Nevertheless, the report’s authors bayevs of other post-Soviet states. His rival criticized the new government for prompt- Ivanishvili initially announced that he ly arresting some 30 officials of the pre- would only serve as prime minister for an vious government, which raised concerns intermediary period of 18 months. He later about politically motivated prosecutions. qualified this announcement by saying he These developments have put would only leave the political arena when Saaskashvili on the defensive, even though, the change in government had been con- in addition to his wide-ranging powers, he solidated and he had fulfilled his election (still) has a plentiful army of followers at promises. Shortly after the elections and the regional and local administrative levels. the formation of the new government, Prime Minister Ivanishvili meanwhile an- military and political officials from the nounced plans to accelerate the constitu- defeated government were arrested for tional changes curtailing the president’s abuse of office. The subsequent disputes powers and to ensure these came into effect between the two camps suggest that the before the next presidential election. On country’s political road ahead could well the ninth anniversary of the Rose Revolu- be rather bumpy. tion on 23 November 2012, Saakashvili expressed his disapproval of the measures taken by the new government and com- Cohabitation or power struggle? mented: “More and more people in Georgia The new dual power constellation in realise that our country is in danger.” The Georgia is known as “cohabitation” – a New Year addresses given by the president term used to describe the relationship and the prime minister demonstrated between a president and prime minister their sharply different standpoints and cast who belong to different political camps doubt on the ability of the two leaders to and both have executive powers.