DOCSLIB.ORG

Georgia in Transition

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Georgia in Transition GEORGIA IN TRANSITION State-building and democratization in the Caucasus A COLLECTION OF RESEARCH ESSAYS FROM THE 2019 UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO INTERNATIONAL COURSE MODULE Table of Contents Introduction Robert C Austin i ‘Reel’ Prospects of Integration: The Role of Georgia’s Film Sector in EU Integration Massimo Chiarella 1 LGBTQ Rights and Georgia’s European Union Aspirations Gloria Dragić 17 European Integration Through Education: A Case Study of Georgian Education Reform Mia Đurković 34 An Analysis of the Regional Development Programme of Georgia 2015-2017: Its Successes and Failures in Ameliorating Regional Disparities and Facilitating European Integration via Supporting Agriculture Mathuja Jeyakumar 52 Dealing with Saakashvili’s Legacy: Georgia’s Transitional Justice Efforts and Reforms to the Justice System Anahid Najafizadeh 72 Feminism v Patriarchy: Georgia’s European Integration Efforts Through Female Political Participation Tami Piovesan 89 Silencing the Georgian People: Freedom of Expression, Government Interference, and Structural Constraints on Georgia’s Media Environment Sanjana Shah 109 Introduction I am delighted to say a few words of introduction about the wonderful student essays that follow. But first, some context. The International Course Module (ICM) is funded by the Faculty of Arts and Science at the University of Toronto. Additional support comes from my home unit, the Centre for European, Russian and Eurasian Studies at the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy. I have been travelling with students for field research for 15 years. We have gone to Albania, Azerbaijan, Bosnia, Czechia, Greece, Hungary, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Tunisia. These trips have been with groups of graduate students and undergraduate students. The ICM I supervise has been around since 2006 and we spent eight years going to Kosovo. I remember fondly a trip in 2008 when we were on-hand for Kosovo’s independence declaration in February 2008. For the past four years, I have been taking students to Georgia. I changed from Kosovo to Georgia for professional and personal reasons. The ICM is embedded into a third-year course I teach that examines, among other things, the enlargement process of the European Union (EU). While Kosovo is almost guaranteed membership in the EU at some point, Georgia is not on the same list. However, while Kosovo’s elite makes noise about their EU ambitions, I decided they were not very serious. What I read about Georgia gave me a different impression and that was confirmed with our first ICM to Georgia in 2014. Despite the bigger challenges Georgia faces, they were simply working harder. Since then, with one year off when I was on leave, we are still going to Georgia. We will go again in 2020. In 2019, I had seven students with me. I must say that this was a really special trip. As you can read from the essays, the team worked extremely hard. They did multiple face- to-face interviews and took part in several group interviews with a variety of people in Georgia. The point of the ICM, at least for me, is to get out of your comfort zone. Students need to find people to interview, follow-up on appointments, navigate the—often chaotic—streets of Tbilisi while being punctual and conduct interviews with high-level stakeholders. This group did an exceptional job at that and the results are obvious. I believe that offering students the chance to do real field work at the undergraduate level is one of the best things we can do at the University of Toronto. Having done multiple international programs for our students, I can say that the ICM is the most transformative for students even though it is a short time frame. We pack a lot in. Most students rank it as the best part of their entire undergrad degree. I am extremely proud of the work that follows. The students identified distinct areas of interest and the topics were approved. This collection has work that really captures some important aspects of Georgian society. We have film by Massimo Chiarella. Film is one of the many areas where Georgia punches above its weight. Gloria Dragić tackles LGBTQ rights and how this impacts Georgia’s internal and external political life, particularly with the EU. Mia Đurković studies Georgia’s educational reforms and how this can impact the EU integration process. Mathuja Jeyakumar provides insight into regional integration and highlights some very interesting projects taking place. Anahid Najafizadeh looks at the legacy, both good and bad, of Georgia’s controversial president Mikheil Sakaashvili. Tami Piovesan looks at the role of women in Georgia and what I think are Georgia’s laudable efforts to increase female political participation. Finally, Sanjana Shah tells us about Georgia’s always highly fluid media atmosphere and what it means for Georgian democracy. i Finally, trips like this are truly team efforts. Another great outcome of the ICM is that the students learn how to really work as a team and they become life-long friends. For me, the ICM is a great team. In our first year in Georgia an undergrad from Victoria College named David Kitai joined us to research a prison abuse scandal. He obviously loved Georgia because he secured his own funding for the next year and joined us again. He then decided to work in Georgia’s always interesting food and wine world and joined us again in 2019. A better guide to food, history and wine would be hard to find! We are grateful to David for his insights and good humor throughout. I will also be forever grateful to my former student Daria Dumbadze, who now works at the Munk School, for suggesting Georgia in the first place. Since then, with one year off, she has travelled with me and been an invaluable friend to me and along with an extraordinary mentor for each and every student. She impacts them on so many levels that the trips would be impossible without her. All aspects of the ICM, from our pre- meetings, to helping identify people to talk to, to managing logistics like nobody else I have ever seen, depend on her. I am happy with what we do. I hope you enjoy the research that follows. Robert C Austin, Associate Professor, Centre for European, Russian and Eurasian Studies (CERES), Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, University of Toronto ii ‘Reel’ Prospects of Integration: The Role of Georgia’s Film Sector in EU Integration Massimo Chiarella Introduction The Georgian National Film Center was founded on December 5th, 20001. While the organization, in name, may be new, the culture and institution of film in Georgia dates back to a time when it was considered one of the top film creators for the Soviet Union2. Since Georgia’s seccession from the Soviet Union in 1991, the creative endeavors that its film industry has undertaken have not only served as a means of rebuilding its bankrupt cinema sector3, but also as a driver to accomplish its newly realized democratic and liberalized objectives. Among the South Caucasus states, Georgia is the country that has demonstrated the greatest willingness to join the European Union (EU) through the implementation of integration reforms.4 As Georgia’s creative industries re-emerge free from Soviet control, they have the ability to act as a political tool to facilitate EU partnerships. For the people of Georgia, EU and potentially NATO membership, represents an opportunity to guarantee stability, economic growth, and security in the region, which has led to Georgian integration with the EU becoming a central foreign policy objective5. Similarly, the EU has expressed interest in bolstering the strength of their relationship with Georgia by way of supporting its democratic institutions, security, and economic integration through partnerships6. Cinema presents itself as a unique opportunity for Georgia to align itself more closely with regard to engaging with EU institutions such as Creative Europe and other programs which will be discussed later in this paper. Georgia has made tremendous progress in developing its cinematic industry and garnering international recognition with Oscar-nominated films such as Tangerines and the creation of a supposed new film school and festival by Twin Peaks filmmaker David Lynch7. While Georgian film is currently in its greatest condition since its exit from the Soviet Union, it is still plagued by many issues from its Soviet past, such as archival 1 Georgian National Film Center. “History and Goals of the Georgian National Film Center.” http://www.gnfc.ge/geo/page/151. 2 Kepley, Vance. “Federal Cinema: The Soviet Film Industry, 1924-32,” n.d., 14. 3 “Ex-Soviet Georgia Eyes Film Industry Rebirth.” Reuters, March 5, 2011. https://www.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-55351520110305. 4 Efe, Haydar. “Foreign Policy of the European Union Towards the South Caucasus.” International Journal of Business and Social Science 3, no. 17 (September 2012): p.188 5 Efe, Haydar. “Foreign Policy of the European Union Towards the South Caucasus.” International Journal of Business and Social Science 3, no. 17 (September 2012): p.189 6 Ibid. 7 “Famed Filmmaker David Lynch to Launch Cinema Institute, Film Fest in Georgia.” Agenda.Ge. October 15, 2017. 1 access and preservation8, labour shortages9, and funding10 among others. The Georgian National Film Centre has developed a number of policies in an attempt to combat these challenges by encouraging collaboration from other countries11 as well as continue to distance Georgia from Russia via Georgian language laws in film12. Alongside domestic policies, international partnerships made with EU organizations such as the Creative Europe Programme and others are thought to help with certain aspects of film production, while furthering the country’s relationship with the European Union.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • News Digest on Georgia
    NEWS DIGEST ON GEORGIA November 28 – December 1 Compiled by: Aleksandre Davitashvili Date: December 2, 2019 Occupied Regions Tskhinvali Region (so called South Ossetia) 1. Another Georgian Sent to Pretrial Custody in Occupied Tskhinvali Georgian citizen Genadi Bestaev, 51, was illegally detained by the „security committee‟ (KGB) of Russia- backed Tskhinvali Region across the line of occupation, near Khelchua village, for “illegally crossing the state border” and “illegal drug smuggling” today. According to the local agency “Res,” Tskhinvali court sentenced Bestaev, native of village Zardiantkari of Gori Municipality, to two-month pretrial custody. According to the same report, in the past, Bastaev was detained by Russia-backed Tskhinvali authorities for “similar offences” multiple times (Civil.ge, November 29, 2019). Foreign Affairs 2. Citizens of Switzerland can enter Georgia with an ID card Citizens of Switzerland can enter Georgia with an ID card, Georgian PM has already signed an official document. „Citizens of Switzerland can enter Georgia on the basis of a travel document, as well as an identity document showing a person‟s name, surname, date of birth and photo,‟ the official document reads. The resolution dated by November 28, 2019, is already in force (1TV, December 1, 2019). Internal Affairs 3. Members of European Parliament on Developments in Georgia On November 27, the European Parliament held a debate on developments in the Eastern Partnership (EaP) countries at its plenary session in Strasbourg. Kati Piri (Netherlands, Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats): “Large protests are currently held in Tbilisi since the government failed to deliver on its commitment to change the electoral code in 2020 to full proportional system.
    [Show full text]
  • Georgia Between Dominant-Power Politics, Feckless Pluralism, and Democracy Christofer Berglund Uppsala University
    GEORGIA BETWEEN DOMINANT-POWER POLITICS, FECKLESS PLURALISM, AND DEMOCRACY CHRISTOFER BERGLUND UPPSALA UNIVERSITY Abstract: This article charts the last decade of Georgian politics (2003-2013) through theories of semi- authoritarianism and democratization. It first dissects Saakashvili’s system of dominant-power politics, which enabled state-building reforms, yet atrophied political competition. It then analyzes the nested two-level game between incumbents and opposition in the run-up to the 2012 parliamentary elections. After detailing the verdict of Election Day, the article turns to the tense cohabitation that next pushed Georgia in the direction of feckless pluralism. The last section examines if the new ruling party is taking Georgia in the direction of democratic reforms or authoritarian closure. nder what conditions do elections in semi-authoritarian states spur Udemocratic breakthroughs?1 This is a conundrum relevant to many hybrid regimes in the region of the former Soviet Union. It is also a ques- tion of particular importance for the citizens of Georgia, who surprisingly voted out the United National Movement (UNM) and instead backed the Georgian Dream (GD), both in the October 2012 parliamentary elections and in the October 2013 presidential elections. This article aims to shed light on the dramatic, but not necessarily democratic, political changes unleashed by these events. It is, however, beneficial to first consult some of the concepts and insights that have been generated by earlier research on 1 The author is grateful to Sten Berglund, Ketevan Bolkvadze, Selt Hasön, and participants at the 5th East Asian Conference on Slavic-Eurasian Studies, as well as the anonymous re- viewers, for their useful feedback.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Owned Georgia Eng.Pdf
    By Paul Rimple This book is about the businessmen and the companies who own significant shares in broadcasting, telecommunications, advertisement, oil import and distribution, pharmaceutical, privatisation and mining sectors. Furthermore, It describes the relationship and connections between the businessmen and companies with the government. Included is the information about the connections of these businessmen and companies with the government. The book encompases the time period between 2003-2012. At the time of the writing of the book significant changes have taken place with regards to property rights in Georgia. As a result of 2012 Parliamentary elections the ruling party has lost the majority resulting in significant changes in the business ownership structure in Georgia. Those changes are included in the last chapter of this book. The project has been initiated by Transparency International Georgia. The author of the book is journalist Paul Rimple. He has been assisted by analyst Giorgi Chanturia from Transparency International Georgia. Online version of this book is available on this address: http://www.transparency.ge/ Published with the financial support of Open Society Georgia Foundation The views expressed in the report to not necessarily coincide with those of the Open Society Georgia Foundation, therefore the organisation is not responsible for the report’s content. WHO OWNED GEORGIA 2003-2012 By Paul Rimple 1 Contents INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Monitoring Court Proceedings of the Cases with Alleged Political Motives
    MONITORING COURT PROCEEDINGS OF THE CASES WITH ALLEGED POLITICAL MOTIVES Summary Report 2020 MONITORING COURT PROCEEDINGS OF THE CASES WITH ALLEGED POLITICAL MOTIVES Summary Report THE REPORT WAS PREPARED BY HUMAN RIGHTS CENTER AUTHOR: GIORGI TKEBUCHAVA EDITED BY: ALEKO TSKITISHVILI GIORGI KAKUBAVA TRANSLATED BY: NIKOLOZ JASHI MONITORS: ANI PORCHKHIDZE TAMAR KURTAULI NINO CHIKHLADZE 2020 MONITORING COURT PROCEEDINGS OF THE CASES WITH ALLEGED POLITICAL MOTIVES Non-governmental organization the HUMAN RIGHTS CENTER, formerly the Human Rights Information and Documentation Center (HRC) was founded on December 10, 1996 in Tbilisi, Georgia. The HRIDC aims to increase respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms and facilitate the peace-building process in Georgia. To achieve this goal, it is essential to ensure that authorities respect the rule of law and principles of transparency and separation of powers, to eliminate discrimination at all levels, and increase awareness and respect for human rights among the people in Georgia. THE HUMAN RIGHTS CENTER IS A MEMBER OF THE FOLLOWING INTERNATIONAL NETWORKS: International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH); www.fidh.org World Organization against Torture (SOS-Torture – OMCT Network); www.omct.org Human Rights House Network; www.humanrightshouse.org Coalition for International Criminal Court; www.coalitionfortheicc.org ADDRESS: Akaki Gakhokidze Str. 11a, 3rd Floor, 0160 Tbilisi Tel: (+995 32) 237 69 50, (+995 32) 238 46 48 Fax: (+995 32) 238 46 48 Email: [email protected] Website: http://www.humanrights.ge; http://www.hridc.org The Report was prepared with the financial support of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). The Report does not necessarily reflect the views of the donor.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report of Monitoring the 2017 Local Self-Government Elections
    FINAL REPORT OF MONITORING THE 2017 LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT ELECTIONS INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR FAIR ELECTIONS AND DEMOCRACY (ISFED) 2018 Tbilisi FINAL REPORT OF MONITORING THE 2017 LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT ELECTIONS REPORT PREPARED BY MIKHEIL BENIDZE TAMAR BARTAIA ELENE NIZHARADZE NINO RIZHAMADZE TATIA KINKLADZE DESIGNED BY: TEMO MACHAVARIANI ISFED election observation mission was made possible with the generous support from the American people, through the financial assistance from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The mission was supported by the Federal Foreign Office of Germany and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). Contribution for observation of the runoff elections also came from the Embassy of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The contents of this report are the sole responsibility of the International Society for Fair Elections and Democracy and may not necessarily reflect the views of USAID, the United States Government, the Federal Republic of Germany, British Embassy, or NED. 2 CONTENT I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 II. ABOUT THE MONITORING MISSION 6 III. POLITICAL CONTEXT AND CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS 8 IV. THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM AND LEGISLATIVE CHANGES 10 V. THE ELECTION ADMINISTRATION 12 VI. STATE AUDIT OFFICE 14 VII. THE INTER-AGENCY COMMISSION FOR FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS 15 VIII. PRE-ELECTION PERIOD 16 IX. MEDIA ENVIRONMENT 19 X. THE ELECTION DAY 20 XI. POST ELECTION PERIOD AND COMPLAINTS PROCESS 27 XII. RECOMMENDATIONS 33 XIII. METHODOLOGY 36 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ICT Information
    [Show full text]
  • Monitoring the Implementation of the Code of Conduct by Political Parties in Georgia
    REPORT MONITORING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CODE OF CONDUCT BY POLITICAL PARTIES IN GEORGIA PREPARED BY GEORGIAN INSTITUTE OF POLITICS - GIP MAY 2021 ABOUT The Georgian Institute of Politics (GIP) is a Tbilisi-based non-profit, non-partisan, research and analysis organization. GIP works to strengthen the organizational backbone of democratic institutions and promote good governance and development through policy research and advocacy in Georgia. It also encourages public participation in civil society- building and developing democratic processes. The organization aims to become a major center for scholarship and policy innovation for the country of Georgia and the wider Black sea region. To that end, GIP is working to distinguish itself through relevant, incisive research; extensive public outreach; and a bold spirit of innovation in policy discourse and political conversation. This Document has been produced with the financial assistance of the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. The contents of this document are the sole responsibility of the GIP and can under no circumstance be regarded as reflecting the position of the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. © Georgian Institute of Politics, 2021 13 Aleksandr Pushkin St, 0107 Tbilisi, Georgia Tel: +995 599 99 02 12 Email: [email protected] For more information, please visit www.gip.ge Photo by mostafa meraji on Unsplash TABLE OF CONTENTS 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 KEY FINDINGS 7 INTRODUCTION 8 METHODOLOGY 11 POLITICAL CONTEXT OF 2020 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS AND PRE-ELECTION ENVIRONMENT
    [Show full text]
  • Policy P Aper Series
    saqarTvelos strategiisa da saerTaSoriso urTierTobebis kvlevis fondi sajaro politikis dokumentebi POLICY SERIES PAPER Mentors: Ekaterine Metreveli Vladimer Papava Aleksandre Kvakhadze Editor: Rusudan Margishvili Technical Editor: Artem Melik-Nubarov All rights reserved and belong to Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, including electronic and mechanical, without the prior written permission of the publisher Copyright © 2020 Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies ABOUT THE PROJECT The Policy Paper Series include policy documents developed within the framework of the project - National Minorities in Political Processes – Engagement for Better Future. The papers were elaborated by the young representatives of political parties, for whom it was the first attempt to work on an analytical document. The papers address the challenges and solutions for the ethnic minorities engagement in the political, economic or social life of Georgia. The project was implemented by the Rondel Foundation with the support and active participation of the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities (OSCE HCNM). The project aims to increase the political and social inclusion of ethnic minorities and to facilitate healthy policy debate on the issues of national minorities among the political parties, thus overall contributes to the good governance practices. Within the framework of the multi-component project, members of Tbilisi-based political party youth organizations, young people living in Samtskhe-Javakheti and Kvemo Kartli and active representatives of the local community attended various thematic seminars. The project also included thematic meetings of representatives of political parties and government agencies with the representatives of national minorities, the preparation of TV programs, and internships for young people representing ethnic minorities in political parties.
    [Show full text]
  • The Messenger P3
    MONDAY, JUNE 29, 2020 The Messenger P3 “Impartial, Informative, Insightful” GEL 3.00 The #114 (4671) Messenger MONDAY, JUNE 29, 2020 WWW.MESSENGER.COM.GE Opposition: First Rurua, then voting Opposition says that they won’t participate in the voting unless Rurua is released from prison. BY NIKA GAMTSEMLIDZE elections. Initially, the ruling party had ruling party and representatives of the finally decide the way the elections should promised the people of the country and opposition have been meeting for several be held. s the Elections of 2020 are coming its international partners that the 2020 months to come up with ideas and plans However, the opposition says that not Acloser, the government of Georgia is elections would have been held in a pro- for this election. all parts of the agreement have been ful- trying to adopt the electoral amendments, portional manner, with no threshold. Finally, with the help of the country’s filled and that Rurua still is in jail. The which will decide the fate of this year’s However, the amendments were not international partners, the decision was Parliament of Georgia will vote on the supported by the ruling party represen- made. Now, the parliament needs to vote tatives, after which, the members of the for the amendments for the third time to CONTINUED ON Page 2 Politics A regional organization of the party, Lelo for Georgia, has been established in Khashuri FULL STORY ON Page 2 Economics 6-year anniversary of EU-Georgia Association Agreement AA officially came into force in 2014 FULL STORY ON Page 3 Giorgi Rurua’s trial is scheduled for June 29th, at 11:00 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Defender of Georgia
    2018 The Public Defender of Georgia www.ombudsman.ge 1 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER OF GEORGIA, 2018 This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the author and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union. 2 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER OF GEORGIA THE SITUATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN GEORGIA 2018 2018 www.ombudsman.ge www.ombudsman.ge 3 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER OF GEORGIA, 2018 OFFICE OF PUBLIC DEFENDER OF GEORGIA 6, Ramishvili str, 0179, Tbilisi, Georgia Tel: +995 32 2913814; +995 32 2913815 Fax: +995 32 2913841 E-mail: [email protected] 4 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................................13 1. FULFILMENT OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE PUBLIC DEFENDER OF GEORGIA IN THE 2017 PARLIAMENTARY REPORT ......................................................................19 2. RIGHT TO LIFE .....................................................................................................................................28 2.1. CASE OF TEMIRLAN MACHALIKASHVILI .............................................................................21 2.2. MURDER OF JUVENILES ON KHORAVA STREET ...............................................................29 2.3. OUTCOMES OF THE STUDY OF THE CASE-FILES OF THE INVESTIGATION CONDUCTED ON THE ALLEGED MURDER OF ZVIAD GAMSAKHURDIA, THE FIRST
    [Show full text]
  • Narratives from Political Parties to Social Movements
    GIP Policy Memo February 2020 / Issue #33 Deconstructing Modern Georgian Populism: Narratives from Political Parties to Social Movements Nino Samkharadze1 Introduction There has been a significant surge of populist rhetoric since 2012 within political-civil space, which is expressed in electoral success of populist parties and stirred up activities of populist social movements. According to the widely accepted definition, populism is a “thin” ideology that looks at the society as two homogenous and antagonist groups: “ordinary people” vs “corrupt elites” and in this “battle” the primary purpose of politics should be the expression of the people’s will2. The work analyses the Georgian populism though this framework. Multiple parties are considered to be populist within Georgian political circles, however, while selecting the subjects for the research, one parliamentary and one extra-parliamentary opposition parties with different ideologies were selected. Within the party spectrum “Alliance of Patriots of Georgia” have an increasing electoral support and currently occupies 6 sits in the Parliament3. Another populist “Georgian Labor Party”4 has been in politics since 1995 and did not get any mandates in the Parliament after the last parliamentary elections5, however, is active during the important political processes6. Besides parties, there are a number of movements among Georgian political circles with the purpose to mobilize masses and popularize their ideas within society. Since 2017 “Georgian March” 1 Junior Policy Analyst at Georgian Institute of Politics. 2 Mudde, C. (2004). The Populist Zeitgeist. Government and Opposition. pp. 541-563. 3 Liberal Academy Tbilisi, Caucasus Research Resource Center (May 29, 2019), Anti-Liberal Populism And The Threat of Russian Influence in The Regions of Georgia.
    [Show full text]
  • GIP Krebuli Eng 2019.Indd
    Compendium of Policy Briefs April 2019 The Georgian Institute of Politics (GIP) is a Tbilisi-based non-profi t, non-partisan, research and analysis organization founded in early 2011. GIP strives to strengthen the organiza- tional backbone of democratic institutions and promote good governance and development through policy research and advocacy in Georgia. It also encourages public participation in civil society-building and developing democratic processes. Since December 2013 GIP is member of the OSCE Network of Think Tanks and Academic Institutions. *This publication has been produced from the resources provided by the National Endow- ment for Democracy. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessar- ily refl ect the views of the Georgian Institute of Politics and the National Endowment for Democracy. Editor: Kornely Kakachia Authors: Salome Minesashvili Levan Kakhishvili Bidzina Lebanidze Nino Robakidze Printed by: Grifoni © Georgian Institute of Politics, 2019 Tel: +995 599 99 02 12 Email: [email protected] www.gip.ge 3 FOREWORD Since the mid-2000s, democracy has regressed for Georgia’s democratization, hampering the in nearly every part of the world. The global establishment of a stable party system. The watchdog Freedom House1 has recorded de- 2018 presidential election was a clear example clines in global freedom for 12 years in a row. of the trust crisis and the extreme polarization Some states where democracy was believed to challenging Georgian democracy. While polit- be well-rooted have regressed under populist ical rivalry is part of any functioning democra- pressure with authoritarian tendencies. cy, in Georgia it has turned into polarization, rather than pluralism, limiting the public nar- While democracies have not collapsed, cur- rative and causing the fragmentation of the rent trends in global politics show that mod- political landscape, which is a major setback ern democracy is challenged by resurgent au- in the struggle to win back public trust.
    [Show full text]
  • Durham Research Online
    Durham Research Online Deposited in DRO: 11 August 2016 Version of attached le: Accepted Version Peer-review status of attached le: Peer-reviewed Citation for published item: Radunovi¡c,Du§san(2014) 'Incommensurable distance : Georgian cinema as a (trans)national cinema.', in Cinema, state socialism and society in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, 1917-1989 : re-visions. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, pp. 49-73. BASEES/Routledge series on Russia and East European studies. (97). Further information on publisher's website: http://www.routledge.com/9780415813235 Publisher's copyright statement: This is an Accepted Manuscript of a book chapter published by Routledge in Cinema, state socialism and society in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, 1917-1989 : re-visions. on 22/06/2014 available online: http://www.routledge.com/9780415813235 Additional information: Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. Durham University Library, Stockton Road, Durham DH1 3LY, United Kingdom Tel : +44 (0)191 334 3042 | Fax : +44 (0)191 334 2971 https://dro.dur.ac.uk Incommensurable Distance: Versions of National Identity in Georgian Soviet Cinema Dušan Radunović On the Concept of National Cinema The aim of this chapter is to trace the variegating strategies of identity formation in Georgian cinema, and to interrogate the manifestations of minority identity in the markedly transnational context of Soviet cinema.
    [Show full text]