The Role of Civic Nationalism in Transformation of the Internal Ethnic Politics of Post-Soviet Georgia
THE ROLE OF CIVIC NATIONALISM IN TRANSFORMATION OF THE INTERNAL ETHNIC POLITICS OF POST-SOVIET GEORGIA
David Matsaberidze
ECMI WORKING PAPER #83
December 2014
ECMI- Working Paper # 83
The European Centre for Minority Issues (ECMI) is a non-partisan institution founded in 1996 by the Governments of the Kingdom of Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany, and the German State of Schleswig-Holstein. ECMI was established in Flensburg, at the heart of the Danish-German border region, in order to draw from the encouraging example of peaceful coexistence between minorities and majorities achieved here. ECMI’s aim is to promote interdisciplinary research on issues related to minorities and majorities in a European perspective and to contribute to the improvement of interethnic relations in those parts of Western and Eastern Europe where ethno-political tension and conflict prevail. ECMI Working Papers are written either by the staff of ECMI or by outside authors commissioned by the Centre. As ECMI does not propagate opinions of its own, the views expressed in any of its publications are the sole responsibility of the author concerned.
ECMI Working Paper # 83 European Centre for Minority Issues (ECMI) Director: Dr. Tove H. Malloy © ECMI 2014
2 | P a g e
ECMI- Working Paper # 83
THE ROLE OF CIVIC NATIONALISM IN TRANSFORMATION OF THE INTERNAL ETHNIC POLITICS OF POST-SOVIET GEORGIA
The paper deals with the transformation of ethnic politics of Georgia in the post -Soviet period and tries to find an answer to the following question: Did the transition of post - Soviet Georgian nationalism from the ethnic nationalism of Gamsakhurdia to the liberal nationalism of Shevardnadze ending with the civic one of Saakashvili lead to the advancement of the civic integration process in the country? The study analyzes the political statements of the four presidents of Georgia in light of the ethnic policy discourse through changes in the accents of the state nationalism versus transformation of state- church relations. The study demonstrates that a shift from ethnic to civic nationalism was exploited as a source of peaceful integration of ethnic minorities of Georgia. Language policy is taken as a case study for the research. It was hoped that civic policies and rhetoric would lead to peaceful integration of conflicting ethnic groups as well, although this has not been the case up to now. The paper explains the success and failure of civic integration policy vis-à-vis different ethnic minorities of the country drawing on the language aspect of the National Concept on Tolerance and Civil Integration policy document. And last, but not least, the transformation of state-church relations in the light of building the civic state of Georgia is also examined.
David Matsaberidze December 2014 ECMI Working Paper # 83
3 | P a g e
ECMI- Working Paper # 83
I. INTRODUCTION civic Georgian nation in the post-Soviet period. To this end, the paper will reconstruct transformation of the post-Soviet ethnic vs. The paper analyzes the transformation civic policy discourse in Georgia in line with process of ethnic politics in Georgia in the the change of national policies of the country post-Soviet period. It reconstructs the course towards ethnic minorities. It will also offer of the transition of the ethnic nationalism of some explanations for success and failures of the post-Soviet Georgia (early 1990s) to the civic nationalism vis-à-vis different ethnic liberal nationalism with civic elements during minorities on the example of language policy Shevardnadze’s presidency, ending with the and explore the dynamics of state-Church fully-fledged civic nationalism of the era of relations in the course of formation of the Saakashvili (since 2005). The post-Rose civic conception of the Georgian nation. Revolutionary period (since 2003) was declared as a stage of civic integration of national minorities into the political and social II. TRANSFORMATION OF life of the country. This paper will try to find answers to the following questions: Did the GEORGIAN NATIONAL transition of the post-Soviet Georgian POLITICS nationalism from the ethnic nationalism of Gamsakhurdia to the liberal nationalism of This section explores the main elements of Shevardnadze ending with the civic Georgian national politics of the post-Soviet nationalism of Saakashvili lead to the period. For the proper understanding of the appearance of civic integration tools in the impact of nationalism on the (trans)formation country? And did it lead to an increase of the of ethnic policy discourse of the country three extent of integration of national minorities aspects should be considered: ongoing social residing on the territory of Georgia? changes (or challenges), pre-existing ethno- Arguably, there is a clear difference in the symbolic resources and new ideological outcomes of policy in respect with minorities movement born out of the former two in the in conflict with the center and those which period of transition. Similarly, the success and have not experienced conflicting relations failure of civic integration policy is heavily with the central authorities of Georgia. In determined by the past legacy of majority- order to answer these questions, the paper will minority relations in Georgia, which is refer to a content analysis of political different for various ethnic groups and is statements of the four presidents of the influenced by the regional geopolitical context country – Zviad Gamsakhurdia, Eduard of a particular era. Generally, transition is the Shevardnadze, Mikheil Saakashvili and Giorgi period of contestation of different elites and Margvelashvili – so as to reconstruct the ideas/ideals, old and new, whereas, as gradual process of building of the inclusive Anthony Smith rightly mentions: “in this turmoil of powers and ideas, one familiar face
4 | P a g e
ECMI- Working Paper # 83
has reappeared: that of nationalism;”1 exactly discredit opponents...” and it is “...the product nationalism, either ethnic or civic, has of deliberate elite efforts to mobilize latent determined the mode of majority-minority solidarities behind a particular political relations in Georgia in the post-Soviet period. program...”4 It’s a matter of debate which During the late 1980s and in the early 2000s, national myths, political programs were nationalism became the main ideology in successful and which failed in Georgia, but it Georgia and it led to national revival in the is certain that national ideas have played an form of ethnic and civic nationalisms for each important role as advertisement(s) for political above-mentioned period respectively; this support in the post-Soviet political life of the could be seen as “a function of social and country. geopolitical changes, their contents and Interestingly, none of the above- intensities, determined by pre-existing ethno- mentioned periods were free from the symbolic resources,”2 as Smith argues. influence of pre-existing ethno-symbolic According to Smith, nationalism – itself an resources, be it ethnic or civic nationalist ideology, symbolism and movement – became mobilization. The Georgian reality in this endemic and the potential for nationalist respect nicely fits within Smith’s proposition movements is always with us,3 what actually that “... the ideal of self-renewal and the was proved in the case of Georgia. For a vision of collective destiny are built into the proper understanding of the majority-minority collective memory of a golden age and justify post-Soviet inter-ethnic relations in Georgia, all the sacrifices that citizens may be asked to the past ethnic resources, Soviet legacies and make.”5 These aspects of the past determine the post-Soviet aspirations should be the nature of nationalism and any emerging adequately considered. nationalism becomes the foundation for the Considering Smith’s proposition, it is not particular national-political discourse. surprising that nationalism became a source of Therefore, the architects of the national legitimization of political discourse in the political project – politicians, intelligentsia, post-Soviet Georgia, both, for the majority, as etc. – market the desired political course of well as minorities. Being coupled with the country with the help of nationalism and ethnicity and politics, or with both successfully “translate ethno-historical simultaneously, the post-Soviet Georgian traditions, ethnic beliefs and territorial nationalism emerged as a powerful ideological attachments into the language of modern movement, based on particular ideals and nationalism [...] where general geo-political motifs of particular elites at a concrete time in situation, including changing international office. These elites were promoting either attitudes to ethnic separatism and irredentism, ethnic or civic policy towards national and the regional location of the mooted minorities of the country. As argued by nation”6 do have significant influence on its Snyder and Ballentine, national mythmaking future political nature. The post-Soviet is “...the attempt to use dubious arguments to national-political projects of Georgia are the mobilize support for nationalist doctrines or to testimony of intimate links between the past
5 | P a g e
ECMI- Working Paper # 83
and present, where the present tries to same time, it is heavily influenced by the legitimate itself on behalf of the past with the existing objective reality of religious blessing of either nationalism or ethnicity. commonality (and not only) with Russia. The The nature of the post-Soviet Georgian segmented public opinion of the early 1990s nationalism is quite fluctuating: it might led to the conflict with some territorialized change its direction, or attach new “social and ethnic minorities, compactly residing on the economic programme and appeal to new strata territory of Georgia, which was the result of of the population, but they remain firmly what is termed as mirroring nationalism by within the parameters of their ethno-historical Svante E. Cornell. Therefore, the current traditions, drawing in the same shared developments and the success vs. failure of memories, ethnic myths and territorial applied civic policy are heavily determined by attachments, even if the language had become the past scenarios of inter-ethnic relations. secular and political, and the symbolism Evidently, those minorities which had conflict reflected the needs of modern communities with the center in the early 1990s, have been rather than those of their pre-modern ethno- refusing to join the civic national project, religious forbears.”7 This kind of although those who have remained in a latent transformation of nationalism could be phase of the conflict have been successfully witnessed in the post-Soviet Georgia, which driven into the civic national project of the was influenced by political ideas of elites, by post-Civil War (the mid-1990s) Georgian existing counter forces within the society and state. that of the ethnic past. As long as the old Referring to the analysis of presidential ideology of communism was discredited in speeches, the second part of the paper post-Soviet Georgia, the new ideology – reconstructs the transformation of national nationalism – became successfully exploited, rhetoric in Georgia and the attitudes of whereas “cultural differences [were] available different governments towards national to be politicized as ethnonationalism.”8 minorities in the country. The research A group of Georgian scientists does not demonstrates the gradual transformation of see any contradiction between the state national politics from ethnic to civic implementation of the Georgian national nationalism in Georgia, which is project and peaceful integration of national recommended by Snyder and Ballentine as “a minorities residing on the territory of country; promotion of civic-territorial conceptions of “their involvement in the nation-building national identity against the ethnically process is not a hard task, if Russia will stop segmented markets.”11 The promoted its attempts to artificially exacerbate inter- conceptions of civic nationalism and policies ethnic relations between majority and of minority integration into the mainstream minority,”9 Gia Nodia claims. But, I’d argue social and political life of Georgia from the that the main problem in contemporary mid-1990s, after the horrors of Abkhazia and Georgia is the “segmented public opinion South Ossetia, could be legitimately seen as [which] is ripe for nationalist appeals;”10 at the preconditions of Georgia’s civic integration.
6 | P a g e
ECMI- Working Paper # 83
The shift from ethnic to civic nationalism the face of the West, in the US, in Russia, as came with changed accents in the new well as internally, sometimes even among his national-political program of the country, with close allies, and primarily among ethnic its roots in the mid-1990s and with some minorities, periodically blaming them for tangible results after the Rose Revolution of being the fifth column of the Kremlin. It could 2003. be argued that he was aware of a possible hidden hand of Moscow behind national III. FROM DEMONIZING TO minorities’ political activism, although he was INCLUSION OF NATIONAL absolutely immoderate towards national MINORITIES minorities at some times. Due to some of his immoderate statements, like “the local settlers The general picture of transformation of should have priorities over other ethnic politics in Georgia could be nationalities”12 and due to his short reconstructed through analyzing the presidency, Georgia did not manage to presidential speeches of four presidents of the formulate its national policy priorities towards post-Soviet independent Georgia. This section ethnic minorities at that time. Paradoxically, highlights the main differences in their his presidential speech was stressing the unity accents, tone and future policy thinking. The of ethnic Georgians and national minorities of inaugural presidential speeches of Zviad Georgia at the time of declaration of Gamsakhurdia, Eduard Shevardnadze, independence and promised them the Mikheil Saakashvili and Giorgi “constitutional guarantees of political Margvelashvili do tell us much about the autonomy of Abkhazia and protection of gradual emergence of the civic integration national rights of Abkhazians;”13 although the process in Georgia. Critical and comparative overt ethnically charged nationalism of reading of their speeches are aimed at tracking Gamsakhurdia’s period, and some of his the process of introduction and transformation immoderate statements, as quoted above, led of civil society building policies and Western to the exacerbation of situation in the promoting slogans, as well as elements of autonomous provinces of the country, their national projects, in the period between populated by national minorities. 1993-2013 in order to highlight the main Nevertheless, as it was already mentioned, stages of evolution of civic integration policy after becoming President of the Republic of of the country. The analysis follows Georgia, Gamsakhurdia became very cautious chronologically and reflects on the main towards national minorities, and, evidently, aspects of national-political projects in their some of his statements point towards speeches. There is not much to say in terms of assuming the possibility of the emergence of civic integration for the period of civic nationalism in Georgia if followed Gamsakhurdia (1991-1992), as he in a way properly; just to quote some of them: “we followed the policy of isolationalism of should not forget that as we were facing the Georgia as he saw enemies everywhere – in most decisive and extremely important
7 | P a g e
ECMI- Working Paper # 83
moment in our history, the great majority of Abkhazia would gain wider political the non-ethnic Georgian population were autonomy within Georgia. Shevardnadze supporting us in the struggle for claimed that the new Georgian state could not independence. The Georgian nation will not be rebuilt without acknowledgment of the forget this. Each ethnic minority, residing on rights of minorities and it was necessary to the Georgian territory, will have guarantees “take measures against containment of for development, promotion and advancement extremist nationalism”15 in the process of through ensuring the cultural space they need building of the civic state and an open society for self-sustained development. Georgia is in Georgia. In a way, the name of his new ready to join all international agreements in political party – “The Union of Citizens” – the sphere of peaceful development of was a testimony of Georgia’s drive towards nations.”14 This is the testimony to the claim civic integration, which signaled the that Gamsakhurdia tried to build new bridges transformation of ethnic nationalism into a with national minorities in the future process liberal-civic one for building the new of building the new independent Georgian inclusive Georgian state. During his second state, notwithstanding his emotional ethnically inauguration, he opted for civic-patriotic, charged rhetoric. Thus, I would propose that rather than religious ritual and instead of Gamsakhurdia could be termed either as Svetitskhoveli Church that he visited in the “emotional nationalist” or the “nationalist of previous one, he visited the Holly Mount the mass rallies;” it seems that beyond Mtsatsminda in Tbilisi; evidently, this visit populism he was quite rational in his future had patriotic, rather than spiritual, national minority policy; this is demonstrated significance. In his second inauguration in his speeches through his civic integration speech, he pointed to the success of national statements. Unfortunately, during his reconciliation in Georgia after the Civil War presidency these moderate statements and of 199216 and stressed the importance of approaches did not get any institutional planting the experience of “The European expressions and opportunity of Charter on the Local Self-Governance” in the implementation, whereas institutional build- Georgian legislature.17 It was to serve as a up of ethnically framed nationalism among basis for the formation of civil society in the ethnic minorities with territorial Georgia and would give a place to all autonomies was remarkably successful. confessions and national minorities residing Gamsakhurdia’s successor, the ex- on the territory of the country.18 All these communist high ranking official, measures were aimed at departing from the Shevardnadze, decided to encourage civic ethnic rhetoric in favor of civic nationalism. elements in internal and external political life The more policy-planned and of the country. He went even further, and symbolically charged ethnic policy was decided to bring the Western type political pursued during the presidency of Saakashvili. system of ethnic diversity management, which He was the first president of Georgia who was to come in the form of federalism, as officially declared Georgians as the oldest
8 | P a g e
ECMI- Working Paper # 83
European nation and claimed that Georgia one and the same time. Thus, during the occupied an important position in the presidency of Saakashvili, not only the shift of European civilization. Therefore, with the rhetoric in favor of civic integration, but also European spirit of civic unity, any citizen of the particular policy in this direction, planned Georgia, irrespective of their ethnic origins – and implemented by the state authorities – Russians, Abkhazians, Ossetians, Kurds, could be also witnessed. Azerbainjanis, Armenians, Jews, Greeks, In his inauguration speech Margvelashvili Ukrainians – were considered as members of was also asserting the process of building the the Georgian nation and the sons of Georgia.19 new European type of political culture in This policy was strengthened by the adoption Georgia; according to him, this of the Framework Convention for the Europeanization process of political culture Protection of National Minorities (Council of would not be a hard task as “Georgia is Europe) in 2005, which was followed by the European in its individual consciousness and Conception for Tolerance and Civic part of the Western civilization in its spirit, Integration in 2009, both of them considered which would be institutionally strengthened as an action plan for the civic integration of during his presidency.”22 This drive to Europe Georgia, implemented through legislation in would be accompanied with guaranteed educational and cultural spheres: provision of political and cultural rights to all inhabitants Georgian language classes at secondary of Georgia – first and foremost to “the citizens education schools in the minority populated of Georgia residing in Abkhazia and South areas; supporting minority cultural life Ossetia – which would be included in the through various activities.20 These normative building process of democratic Georgia and and legislative changes were crucial for the the state would ensure their ethnic and cultural cooperation with the EU structures, whereas identity, as well as political rights.”23 Thus, as Clark mentions, these changes influenced Georgia would gain its place as a bridge and “national politics, which took the form of medium between Europe and Asia. civic nationalism under conditions of Considering the fact that the full membership increased cooperation with the West.”21 in the EU structures is a long run project for The symbolization policy of Georgia’s Georgia, the undertaken civic policies have links to European culture was also pursued. At increased the civic integration of national the place of inauguration of Presidents, in minorities in the Georgian state, which front of the seat of Parliament, which has became home for all its citizens, majority and symbolic significance – the place where the minorities seen as equal members of the independence driven demonstration was shot Georgian nation (as opposed to the early at by Russian soldiers on April 9, 1989 – the 1990s). EU stars flag and the new flag of Georgia – It is apparent that since the early 1990s, the so called 5 crosses flag – are waving side against the backdrop of the horrible by side, which is a demonstration of Georgia’s experience of ethnic conflicts and bloodshed, oldest Europeanness and its EU aspirations at Georgia gradually adhered to the principles of
9 | P a g e
ECMI- Working Paper # 83
civic integration, modeled on the European according to the claim of Georgian standards, which was in a way (consciously or constitutionalist, former head of the unconsciously) a step ahead towards Constitutional Commission, Avtandil Europe/EU. If during the mid-1990s it was a Demetrashvili, “if a person with Muslim more formal fulfillment of the civic origins would win the presidential elections, integration policy tools, from the mid-2000s, the presidential oath could not be delivered in more inclusive policies towards ethnic the church.”24 In this respect, evidently, a minorities, aimed at their incorporation secular, civil consent promoting decision was through integration into the ordinary political- taken, and this aspect was constitutionally economic and socio-cultural life of the guaranteed. Although, after delivering the country, were pursued by the state. The presidential speech, either the Cathedral of primary target of this shift was aimed at Svetiskhoveli (Shevardnadze) or the medieval avoiding further conflicts with other ethnic monastery Gelati (Saakashvili) was visited by minorities of the state. This was the main shift the Presidents of Georgia. These both had in internal politics of the country, whereas more symbolic-patriotic significance for externally EU-Atlantic integration became the commemorations of heroes and glorious past primary aim of the mainstream political of the country, rather than religious meaning. establishment, to which the first – civil society The speeches they delivered here do building process of the country, leading to the demonstrate the attempts to make a link formation of the inclusive civic Georgian between past and the present, for the sake of nation – was a step ahead. legitimization of the present political-cultural discourse. IV. THE ROLE OF ORTHODOX In spite of multi-ethnicity and religious CHURCH AND SECULARISM diversity of the country, all of the four presidents stressed the role of divinity in the The Christian Orthodox religion and the future redemption of Georgia and its integrity. Georgian church played an important role in For example, Gamsakhurdia described the the post-Soviet independent Georgia. Thus, Georgian people as under the process of church-state relations in the civic nation awakening of “religious ideology and national promotion process, accompanied by a consciousness”25 and pointed to the historical- secularization policy of the country, should traditional unity of church and state in not be neglected. The Catholicos-Patriarch of Georgia which was expressed through the All Georgia Ilia II has attended all presidential intimate links between “Georgian national inaugural ceremonies since 1991 and his movement and religious consciousness.”26 In presence at these events has always had a this way, he denoted the existing movement as symbolic significance. It is noteworthy that national-religious one, which should serve as the presidential oath has always been made in the basis for the social-political life of the new front of the Parliament House and not in the state, and even promised to declare the main Cathedral of Georgia – Svetiskhoveli, as Orthodox religion as the state religion of
10 | P a g e
ECMI- Working Paper # 83
Georgia. Although, at the same time, he Svetitskhoveli, which was dedicated to his guaranteed the “freedom of practice of inauguration.30 This became an important religion for all citizens of Georgia.”27 signal of the new type of church-state Gamsakhurdia even did not decline to relations in Georgia and since then the mention that Georgia was the Holy Land of Catholicos-Patriarch of All Georgia has Virgin Mary, which followed the way of Jesus attended all inauguration ceremonies of all Christ. presidents. This could be considered as an Shevardnadze was the first president to important step towards building civic culture establish the ritual of visiting Svetitskhoveli in multi-ethnic and multi-religious Georgia, as after the inaugural speech and considered this Catholicos-Patriarch joined the civic as an important part of the inauguration of a ceremony and not vice versa. The process of president. He attached a kind of symbolic including civic-patriotic elements in the significance to this visit and termed it as “an process of inauguration was followed by approachment of president to God in a process Saakashvili, who decided not to go to of leading the nation.”28 He even recalled Svetitskhoveli Church, but visited the grave of some religious analogies, such as between the King David the Builder, which was the Georgia and the Biblical Job. Alongside substitution of the spiritual part of stressing the role of state in the formation of inauguration with the patriotic element – the civil society in Georgia, Shevardnadze recollection of the dyadic past. pointed to the joint efforts of state and church The current president Margvelashvili in formation of the civic state of Georgia. His argued the necessity of preservation of the second presidential inauguration, which, terms and conditions of the Constitutional according to the Constitution of Georgia, was guarantees mediated between state and the scheduled for April 30, 2000, coincided with Church; although, at the same time, he Easter of that year, which attached symbolic stressed that the Constitutional rights of all and religious significance. Shevardnadze inhabitants and their religious practices will stressed that the past years of his presidency be respected and protected in the country. was the period of redemption for Georgians Like Gamsakhurdia and Shevardnadze, he and Georgia, and argued that without the help referred to God “to give power and wisdom to of God Georgia could not become the crucial take the responsibility of presidency of bridge between Europe and Asia; he Georgia, vested on him by the Georgian mentioned that “it was most painful for the people”31 – a clearly religious tone; and President and Catholicos-Patriarch that similar to Saakashvili, he referred to the past Georgian has not become united so far and the in relation to the preservation of Georgian problems of Abkhazia and South Ossetia are identity and quoted the famous Georgian poet not solved yet.”29 On his second inauguration and public figure of the 19th century, Ilia he did not visit Svetitskhoveli, although he Chavchavadze, who was arguing at that time – thanked the Catholicos-Patriarch of “Georgians should create their own present, All Georgia Ilia II for conducting liturgy in on the basis of past” and went on to recollect
11 | P a g e
ECMI- Working Paper # 83
the heroic activity of the Georgia soldier – V. SUCCESS AND FAILURE OF Antsukhelidze – during the Russian-Georgian CIVIC INTEGRATION POLICY War of August 200832 – a remarkably civic – THE CASE OF LANGUAGE component. The offered analyses of the four The language issue, i.e., teaching state presidential speeches of Georgia since its language and the promotion of minority independence (the early 1990s) demonstrate languages – became the main vehicle of civic that the processes of building a civic society integration policy. The National Concept on and a democratic state on the one hand, and Tolerance and Civil Integration (mentioned the secularization policy, on the other, went above), defined the following six main target parallel to each other and these moves were areas to be improved with regard to the seen as a truly European transformation of the education of national minorities: better access state in its internal political life, with the spirit to pre-school education for persons belonging of acknowledgement of the rights of national to ethnic minorities; access to general minorities. These changes were meant to education for persons belonging to ethnic create the foundations for a gradual minorities; access to higher education for emergence of the civic model of the multi- persons belonging to ethnic minorities; ethnic Georgian nation-state. Although the improved command of the state language Christian religion has been symbolized in among persons belonging to ethnic minorities; Georgian politics by all presidents of Georgia, protection of minority languages; and access and this proves the great influence of religion to vocational training programmes and adult and Church as an institution in Georgian education for persons belonging to ethnic 33 society, the rights of religious minorities and minorities. In addition, national minorities denominations are constitutionally were given the right to receive general guaranteed. Meantime, it is also apparent, primary and secondary education in their that the past plays an important role in the respective native languages and to run legitimization of the present political minority language schools. The multilingual discourse, and undoubtedly, civic nationalism education was considered as an alternative, is the main driving force of state-building and accompanied with training of Georgian national minority integration of contemporary language teachers, upgrading and revising Georgia. Nevertheless, language was picked textbooks, as well as transforming the up as the main tool of civic integration of National Curriculum and including Georgian national minorities in the post-Rose language textbooks as a second language. Revolution Georgia and the following Evidently, vis-à-vis Abkhazian and South paragraph will highlight the role of language Ossetian ethnic minorities the civic integration policy in the national consolidation of the policy failed and they have not endorsed its post-Soviet Georgian state. main proposition – promotion of minority language education, in parallel to state language teaching programs. Azerbaijani and
12 | P a g e
ECMI- Working Paper # 83
Armenian minorities, compactly residing in determined the weak influence of language Kvemo Kartli and Javakheti regions policy over the Abkhazian and South Ossetian respectively, have become involved in the ethnic communities, thus the generated tools state language learning programs and most could not be deployed or instrumentalized notably the young generation have either locally among the Abkhazian and South deepened their knowledge in the state Ossetian communities. language – Georgian, or have learned it from the elementary level; some of them later were VI. CONCLUSION promoted to local governing positions at state institutions. But this program did not work for It was demonstrated here that after the horror Abkhazians and [South] Ossetians at least for of ethnic nationalism of the early 1990s, civic the following reasons: nationalism was exploited as a source of 1. The delayed civic national policy did peaceful consolidation, and for integration of not reach them after the war of 1992-93 and national minorities of Georgia in the long term they became hostages of the local minority perspective. The period of presidency of ethnic rhetoric, which demonized the majority Gamsakhurdia could be seen as an exception among local ethnic societies; in this respect; although there could be found 2. They had to live not only with the some moderate and civic policy oriented ideas stigma of the oppressed people by the in his statements, the first president is majority, but also found themselves isolated remembered for his immoderate nationalist from the state by the local policies of slogans, which have alienated ethnic Sukhumi/Tskhinvali and Moscow minorities from the center in the early 1990s. simultaneously; Whereas from the period of Shevardnadze 3. The level of knowledge of their mother onwards, the state planned national policy was tongue decreased significantly, among the promoted, with various tools of expression young generation in particular, and due to and implementation – mainly that of language objective reasons they became accustomed to – aimed at the peaceful integration of ethnic the Russian language, which was a lingua minorities residing on the territory of Georgia, franca, being the main medium of with some notable success. This process was communication for them during the Soviet institutionally promoted since the Rose times, and remained the same after the Revolution government came into office after dissolution of the Soviet Union, which 2004. became apparent after the change of the The study has also proved that despite political circumstances since the early 1990s; different challenges at each period of the post- Thus they lost interest towards the state Soviet independent Georgia, God and the language of the country – Georgian – symbolic attachment to religion played an especially due to subjective or practical important role in Georgian society, therefore reasons. The absence of political control over religion or religious aspects are quite often these regions from the side of Tbilisi referred to by politicians. It could be argued
13 | P a g e
ECMI- Working Paper # 83
that the post-Soviet internal and external the most successful tool for the management politics of Georgia is a mixture of symbolism, of civic nationalism and for integration of authority of religion and cultural values. This national minorities into the mainstream is testified through the recollections of past Georgian civic nation. The promotion of the history by politicians, both Biblical as well as state language among national minorities of symbolic, for justification of their political the country and the preservation of minority actions. Although gradually, with the languages locally became the most effective emergence of civil values in Georgia, the force of civic integration policy, although the presidential speeches (mainly those of existing external political circumstances and Saakashvili) became free of religious aspects. “locked” past memory significantly constrain But none of them were free from ethnic the success of integration policy towards elements and each of them declared the ethnic minorities being in conflict with Tbilisi positive state policy towards national since the early 1990s. minorities. Meantime, language was found as
14 | P a g e
ECMI- Working Paper # 83
Endnotes
1Smith, A.D, “The Resurgence of Nationalism? Myth and Memory in the Renewal of Nations”, LSE Centennial Lecture, 47(4) The British Journal of Sociology (1996), 575. 2Ibid. 3Ibid, 579. 4Snyder, J. and Ballentine, K. “Nationalism and the Marketplace of Ideas”, 21(2) International Security (1996), 66. 5Smith, A.D, “The Resurgence of Nationalism? Myth and Memory in the Renewal of Nations”, Op.cit.note 1, at 585. 6Ibid, 593. 7Ibid, 594. 8Snyder, J. and Ballentine, K. “Nationalism and the Marketplace of Ideas”, Op.cit.note 4, 73. 9Nodia, G. The Components of the Georgian National Idea: A General Sketch, in the collection of essays The Birth of Georgian Nation, proceedings of the conference dedicated to Ilia Chavchavadze (26-27 November), Ilia Chavchavadze State University Press, Tbilisi, 2007, 130. 10Snyder, J. and Ballentine, K. “Nationalism and the Marketplace of Ideas”, Op.cit.note 4, 76. 11Ibid, 94. 12Interview of Zviad Gamsakhurdia with the Italian newspaper “Stampa.” “Zviad Gamsakhurdia: Ossetians Represent an Unimportant Minority”. 60(8) Союз [Union] (1991). At:
15 | P a g e
ECMI- Working Paper # 83
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
David Matsaberidze Assistant Professor, Department of International Relations, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Iv. Javakishvili Tbilisi State University Contact: [email protected]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION SEE EUROPEAN CENTRE FOR MINORITY ISSUES (ECMI) Schiffbruecke 12 (Kompagnietor) D-24939 Flensburg +49-(0)461-14 14 9-0 * fax +49-(0)461-14 14 9-19 * E-Mail: [email protected] * Internet: www.ecmi.de
16 | P a g e