Tweet
DOES THE SOUTH CAUCASUS HAVE A CHANCE?
Carnegie Moscow Center
Oct 1 2013
by: Lilia Shevtsova
Tuesday, October 1, 2013
Does the South Caucasus have a chance? I mean a chance for a real, not
fake independence and an open society? This is a natural question when
one starts to deliberate on the forthcoming presidential elections
in Azerbaijan (October 16) and Georgia (October 27). The Armenia
case does not give much ground for optimism. Armenians went through
their presidential elections in February, demonstrating how electoral
authoritarianism works, with its key axiom being "uncertain rules of
the game and a certain outcome." The incumbent Serzh Sargsyan was
the winner-who would have doubted! Several presidential candidates
withdrew, one was shot, and the 60 percent turn-out resembled the
Soviet times. Armenia also proved to be a litmus test indicating the
extent of freedom for maneuver that the South Caucasus has. Yerevan
was immediately punished for its attempt to court the EU: Moscow showed
its displeasure by providing a $4 billion arms supply to Azerbaijan.
Could the October presidential elections in Azerbaijan and Georgia
change the pattern? These elections seem to mean different things for
those two countries. In the first case, there is a continuity of Ilham
Aliev rule that is moving toward sultanism. No need to discuss the
outcome of the forthcoming Azeri elections which is already known. One
could only debate how repressive the same sultan will be during his
new tenure.
In Georgia, one could observe the end of one epoch and the beginning
of another. The era of Saakashvili's modernization "from the top"
and an open pro-Western vector is definitely over. Its greatest legacy
was a peaceful transfer of power. But there is no guarantee that this
legacy will become a new tradition in Georgia. The current balance
of forces and even more importantly, the changes in the Georgian
constitution orchestrated by the current ruling team-that give key
political resources to the prime minister and the government-create
a new power monopoly which could acquire taste for reproducing itself
indefinitely. In any case, one could safely bet that the representative
of the ruling Georgian Dream party Giorgi Margvelashvili will get
the presidential job, that has become more of a decoration. The real
power will remain with Bidzina Ivanishvili.
Will he fulfill his promise to leave politics as soon as Saakashvili
moves out of his presidential palace? I would not bet on that. Anyway,
Georgian politics is hardly moving toward an open society paradigm.
Could Tbilisi and Baku succeed with their foreign policy project-to
have a cozy relationship with both Russia and the West? Recent history
shows that some leaders of the new independent states were pretty
successful in riding two horses in opposite directions. I have in
mind Kuchma, the former leader of Ukraine, Shevardnadze of Georgia,
and Aliev father. Alas, the times of duality and uncertain loyalty are
gone. Firstly, because of the paralysis of the EU that has failed to
give energy to its Eastern Partnership, and the failure of the Obama
America to lead the West. Secondly, because the Putin's Kremlin has
endorsed a new foreign policy strategy-"those who are not with us are
against us" and openly declared the goal of building in the post-Soviet
space a new galaxy, with Russia as its pole and satellites around.
Sadly, the South Caucasus remains the hostage of geography. This
could be anticipated in times when civilization built on values is
retrenching...
http://carnegie.ru/eurasiaoutlook/?fa=53158
From: A. Papazian
Carnegie Moscow Center
Oct 1 2013
by: Lilia Shevtsova
Tuesday, October 1, 2013
Does the South Caucasus have a chance? I mean a chance for a real, not
fake independence and an open society? This is a natural question when
one starts to deliberate on the forthcoming presidential elections
in Azerbaijan (October 16) and Georgia (October 27). The Armenia
case does not give much ground for optimism. Armenians went through
their presidential elections in February, demonstrating how electoral
authoritarianism works, with its key axiom being "uncertain rules of
the game and a certain outcome." The incumbent Serzh Sargsyan was
the winner-who would have doubted! Several presidential candidates
withdrew, one was shot, and the 60 percent turn-out resembled the
Soviet times. Armenia also proved to be a litmus test indicating the
extent of freedom for maneuver that the South Caucasus has. Yerevan
was immediately punished for its attempt to court the EU: Moscow showed
its displeasure by providing a $4 billion arms supply to Azerbaijan.
Could the October presidential elections in Azerbaijan and Georgia
change the pattern? These elections seem to mean different things for
those two countries. In the first case, there is a continuity of Ilham
Aliev rule that is moving toward sultanism. No need to discuss the
outcome of the forthcoming Azeri elections which is already known. One
could only debate how repressive the same sultan will be during his
new tenure.
In Georgia, one could observe the end of one epoch and the beginning
of another. The era of Saakashvili's modernization "from the top"
and an open pro-Western vector is definitely over. Its greatest legacy
was a peaceful transfer of power. But there is no guarantee that this
legacy will become a new tradition in Georgia. The current balance
of forces and even more importantly, the changes in the Georgian
constitution orchestrated by the current ruling team-that give key
political resources to the prime minister and the government-create
a new power monopoly which could acquire taste for reproducing itself
indefinitely. In any case, one could safely bet that the representative
of the ruling Georgian Dream party Giorgi Margvelashvili will get
the presidential job, that has become more of a decoration. The real
power will remain with Bidzina Ivanishvili.
Will he fulfill his promise to leave politics as soon as Saakashvili
moves out of his presidential palace? I would not bet on that. Anyway,
Georgian politics is hardly moving toward an open society paradigm.
Could Tbilisi and Baku succeed with their foreign policy project-to
have a cozy relationship with both Russia and the West? Recent history
shows that some leaders of the new independent states were pretty
successful in riding two horses in opposite directions. I have in
mind Kuchma, the former leader of Ukraine, Shevardnadze of Georgia,
and Aliev father. Alas, the times of duality and uncertain loyalty are
gone. Firstly, because of the paralysis of the EU that has failed to
give energy to its Eastern Partnership, and the failure of the Obama
America to lead the West. Secondly, because the Putin's Kremlin has
endorsed a new foreign policy strategy-"those who are not with us are
against us" and openly declared the goal of building in the post-Soviet
space a new galaxy, with Russia as its pole and satellites around.
Sadly, the South Caucasus remains the hostage of geography. This
could be anticipated in times when civilization built on values is
retrenching...
http://carnegie.ru/eurasiaoutlook/?fa=53158
From: A. Papazian