Abstract

The political events that took place at the end of 2003 in Georgia, in 2004 in Ukraine and in 2005 in Kyrgyzstan are popularly called the Rose, Orange and Tulip Revolution or collectively: the Colour Revolutions in the post-Soviet space. At first glance the term “revolution” may seem appropriate. The Colour Revolutions have resulted in the regime change in all the three states. However, from a decade-long perspective one may notice that the revolutionary changes in the political systems of Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan did not actually take place. The post-revolutionary reality: the Russian-Georgian war and criminal charges against the revolutionary Georgian President Micheil Saakashvili, theinfamous ending to the political career of the revolutionary leader Victor Yushchenko just four year after the Orange Revolution and the spectacular collapse of the Victor Yanukovych regime, which led to a hybrid warfare with Russia, or Kyrgyzstan’s permanent political instability following the revolutionary events of 2005 require yet another insight into what has happened in Tbilisi, Kiev, and Bishkek. Without an in-depth analysis of the events, it is impossible to understand the fundamental social and political dynamics of the ongoing and future changes in Eastern Europe, the Caucasus or Central Asia. The re-evaluation of the Colour Revolutions is not only of historical importance, though. It is also a universal lesson concerning the most important challenge that all the democratic social movements active in the authoritarian or post-authoritarian states have to face: how to manage large-scale civil disobedience protests of a disappointed society while the ruling governments do not follow democratic rules and the international community does not fully comprehend the significance of the ongoing changes.

Highlights

  • The Rose Revolution in Georgia, the Orange Revolution in Ukraine and the Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan allowed many political scientists to form a hypothesis of another democratic wave spreading in the former Eastern Bloc, this time in the post-Soviet space [Avioutskii, 2006, p. 213]

  • The revolutionary interpretation was useful both for the Western-like supporters of the changes, the pro-Russian antagonists of the regime reshuffle and for the new political elites as well

  • The political changes in Georgia, Ukraine, and Kyrgyzstan uncover the still active geopolitical and economic processes which strongly influence the reality of the post-Soviet space while being rarely spotted by the foreign observers [Shevcov, 2005]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The Rose Revolution in Georgia, the Orange Revolution in Ukraine and the Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan allowed many political scientists to form a hypothesis of another democratic wave spreading in the former Eastern Bloc, this time in the post-Soviet space [Avioutskii, 2006, p. 213]. As the Colour Revolutions were driven by genuine civil disobedience, which never enjoyed a proper democratic or even more general political representation, their analysis provides a universal lesson concerning the most important challenge that all the democratic social movements active in the authoritarian or post-authoritarian states have to face: how to manage large-scale civil disobedience protests of a disappointed society while the ruling governments do not follow democratic rules and the international community does not fully comprehend the content of the ongoing changes. One may state that Georgia in 2003, Ukraine in 2004, and Kyrgyzstan in 2005 set the perfect examples of the continuation of this trend According to his observations, the ideal of a democratic transformation, when the democratic breakthrough is followed by a democratic consolidation of the political regime did not happen in reality. The development of new political systems was based on a combination of recalling the individual political traditions of a given state, copying the Western-like institutional solutions (in particular as far as the compatibility of the local economic system with the international free market reality was concerned) and pragmatically adapting the political practice of a communist state

For comparison of opinions
More on these aspects
More on the concept of the New Great Game see
Summary
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call