Commentary: Georgia's new political journey

This is a  commentary prepared by the political editor of commonspace.eu

The results of the last round of the parliamentary elections in Georgia have confirmed a landslide victory for the ruling Georgian Dream party (GD) which now has a renewed and increased mandate to push forward its political vision. Having won 115 seats, it now not only has a huge majority in parliament but also enough to amend the constitution, if it so wishes, without the support of other parties.

Today, Georgia embarks on a new political journey. The period of democratic transition is over, and a new phase, where the emphasis must be on state and democratic consolidation, has opened. The October 2016 Parliamentary elections in Georgia were not perfect, but they were the best the country ever had, and within the accepted international standards.  Well organised, competitive and fair elections now need to become a habit, so that politicians and voters alike can focus on policies and substance.

Whilst in this election the government has not changed, politics has. The dynamic inside the newly elected, 150-member, Georgian parliament will be very different - with only three parties represented, and with a much smaller opposition. This will be made up of the United National Movement (UNM) with 27 seats and the Patriots Alliance (PA)with 6 seats. 2 MPs will sit as independents but are likely to support the government on most issues. A healthy democracy depends on an effective and constructive parliamentary opposition which is essential to provide the checks and balances necessary. The Georgian Dream government, with its new huge majority, will be well advised to be magnanimous in victory, especially when it comes to allocation of key posts for parliamentary scrutiny of areas such as budgetary control.

A huge responsibility is on the shoulders of Georgian Dream and its leaders. The Party now holds all the leverages of power. It has been given the trust of the Georgian people, and it must now deliver, especially on the economy, and the improvement of the quality of life of the average Georgian. The Party needs to strengthen the mechanism of internal debate and the way it interphases with the rest of society. There are big and tough decisions ahead, and they need to be taken in broad consultation with both the party membership and the rest of society

Within the other political parties, both those that are represented in parliament, and those that are not, a massive rethink has now started. Already some key personalities have announced their plans: the outgoing Chairman of Parliament, David Usupashvili has led an exodus from the Republican Party, but says he will remain on frontline politics; Irakli Alasania and some of his close associates have left the Free Democrats and are taking time out of politics; as is UNM's Mikheil Machavariani.

A new re-alignment amongst the opposition parties is now not only possible but likely. Much will depend on the future of the UNM, and its ability to modernise itself and adapt to the new challenges ahead. Many Georgian politicians and political forces refuse to have anything to do with it until it does so. The Patriots are a new force. We will soon know if the accusations hurled at them that they are a xenophobic, pro-Russian party - which they strenuously deny - are true or not. They can be a disruptive force, but given the size of the government majority this should not be the case

There is also talk of a new political force with centrist and liberal values and this is likely to emerge. On the fringes, some of the last dinosaurs of Georgian politics, such as Nino Burjanadze and Shalva Natelashvili, pledge to struggle on, but their moment has passed.

The new situation also offers a challenge and an opportunity for the political elites in Europe to engage anew with Georgian politics, and contribute to its future development. The big political families of Europe - the European People's Party, the Socialists and Democrats, the Liberals, and others have affiliates in Georgia. They need to up their game, and offer not simply solidarity but also political mentoring to their Georgian partners. The new Georgian Parliament is overwhelmingly pro-western and pro-European. The process of embedding European values within the Georgian political culture is however far from complete. The journey ahead for Georgian politics is bound to be eventful, but the ingredients are there for the breakthrough that Georgia needs, and that its' politicians have promised. Europe should be there, accompanying Georgia on this journey.

source: this commentary was prepared by the political editor of commonspace.eu

photo: Georgian Dream supporters celebrating after the 2016 parliamentary elections (picture courtesy of agenda.ge)

 

 

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Israeli parliament votes to bring back the death penalty, but only for Palestinians

Israeli parliament votes to bring back the death penalty, but only for Palestinians

srael’s parliament approved a bill on Monday that would allow the execution of Palestinians convicted on terror charges for deadly attacks, a move that has been criticized as discriminatory and immediately drew a court challenge. Sixty-two lawmakers, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, voted in favor and 48 against the bill, championed by far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir. There was one abstention and the rest of the lawmakers were not present. Ben Gvir in the run-up to the vote had worn a lapel pin in the shape of a noose, symbolising his support for the legislation. “We made history!!! We promised. We delivered,” he posted on X after the vote. The bill would make the death penalty the default punishment for Palestinians in the Israeli-occupied West Bank found guilty of intentionally carrying out deadly attacks deemed “acts of terrorism” by an Israeli military court. The bill says that the sentence may be reduced to life imprisonment under “special circumstances.” Palestinians in the West Bank are automatically tried in Israeli military courts. Meanwhile, under the bill, in Israeli criminal courts anyone “who intentionally causes the death of a person with the aim of harming an Israeli citizen or resident out of an intention to put an end to the existence of the State of Israel shall be sentenced to death or life imprisonment.” Criminal courts try Israeli nationals, including Palestinian citizens and residents of east Jerusalem. The bill sets the execution method as hanging, adding that it should be carried out within 90 days of the sentencing, with a possible postponement of up to 180 days. - ‘Parallel tracks’ - The bill appears to conflict with Israel’s Basic Laws, which prohibit arbitrary discrimination, and shortly after it was passed, a leading human rights group announced that it had filed a petition with the Supreme Court demanding the legislation’s annulment. “The law creates two parallel tracks, both designed to apply to Palestinians,” the Association for Civil Rights in Israel said in a statement. “In military courts — which have jurisdiction over West Bank Palestinians — it establishes a near-mandatory death sentence,” the rights group said. In civilian courts, the law’s stipulation that defendants must have acted “with the aim of negating the existence” of Israel “structurally excludes Jewish perpetrators,” the group added. The association argued the law should be annulled on both jurisdictional and constitutional grounds. During the debate in parliament, opposition lawmaker and former deputy Mossad director, Ram Ben Barak, expressed outrage at the legislation. “Do you understand what it means that there is one law for Arabs in Judea and Samaria, and a different law for the general public for which the State of Israel is responsible?” he asked fellow parliamentarians, using the Israeli name for the West Bank. “It says that Hamas has defeated us. It has defeated us because we have lost all our values.” - ‘Discriminatory application’ - Lawmaker Limor Son Har-Melech from Ben Gvir’s party, who years ago survived an attack by Palestinian militants in which her husband was killed, urged fellow parliamentarians to approve the bill. “For years, we endured a cruel cycle of terror, imprisonment, release in reckless deals, and the return of these human monsters to murder Jews again ... And today, my friends, this cycle has come full circle.” The Palestinian Authority condemned the law’s adoption, saying that “Israel has no sovereignty over Palestinian land.” “This law once again reveals the nature of the Israeli colonial system, which seeks to legitimize extrajudicial killing under legislative cover,” it added. In February, Amnesty International had urged Israeli lawmakers to reject the legislation, citing its “discriminatory application against Palestinians.” On Sunday, Britain, France, Germany and Italy expressed “deep concern” over the bill, which they said risked “undermining Israel’s commitments with regards to democratic principles.” While the death penalty exists for a small number of crimes in Israel, it has become a de facto abolitionist country — the Nazi Holocaust perpetrator Adolf Eichmann was the last person to be executed in 1962. Israel has occupied the West Bank since 1967 and violence there has soared since Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack on Israel triggered the Gaza war. (read more by clicking the image above).

Popular

Editor's choice
Interview
Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Today, commonspace.eu starts a new regular weekly series. THURSDAY INTERVIEW, conducted by Lauri Nikulainen, will host  persons who are thinkers, opinion shapers, and implementors in their countries and spheres. We start the series with an interview with Murad Muradov, a leading person in Azerbaijan's think tank community. He is also the first co-chair of the Action Committee for a new Armenian-Azerbaijani Dialogue. Last September he made history by being the first Azerbaijani civil society activist to visit Armenia after the 44 day war, and the start of the peace process. Speaking about this visit Murad Muradov said: "My experience was largely positive. My negative expectations luckily didn’t play out. The discussions were respectful, the panel format bringing together experts from Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey was particularly valuable during the NATO Rose-Roth Seminar in Yerevan, and media coverage, while varied in tone, remained largely constructive. Some media outlets though attempted to represent me as more of a government mouthpiece than an independent expert, which was totally misleading.  Overall, I see these initiatives as important steps in rebuilding trust and normalising professional engagement. The fact that soon a larger Azerbaijani civil society visits to Armenia followed, reinforces the sense that this process is moving in the right direction." (click the image to read the interview in full)