Georgia’s Pro-EU Opposition

Protests Challenge Recent Election Outcome

Citizens and Georgian Dream Party supporters, carrying flags of Georgia and the Georgian Dream Party, attend the Georgian Dream Party’s election rally. Photo credit: Anadolu

The conservative Georgian Dream party won 54% of the parliamentary vote in the 26 October election. The outcome has since been attacked by opposition parties, President Salome Zourabichvili, as well as by the United States and the European Union. The primary opposition parties, which trailed significantly behind with a maximum of 11% of the vote, rejected the results, claiming the election was manipulated.

President Zourabichvili has claimed the election had been “stolen” and alleged “Russian interference,” but failed to provide substantive evidence for her accusations. She rallied pro-EU groups to protest the outcome, and on 28 October, demonstrators gathered outside the parliament in Tbilisi. Some demanded a re-run of the election, although it remains to be seen how the situation will evolve in the coming days.

On election day, the electoral commission and international observers noted cases of double voting and similar events, but apparently found no evidence to support allegations of full fledged rigging. Even Zourabichvili conceded it would be next to impossible to prove external involvement.

Yet, both the US and EU were swift to support Zourabichvili’s claims. Some EU member states announced they would review some of their ongoing support grants and agreements with Georgia, framing the election result as part of what they perceive to be an authoritarian shift under the last Georgian Dream administration. On the other hand, some international observers appealed to the international community and asserted that it is crucial to respect the will expressed by the Georgian people despite disliking the results.

Threats to West’s influence

Policy-wise, Georgian Dream has pursued neoliberal, pro-Western policies, as well as EU membership. More recently, however, the government began looking into building more diverse political and economic relations, notably with China and Russia. This change, according to historian Bryan Gigantino, threatens to somewhat reduce NATO countries’ influence on Georgia—a scenario these countries are eager to avoid.

Recent reforms, including notably a law on foreign-funded organizations, have been taken as signs of this shifting allegiance. Similar legislation has been used in other countries to undermine progressive movements, yet in Georgia, the law seems to impact first and foremost NGOs often tied to Western neoliberal agendas, acting as advocates, even lobbyists, for the US and the EU. In this context, some analysts have argued, more transparency regarding liberal NGO’s work could be a positive breakthrough. However, it is unlikely that the current law is going to achieve that, especially if it is not accompanied by a wider shift in policies.

As post-electoral tensions continue, it remains uncertain what the next days will bring. If the US and EU continue supporting claims made by the opposition, this could push the country to turn further to regional and non-Western partners, with a chance to build a position more independent in relation to the US and its European allies.