Tweet
ANALYST SPEAKS OF RECENT POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS
Nino Khutsidze, Civil Georgia
Q&A with Ghia Nodia
Civil Georgia, Georgia
March 16 2006
"Q&A "
Recent multiple attacks of the opposition over various problems have
already turned into a headache for the Georgian authorities.
Head of the think-tank Caucasian Institute for Peace, Democracy and
Development (CIPDD) Ghia Nodia said in an interview to Civil Georgia
on March 15 that Sandro Girgvliani's high-profile murder case has
triggered "the most serious crisis" for the authorities since 2004
South Ossetian developments, when clashes erupted between the Georgian
troops and S.Ossetian militias.
Q.: What kind of conclusions can be made about the government's
policies while analyzing situation around Sandro Girgvliani murder
case, cash register protests, as well as developments in Akhalkalaki?
A.: Essentially, those problems, which have triggered protest rallies,
are radically different from each other.
Necessity of protest rallies against cash registers can be a matter of
dispute. On the one hand, the authorities are right while demanding
the use of cash registers everywhere in order to keep control on
all types of economic activities. On the other hand, the interests
of those people [outdoor market sellers] should also be taken into
consideration. This is a specific economic issue, which is a matter
of negotiations and will probably be solved. I do not think that this
is a strategic problem for the present authorities.
As for Girgvliani's murder case and the Akhalkalaki incident, here
we deal with serious strategic problems the government is facing.
Q.: At first regarding the Girgvliani murder case; what kind of
consequences it might have for the government?
A.: Perhaps, Girgvliani's murder case has turned into the most serious
crisis for authorities since the 2004 developments in South Ossetia,
because it has demonstrated that a certain part of the authorities, in
particular the law-enforcement agencies, have a syndrome of impunity.
They [the law enforcer officials] think that they are doing a good
job and those people, who criticize them, are bad people. At the same
time, they believe that their opponents are weak enough to take their
position into consideration.
All these have created a syndrome of self-assurance, a syndrome "I
can do everything". This trend has been unveiled in this particular
situation [high-profile murder case].
Of course, the authorities' reaction was inadequate. For a long time
they stood against assuming the responsibility for Girgvliani's murder.
Frankly speaking, if such a scandal had happened in a country with a
strong democracy, of course, it would have resulted into the Interior
Minister's resignation.
However, in Georgia I personally find it difficult to join the demands
over the Minister's resignation, because Vano Merabishvili [Interior
Minister] is one of the most effective and strongest ministers.
These authorities suffer with lack of highly-qualified cadre.
Therefore, I think that Minister Merabishvili's resignation would be
a loss not only for the government, but also for the reforms.
Implementation of reforms in the law enforcement system is of key
importance for Georgia and Merabishvili really achieved certain success
in this regard. But, of course, someone else might succeed as well.
Of course Girgvliani's murder case discredits the government, on the
one hand, and damages entire process [of reforms], on the other. I
know, that Data Akhalaia [suspended chief of Interior Ministry's
Department for Constitutional Security] among the favorites of the
authorities. It is a positive and important step that even this
employee was dismissed.
Q.: What can be the situation to the current situation, when on the
one hand the ruling party and authorities strongly back Merabishvili
and on the other hand pressure increases with the demand to sack him?
A.: It seems that the authorities are examining the situation, whether
the steps already undertaken by them are enough to defuse political
tensions or not.
Of course, it was a mistake that the authorities dragged out the
process and did not sack [Data] Akhalaia, [Vasil] Sanodze [suspended
chief of the general inspection of the Interior Ministry, who are
allegedly linked to the Girgvliani murder case]. It was a mistake.
I do not rule out that the authorities will be forced to dismiss
even Merabishvili.
Q.: And now what about developments in Akhalkalaki?
A.: The local ethnic Armenian population of Akhalkalaki expresses
discontent for a long time. Of course, there we have an external
irritant in a form of the [Russian military] base. It seems that there
are different opinions in Russia, whether to withdraw this base or
to suspend its pullout. Hence, inspiration of certain developments
from Russia can be regarded as quite natural.
On the other hand, the local Armenian population has great concerns.
They fear that the Tbilisi wants to drastically change a demographic
situation there by populating ethnic Georgians in the region. They
live with this fear and each step, which weakens their domination,
triggers a painful reaction.
The authorities want to conduct the proceedings in courts in the state,
Georgian language and appointed there a Georgian judge, as there is
no local judge with a good command of the Georgian language.
But in this case the authorities miscalculated while taking this
decision.
On the one hand it is absolutely clear that the state language should
perform its function on the entire territory of the country, but
obviously it is practically impossible to implement it in Akhalkalaki
within at least next 5 years. The authorities should develop a long-tem
action plan so that the Georgian language is gradually established
in the state structures and simultaneously they should introduce a
short-term decision, which can be a compromise and a temporary measure.
Q.: Recently opponents have intensified criticism of the authorities
for saying not to a dialogue as a mean of solving problems. What is
your opinion about it?
A.: This is one more strategic mistake of the authorities. In
2004 they tried several times to launch a dialogue with the civil
society organizations, but when they saw that this dialogue was often
unpleasant and even critical towards them, they decided to get in
touch directly with the people.
The only possible form of communication with the people is a monologue
and our authorities are very talented in this regard.
Mikheil Saakashvili is a very talented politician and works
successfully with the population, while the work with the active part
of our society, with separate target groups is completely neglected.
The authorities fail to understand that in order to establish a public
opinion, it is necessary to actively work with the civil society
groups, that requires patience and listening to different opinions.
We have rather pragmatic government. They compromise only when they
see the force, which needs to be taken into consideration.
Q.: Do you think that the opposition is a force of this kind?
A.: The authorities do not perceive the opposition as a serous force,
however when they [the authorities] see that over certain issues the
opposition can mobilize a large part of the society, they compromise.
For example resignation of Akhalaia and Sanodze show that the
government can compromise. In case of a resolution on Russian
peacekeepers in South Ossetia, the authorities retreated [from their
initial hard-line stance] as a result of pressure from the United
States and Europe. So it demonstrates that the authorities, when
they deem it necessary, are flexible and even can compromise. But
this kind of a compromise is not triggered by long-term calculations.
Q.: Several opposition parties argue that the opposition is often
forced to react on the authorities' "cheap PR campaigns" with "cheap"
and "populist" slogans that finally causes an extreme lowering of
the level of political debates. What can you say about it?
A.: The quality of political debates was always low in Georgia. In
my opinion, this is caused by lack of [political] experience. One
more reason is lack of those persons, who can speak of politics.
They [authorities] think that exchange of insults during political
debates is very profitable for raising their rating; they hope that
such a behavior will help them gain a victory. A part of politicians
even misunderstand the Georgian society, thinking that people are in
favor of this kind of political debates.
Q.: Recently, the authorities started to indicate that certain
external forces are trying to influence on development in Georgia
through interfering in the domestic politics. Do you think there are
real grounds for these concerns?
A.: Recently Russia makes systemic attempts to stir up aggravation
of situation in Georgia. This is also linked with Georgia's real
prospects to join NATO. Moreover, the present authorities of Georgia
are emotionally unacceptable for Russia. Russia believes that the
Georgian authorities are incompetent, while the President [Mikheil
Saakashvili] is an unsteady person, who will sooner or later end in
failure that will trigger a serious crisis and change of government
through revolution.
Therefore, Russia tries to trigger these kinds of developments, on the
one hand, and to ensure that more acceptable people come to power after
the new revolution, on the other. This plan of Russia is quite obvious.
However, this does not mean, that all forces acting in Georgia are
inspired by Russia. Of course, except of [Georgia's ex-security
chief] Igor Giorgadze's supporters. I also do not rule out that
Russia not only tries, but also can directly influence developments
in Akhalkalaki..
But, on the other hand Russia lacks leverages to directly influence
on developments in Georgia, maybe except of Akhalkalaki and of course
breakaway regions.
Nino Khutsidze, Civil Georgia
Q&A with Ghia Nodia
Civil Georgia, Georgia
March 16 2006
"Q&A "
Recent multiple attacks of the opposition over various problems have
already turned into a headache for the Georgian authorities.
Head of the think-tank Caucasian Institute for Peace, Democracy and
Development (CIPDD) Ghia Nodia said in an interview to Civil Georgia
on March 15 that Sandro Girgvliani's high-profile murder case has
triggered "the most serious crisis" for the authorities since 2004
South Ossetian developments, when clashes erupted between the Georgian
troops and S.Ossetian militias.
Q.: What kind of conclusions can be made about the government's
policies while analyzing situation around Sandro Girgvliani murder
case, cash register protests, as well as developments in Akhalkalaki?
A.: Essentially, those problems, which have triggered protest rallies,
are radically different from each other.
Necessity of protest rallies against cash registers can be a matter of
dispute. On the one hand, the authorities are right while demanding
the use of cash registers everywhere in order to keep control on
all types of economic activities. On the other hand, the interests
of those people [outdoor market sellers] should also be taken into
consideration. This is a specific economic issue, which is a matter
of negotiations and will probably be solved. I do not think that this
is a strategic problem for the present authorities.
As for Girgvliani's murder case and the Akhalkalaki incident, here
we deal with serious strategic problems the government is facing.
Q.: At first regarding the Girgvliani murder case; what kind of
consequences it might have for the government?
A.: Perhaps, Girgvliani's murder case has turned into the most serious
crisis for authorities since the 2004 developments in South Ossetia,
because it has demonstrated that a certain part of the authorities, in
particular the law-enforcement agencies, have a syndrome of impunity.
They [the law enforcer officials] think that they are doing a good
job and those people, who criticize them, are bad people. At the same
time, they believe that their opponents are weak enough to take their
position into consideration.
All these have created a syndrome of self-assurance, a syndrome "I
can do everything". This trend has been unveiled in this particular
situation [high-profile murder case].
Of course, the authorities' reaction was inadequate. For a long time
they stood against assuming the responsibility for Girgvliani's murder.
Frankly speaking, if such a scandal had happened in a country with a
strong democracy, of course, it would have resulted into the Interior
Minister's resignation.
However, in Georgia I personally find it difficult to join the demands
over the Minister's resignation, because Vano Merabishvili [Interior
Minister] is one of the most effective and strongest ministers.
These authorities suffer with lack of highly-qualified cadre.
Therefore, I think that Minister Merabishvili's resignation would be
a loss not only for the government, but also for the reforms.
Implementation of reforms in the law enforcement system is of key
importance for Georgia and Merabishvili really achieved certain success
in this regard. But, of course, someone else might succeed as well.
Of course Girgvliani's murder case discredits the government, on the
one hand, and damages entire process [of reforms], on the other. I
know, that Data Akhalaia [suspended chief of Interior Ministry's
Department for Constitutional Security] among the favorites of the
authorities. It is a positive and important step that even this
employee was dismissed.
Q.: What can be the situation to the current situation, when on the
one hand the ruling party and authorities strongly back Merabishvili
and on the other hand pressure increases with the demand to sack him?
A.: It seems that the authorities are examining the situation, whether
the steps already undertaken by them are enough to defuse political
tensions or not.
Of course, it was a mistake that the authorities dragged out the
process and did not sack [Data] Akhalaia, [Vasil] Sanodze [suspended
chief of the general inspection of the Interior Ministry, who are
allegedly linked to the Girgvliani murder case]. It was a mistake.
I do not rule out that the authorities will be forced to dismiss
even Merabishvili.
Q.: And now what about developments in Akhalkalaki?
A.: The local ethnic Armenian population of Akhalkalaki expresses
discontent for a long time. Of course, there we have an external
irritant in a form of the [Russian military] base. It seems that there
are different opinions in Russia, whether to withdraw this base or
to suspend its pullout. Hence, inspiration of certain developments
from Russia can be regarded as quite natural.
On the other hand, the local Armenian population has great concerns.
They fear that the Tbilisi wants to drastically change a demographic
situation there by populating ethnic Georgians in the region. They
live with this fear and each step, which weakens their domination,
triggers a painful reaction.
The authorities want to conduct the proceedings in courts in the state,
Georgian language and appointed there a Georgian judge, as there is
no local judge with a good command of the Georgian language.
But in this case the authorities miscalculated while taking this
decision.
On the one hand it is absolutely clear that the state language should
perform its function on the entire territory of the country, but
obviously it is practically impossible to implement it in Akhalkalaki
within at least next 5 years. The authorities should develop a long-tem
action plan so that the Georgian language is gradually established
in the state structures and simultaneously they should introduce a
short-term decision, which can be a compromise and a temporary measure.
Q.: Recently opponents have intensified criticism of the authorities
for saying not to a dialogue as a mean of solving problems. What is
your opinion about it?
A.: This is one more strategic mistake of the authorities. In
2004 they tried several times to launch a dialogue with the civil
society organizations, but when they saw that this dialogue was often
unpleasant and even critical towards them, they decided to get in
touch directly with the people.
The only possible form of communication with the people is a monologue
and our authorities are very talented in this regard.
Mikheil Saakashvili is a very talented politician and works
successfully with the population, while the work with the active part
of our society, with separate target groups is completely neglected.
The authorities fail to understand that in order to establish a public
opinion, it is necessary to actively work with the civil society
groups, that requires patience and listening to different opinions.
We have rather pragmatic government. They compromise only when they
see the force, which needs to be taken into consideration.
Q.: Do you think that the opposition is a force of this kind?
A.: The authorities do not perceive the opposition as a serous force,
however when they [the authorities] see that over certain issues the
opposition can mobilize a large part of the society, they compromise.
For example resignation of Akhalaia and Sanodze show that the
government can compromise. In case of a resolution on Russian
peacekeepers in South Ossetia, the authorities retreated [from their
initial hard-line stance] as a result of pressure from the United
States and Europe. So it demonstrates that the authorities, when
they deem it necessary, are flexible and even can compromise. But
this kind of a compromise is not triggered by long-term calculations.
Q.: Several opposition parties argue that the opposition is often
forced to react on the authorities' "cheap PR campaigns" with "cheap"
and "populist" slogans that finally causes an extreme lowering of
the level of political debates. What can you say about it?
A.: The quality of political debates was always low in Georgia. In
my opinion, this is caused by lack of [political] experience. One
more reason is lack of those persons, who can speak of politics.
They [authorities] think that exchange of insults during political
debates is very profitable for raising their rating; they hope that
such a behavior will help them gain a victory. A part of politicians
even misunderstand the Georgian society, thinking that people are in
favor of this kind of political debates.
Q.: Recently, the authorities started to indicate that certain
external forces are trying to influence on development in Georgia
through interfering in the domestic politics. Do you think there are
real grounds for these concerns?
A.: Recently Russia makes systemic attempts to stir up aggravation
of situation in Georgia. This is also linked with Georgia's real
prospects to join NATO. Moreover, the present authorities of Georgia
are emotionally unacceptable for Russia. Russia believes that the
Georgian authorities are incompetent, while the President [Mikheil
Saakashvili] is an unsteady person, who will sooner or later end in
failure that will trigger a serious crisis and change of government
through revolution.
Therefore, Russia tries to trigger these kinds of developments, on the
one hand, and to ensure that more acceptable people come to power after
the new revolution, on the other. This plan of Russia is quite obvious.
However, this does not mean, that all forces acting in Georgia are
inspired by Russia. Of course, except of [Georgia's ex-security
chief] Igor Giorgadze's supporters. I also do not rule out that
Russia not only tries, but also can directly influence developments
in Akhalkalaki..
But, on the other hand Russia lacks leverages to directly influence
on developments in Georgia, maybe except of Akhalkalaki and of course
breakaway regions.