1 Pathologies of Georgian Politics
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
UNIVERSITY of TARTU Faculty of Social Sciences Johan
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by DSpace at Tartu University Library UNIVERSITY OF TARTU Faculty of Social Sciences Johan Skytte Institute of Political Studies Master’s Thesis Lika Merebashvili DISCOVERING CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL DEPENDENCE IN THE CONTEXT OF RUSSIA - GEORGIA ECONOMIC RELATIONS Supervisor: Prof. Viacheslav Morozov Tartu 2016 I have written this Master's thesis independently. All viewpoints of other authors, literary sources and data from elsewhere used for writing this paper have been referenced. Lika Merebashvili The defence will take place on 19.12.16 at Lossi 36, Tartu, Estonia. Opponent - Dr. Leonardo Alvarez Pataccini Acknowledgements I would like to thank Prof. Viacheslav Morozov for supervising my thesis and for providing his valuable recommendations and constructive criticism which strongly encouraged me to do my best in the preparation of this work. I would like to also express my deep gratitude to the reviewer of the thesis Dr. Pataccini and the entire pre-defence committee, especially to Thomas Linsenmaier, Stefano Braghiroli, Heiko Pääbo, Raul Toomla, and Olga Bogdanova for their relevant comments and advice. And, finally, I would like to thank Oliivia Võrk and Aigi Hommik for their continuous administrative support. ABSTRACT This Master’s thesis examines social dimension of the economic dependence and foreign policy compliance of Georgia to Russia in order to explain foreign policy choices of the governments of Georgia. According to the mainstream IPE scholarship, higher the economic dependence, more prone the dependent partner is to make political compromises for the benefit of the dominant. -
Georgian Charter of Journalistic Ethics Study and Research on Election
Georgian Charter of Journalistic Ethics Study and Research on Election Media Coverage for 2016 Parliamentary Elections in Georgia TV News Monitoring Report 26 September – 2 November, 2016 The Georgian Charter of Journalistic Ethics is implementing the monitoring of TV news broadcasts within the framework of the project entitled “Study of the Media Coverage of the 2016 Parliamentary Elections” funded by the European Union (EU) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The monitoring is carried out from 20 May to 19 December, 2016 and covers main news programs on the following 11 TV channels: “1st Channel” of the public broadcaster, “Rustavi 2”, “Maestro”, “GDS”, “Tabula”, “Kavkasia”, “TV Pirveli”, “Obieqtivi”, “Ajara TV”, and “TV 25”. This report presents the media monitoring results for the period of 26 September through 2 November, 2016. The quantitative and the qualitative analysis of the monitoring data has revealed the following key findings: At the outset of the monitoring a large number of TV channels devoted their primary attention to the activities of the Government of Georgia. During the last two monitoring rounds, however, this trend has been altered and TV channels started to actively cover political groups. During this round of monitoring “United National Movement” received the highest coverage among all political subjects at the nine monitored TV channels; As during the previous round of monitoring, activities of the Government of Georgia were most positively covered by “GDS” with 11% of positive tone indicators. -
Successful Mediation and a Way Ahead
Policy Paper 2021 The European Union’s New Role in Georgia: Successful Mediation and a Way Ahead LEVAN KAKHISHVILI GIP POLICY PAPER ISSUE #23 | MAY 2021 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. This publication was produced with the support of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). The views and opinions expressed in this article are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Georgian Institute of Politics and the National Endowment for Democracy. HOW TO QUOTE THIS DOCUMENT: Levan Kakhishvili, "The European Union’s New Role in Georgia: Successful Mediation and a Way Ahead", Policy Paper No. 23, Georgian Institute of Politics, May 2021. © 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 Cover Photo: Meeting with Charles Michel in Georgian Parliament Ended | https://georgiatoday.ge/ ABOUT THE AUTHOR Levan Kakhishvili is a Doctoral Fellow in political science at the Bamberg Graduate School of Social Sciences (BAGSS), University of Bamberg, in the framework of DAAD Graduate School Support Programme. He is also a Lecturer at the Chair of Comparative Politics at the University of Bamberg, and a Policy Analyst at the Georgian Institute of Politics. He holds two Master’s degrees, in Russian and East European Studies from the St. -
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 -
Country of Origin Information Report Republic of Georgia 25 November
REPUBLIC OF GEORGIA COUNTRY OF ORIGIN INFORMATION (COI) REPORT Country of Origin Information Service 25 November 2010 GEORGIA 25 NOVEMBER 2010 Contents Preface Paragraphs Background Information 1. GEOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................ 1.01 Maps ...................................................................................................................... 1.05 2. ECONOMY ................................................................................................................ 2.01 3. HISTORY .................................................................................................................. 3.01 Post-communist Georgia, 1990-2003.................................................................. 3.02 Political developments, 2003-2007...................................................................... 3.03 Elections of 2008 .................................................................................................. 3.05 Presidential election, January 2008 ................................................................... 3.05 Parliamentary election, May 2008 ...................................................................... 3.06 Armed conflict with Russia, August 2008 .......................................................... 3.09 Developments following the 2008 armed conflict.............................................. 3.10 4. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS .......................................................................................... -
1 PATHOLOGIES of GEORGIAN POLITICS: EXTREMISM, FACTIONALISM and SECURITIZATION in the POST-SAAKASHVILI ERA Jason E. Strakes, P
PATHOLOGIES OF GEORGIAN POLITICS: EXTREMISM, FACTIONALISM AND SECURITIZATION IN THE POST-SAAKASHVILI ERA Jason E. Strakes, PhD (Associate Researcher, Ilia State University, Georgia) Copyright: Research Institute for European and American Studies (www.rieas.gr) Publication date: 6 December 2015 In the years since the South Ossetia War of 8-13 August 2008, Western observers have produced much alarmist commentary regarding the imminent Russian threat to Georgia's continued existence as an independent state, and the imperative of greater Euro-Atlantic commitment to its defense.1 On one hand, this reflects the international public relations campaign pursued by the former United National Movement (UNM) government to justify its unsuccessful strategy of reintegrating the de facto state territories by force, which (in defiance of the 2009 EU Independent International Fact Finding Mission Report) cast the conflict as a premeditated and expansionist gambit by Moscow—a view congratulated by ideologically sympathetic experts and policymakers.2 Yet, this narrative followed upon an existing unofficial domestic security doctrine during its incumbency from 2004-2012 that identified all major instances of organized political opposition or unrest as Kremlin-orchestrated actions, which both preceded and was reinforced by the five-day invasion.3 This essential credulity on the part of some U.S. and European representatives has encouraged the drawing of spurious associations between the August War and the Russian annexation of Crimea and involvement in the ensuing insurgency in the eastern oblasts of Ukraine since February 2014, in turn fueling the trope of entitlement to “shortcuts” to NATO membership among Georgian societal elites.4 Yet, rather than the latest wave of Russian imperialism, it is possible that the greatest threat to peace and stability in contemporary Georgia originates from the country's leaders themselves. -
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes Washington, D.C
INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR SETTLEMENT OF INVESTMENT DISPUTES WASHINGTON, D.C. IN THE PROCEEDINGS BETWEEN IOANNIS KARDASSOPOULOS and RON FUCHS (Claimants) and THE REPUBLIC OF GEORGIA (Respondent) (ICSID Case Nos. ARB/05/18 and ARB/07/15) AWARD Arbitral Tribunal Mr. L. Yves Fortier, C.C., O.Q., Q.C., President Professor Francisco Orrego Vicuña Professor Vaughan Lowe, Q.C. Secretary of the Tribunal Ms. Aïssatou Diop Assistant to the Tribunal Ms. Alison G. FitzGerald Representing the Claimant Representing the Respondent Ms. Karyl Nairn Ms. Claudia T. Salomon Mr. Timothy G. Nelson Mr. Matthew Saunders Mr. David Herlihy Ms. Kate Knox Ms. Jennifer M. Cabrera Ms. Kiera Gans SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER AND FLOM Mr. Theodore C. Jonas (UK) LLP / SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER Mr. Nick Gvinadze AND FLOM LLP Mr. Avto Svanidze DLA PIPER UK LLP / DLA PIPER LLP (US) / DLA PIPER GVINADZE & PARTNERS LLP Date of dispatch to the parties: March 3, 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I. PROCEDURE ................................................................................................... - 1 - A. Overview ............................................................................................................ - 1 - B. Registration of the Requests for Arbitration.................................................. - 3 - C. Constitution of the Tribunal and Commencement of the Proceeding ......... - 3 - D. The Jurisdictional Phase .................................................................................. - 4 - E. The Liability and Quantum Phase ................................................................. -
Political Forum: 10 Questions on Georgia's Political Development
1 The Caucasus Institute for Peace, Democracy and Development Political Forum: 10 Questions on Georgia’s Political Development Tbilisi 2007 2 General editing Ghia Nodia English translation Kakhaber Dvalidze Language editing John Horan © CIPDD, November 2007. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or oth- erwise, without the prior permission in writing from the proprietor. CIPDD welcomes the utilization and dissemination of the material included in this publication. This book was published with the financial support of the regional Think Tank Fund, part of Open Society Institute Budapest. The opinions it con- tains are solely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the position of the OSI. ISBN 978-99928-37-08-5 1 M. Aleksidze St., Tbilisi 0193 Georgia Tel: 334081; Fax: 334163 www.cipdd.org 3 Contents Foreword ................................................................................................ 5 Archil Abashidze .................................................................................. 8 David Aprasidze .................................................................................21 David Darchiashvili............................................................................ 33 Levan Gigineishvili ............................................................................ 50 Kakha Katsitadze ...............................................................................67 -
Central Asian Survey Managing Ethnic Diversity in Georgia
Zurich Open Repository and Archive University of Zurich Main Library Strickhofstrasse 39 CH-8057 Zurich www.zora.uzh.ch Year: 2009 Managing ethnic diversity in Georgia: one step forward, two steps back Wheatley, Jonathan DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02634930903034880 Posted at the Zurich Open Repository and Archive, University of Zurich ZORA URL: https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-98582 Journal Article Originally published at: Wheatley, Jonathan (2009). Managing ethnic diversity in Georgia: one step forward, two steps back. Central Asian Survey, 28(2):119-134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02634930903034880 This article was downloaded by: [Fachhochschule Nordwestschweiz] On: 04 July 2014, At: 03:03 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Central Asian Survey Publication details, including instructions for aut hors and subscription information: http:/ / www.tandfonline.com/ loi/ ccas20 Managing ethnic diversity in Georgia: one step forward, two steps back Jonathan Wheatley a a Centre for Democracy Aarau, University of Zurich , Switzerland Published online: 09 Jul 2009. To cite this article: Jonathan Wheatley (2009) Managing ethnic diversity in Georgia: one step forward, two steps back, Central Asian Survey, 28:2, 119-134, DOI: 10.1080/ 02634930903034880 To link to this article: http:/ / dx.doi.org/ 10.1080/ 02634930903034880 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTI CLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. -
Gender and Society: Georgia
Gender and Society: Georgia Tbilisi 2008 The Report was prepared and published within the framework of the UNDP project - “Gender and Politics” The Report was prepared by the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) The author: Nana Sumbadze For additional information refer to the office of the UNDP project “Gender and Politics” at the following address: Administrative building of the Parliament of Georgia, 8 Rustaveli avenue, room 034, Tbilisi; tel./fax (99532) 923662; www.genderandpolitics.ge and the office of the IPS, Chavchavadze avenue, 10; Tbilisi 0179; tel./fax (99532) 220060; e-mail: [email protected] The views expressed in this publication are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the United Nations or UNDP Editing: Sandeep Chakraborty Book design: Gio Sumbadze Copyright © UNDP 2008 All rights reserved Contents Acknowledgements 4 List of abbreviations 5 Preface 6 Chapter 1: Study design 9 Chapter 2: Equality 14 Gender in public realm Chapter 3: Participation in public life 30 Chapter 4: Employment 62 Gender in private realm Chapter 5: Gender in family life 78 Chapter 6: Human and social capital 98 Chapter 7: Steps forward 122 Bibliography 130 Annex I. Photo Voice 136 Annex II. Attitudes of ethnic minorities towards equality 152 Annex III. List of entries on Georgian women in Soviet encyclopaedia 153 Annex IV. List of organizations working on gender issues 162 Annex V. List of interviewed persons 173 Annex VI. List of focus groups 175 Acknowledgements from the Author The author would like to express her sincere gratitude to the staff of UNDP project “Gender and Politics” for their continuous support, and to Gender Equality Advisory Council for their valuable recommendations. -
Rose Revolution: the Challenges and Peculiarities of Democratization
Georgian Rose Revolution: The Challenges and Peculiarities of Democratization in Post-Soviet Countries A thesis presented to the faculty of the Center for International Studies of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts Anna Gabritchidze November 2011 © 2011 Anna Gabritchidze. All Rights Reserved. 2 This thesis titled Georgian Rose Revolution: the Challenges and Peculiarities of Democratization in Post-Soviet Countries by ANNA GABRITCHIDZE has been approved for the Center for International Studies by Dauda AbuBakar Professor of Political Science Jie Li Li Director, International Development Studies Drew McDaniel Interim Director, Center for International Studies 3 Abstract GABRITCHIDZE, ANNA, M.A., November 2011, International Development Studies Georgian Rose Revolution: the Challenges and Peculiarities of Democratization in Post- Soviet Countries (73 pp.) Director of Thesis: Dauda AbuBakar This thesis will describe and analyze the challenges and peculiarities of democratization in post-Soviet countries with Georgia as the main focus. It will cover the investigation of phenomena of so-called “fourth wave” democracies with their transition regime styles. In the end of the 1990s Samuel Huntington asked if we can expect a new wave of democratization in the 21st century and what factors would define it. The dramatic wave of political changes which gripped republics of the former Soviet Union during this short period led to “Rose Revolution” in Georgia in November 2003, the “Orange Revolution” in Ukraine in November 2004 and the “Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan” in March 2005. The Georgian case study could be an evident demonstration of this political and social change with the challenges common to all post-Soviet countries as well as with its uniqueness. -
Simplified Procurement – Corruption Risks in Non-Competitive Government Contracts
Simplified Procurement – Corruption Risks in Non-Competitive Government Contracts December 2013 Transparency International Georgia 26, Rustaveli Avenue, Tbilisi Tel: (+995 32) 292 14 0 Web: http://transparency.ge/en Email: [email protected] An electronic version of this report, interactive visualizations and source data is available at http://transparency.ge/en/simplified-procurement. Scan with your mobile device The report was prepared with financial support from the Open Society Georgia Foundation, the Official Development Aid of the Slovak Republic (SlovakAid) and the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida). The content and opinions expressed in the report are those of Transparency International Georgia and do not reflect the position of the donors. Executive Summary This report finds that extensive direct contracting by the Georgian government has resulted in numerous cases of companies linked to public officials receiving large, non-competitive contracts and that numerous beneficiaries of this practice in 2011 and 2012 made financial contributions to the ruling party, some of which may constitute kickback payments. Transparency International (TI) Georgia analyzed more than 430,000 non- competitive government contracts awarded between December 2010 and September 2013. In 2011, the government issued direct contracts worth more than GEL 959 million, GEL 1.17 billion in 2012 and approximately 450 million in the first nine months of 2013. Last year, these contracts accounted for 18% of all government spending, equal to 4.7% of the Georgian economy (GDP). Direct procurement is likely to result in wasteful spending, as there is no opportunity for other qualified bid for the same contract and bring down the price.