Georgian Authorities Research Articles

Վրաստանի աշխարհաքաղաքական տեղաշարժը. ներքին և արտաքին գործոններ / Georgia's Geopolitical Shift: Internal and External Factors

In the post-Soviet space, the South Caucasus has always stood out as the most conflict-ridden region. Three powerful neighbors of the region - Russia, Turkey and Iran - constantly monitor developments here, seeking to increase the dose of influence. As a result of the change of power, in 2012, the Georgian Dream party came to power in Georgia, and anti-Russian sentiments in the country began to decline. Despite all the pressure, the Georgian authorities did not join the sanctions imposed by the United States and the European Union against Russia. The «Georgian Dream» party put forward a legislative initiative on foreign agents in 2023, after which it faced mass protests. As a result, the bill was withdrawn, but already in the next year, 2024, the majority of members of parliament again introduced the bill and on May 28th it was adopted. In Georgia, in 2023-2024, domestic political processes are taking place around this law, including the issue of changing the foreign policy vector.

Общественно-политическое и правовое положение осетин Южной Осетии как подданных Грузинского государства (XII–XVIII вв.)

The article examines a little-known historical and legal problem related to the citizenship of the South Ossetians of the Georgian feudal monarchy and Georgian kings. The little-researched problem raised seems not only relevant from the point of view of Russian history and jurisprudence, but also interesting from the socio-political position of today, when relations between Georgians and Ossetians have significantly deteriorated not only because of the genocide organized by the Georgian authorities against South Ossetians in 1920, 1989-1992 and 2008, but also the complete separation of South Ossetia from genocidal Georgia. The article is debatable, but the facts presented here seem convincing and reasoned.

Social processes in Modern Georgia: Is There any Potential for the Development of Russian-Georgian Cooperation?

The authors of the article, participants in the discussion “Georgia’s Communication Regime: Development Trends,” presented their views on social processes in modern Georgia. It is substantiated that the spiritual ties between Georgians and Russians are based on Orthodoxy and the mutual assistance that Russians and Georgians have provided to each other for centuries. The historical and cultural origins of Russian-Georgian relations are examined. The common historical past contributed to the interpenetration of cultures and traditions. However, under the influence of Western ideologies, a large part of modern Georgian youth has formed a different worldview. The authors of the article propose how to overcome the ideological gap through the implementation of cultural projects. Promising areas of cooperation between Russia and Georgia are considered in the absence of diplomatic relations and the anti-Russian position of the Georgian authorities. Youth communications and cooperation in the economy (primarily in agriculture) are also promising. The following risks of cooperation are considered: the unresolved issue of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, fluctuations of the political elites of Georgia, the chaotic nature of the Georgian economy, the role of anti-Russian position of Russians in Georgia, insufficient work with Georgian society on the Russian side and the need to activate the potential of the Georgian diaspora in Russia.The article was prepared based on the materials of the international round table “Georgia’s Communication Regime: Development Trends” (conducted by the National Research Institute for the Communications Development in December 2023).

Government of Georgia’s Public Rhetoric

Russian propaganda exploits the idea of freedom of information to promote disinformation. It aims to sow confusion using conspiracy theories and ensure there is not a single issue for society to consolidate. As a well-tested approach, this malicious practice of “brainwashing” can be applied in across countries or circumstances. Observation of statements made by Georgian authorities leads to the hypothesis that methods of Russian propaganda have been embedded in Georgia’s ruling Georgian Dream party’s rhetoric. Therefore, the focus of this paper is to study features of the Georgian government’s public communication through the prism of propaganda and test whether its rhetoric is analogous to Russia’s propaganda toolkit. The study shows apparent parallels between these two phenomena. The Georgian government’s rhetoric implies vociferous accusations against people being critical of the authorities, cultivating groundless fears among the population and shaping a negative agenda.

Negotiating de facto borders: the case of social services provision in Abkhazia and Transnistria

ABSTRACT Following the dissolution of the USSR, the restructuring of borders reshaped a space previously characterized by territorial continuity. While many of these borders gained international recognition, others, like those of Abkhazia and Transnistria, remained de facto, lacking acknowledgement from most sovereign states. Despite scholarly recognition that de facto statehood is detrimental to social welfare, the impact of contested borders on welfare provisions remains underexplored. this article analyses how this multiplication of contested (in)tangible borders impacts the activities of Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) as crucial actors in the provision of social services in Transnistria and Abkhazia. The complex geopolitical dynamics of these borderlands necessitate an examination of border-making practices, considering the interplay between Transnistrian and Abkhazian CSOs, Moldovan and Georgian authorities, and Transnistrian and Abkhazian authorities. International organizations, donors, and Russia also play substantial roles. The analysis reveals that each actor controls critical resources such as access, funding, know-how, and symbolic capital. Consequently, CSOs exhibit agency both locally, when interacting with de facto authorities, and at regional and international levels when engaging with external donors and organizations.

О начальном этапе грузино-осетинского конфликта

Introduction. The article examines the background, causes and initial stage of the Georgian-Ossetian conflict, tied to the aggressive and nationalistic policy of the authorities of the Georgian Democratic Republic during the period of independence - 1918-1921. Materials and Methods. The analysis was carried out on f Russian, Georgian and Ossetian sources of various formats, including those of administrative nature and personal origin. First of all, it is necessary to highlight the memoirs and speeches of major political and military figures of the era in question N. Zhordania, V. Dzhugeli, G. Kvinitadze, F. Makharadze. By applying historicalcomparative and retrospective methods of scientific research, it was possible to construct a complete picture of what happened during the period under review. Analysis. The Georgian dictatorship quickly led to an increase in anti-Georgian sentiment among the residents of South Ossetia and subsequent protests against Georgian authorities. While the latter classified the Ossetians as traitors and organized a punitive expedition of unprecedented cruelty and scope in 1920. The article tracks in detail the progress of the operation, the battles with the Ossetian rebels, and lists the repressive actions of the Georgian armed forces on the territory of South Ossetia, in particular, the People's Guard units led by the notorious leader Valiko Dzhugeli, who did not even interfere with the demonstrative killings of local Ossetians. Therefore, this expedition can be clearly assessed as ethnic cleansing, during which almost the entire population of South Ossetia was forced to flee through the mountains to the territory of North Ossetia. Results. It was the tragic events of 1920 that became the basic stage in the periodization of the Georgian-Ossetian conflict, echoes of which we can see in the 21st century.

De-Europeanization as discursive disengagement: has Georgia “got lost” on its way to European integration?

ABSTRACT This article looks at de-Europeanization as a progressive disengagement between domestic authorities and EU actors manifested through their discourses. The authors view discursive disengagement as consisting of two major aspects: Discursive opposition between domestic authorities and the EU reflected in their conflicting statements and the intensification of this discursive opposition, whereby the domestic authorities’ discourses shift from defensive to offensive ones. The authors trace the respective developments based on the case of Georgia, looking at the discursive interaction between domestic and EU actors in the Georgian TV media from July 2021 to June 2022. The research has revealed Georgian authorities’ discursive opposition to EU actors behind the façade of seemingly pro-European statements. After Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, this discursive opposition has escalated and become offensive. The authors use quantitative content analysis to map actor-discourse networks, as well as critical discourse analysis to reveal deeper layers of de-Europeanization discourse.

Изнанка скандальных законопроектов: выбор Грузии / The background of controversial bills: Georgia’s option

In February-March of 2023 earth-shaking events took place in Georgia. The authorities tried to pass the wellk-nown bills on agents of foreign influence, which were opposed by the entire West, as well as the forces, organizations and public circles influenced by the West in Georgia. The fight against the bills, which was really a storm in a teacup, was only the tip of the iceberg. In fact, it was an attempt to stage a coup in Georgia, bring Western puppet forces to power and open a second front against Russia, an adventure that was foiled thanks to the measured steps of the Georgian authorities.

AGGRESSION AGAINST GEORGIA AND UKRAINE: CONTEXT AND PARALLELS

AGGRESSION AGAINST GEORGIA AND UKRAINE: CONTEXT AND PARALLELS

The Soldier and Education in the First Republic of Georgia: 1918-1921

The establishment of the capitalist system contributed to the formation of new social classes: the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. The removal of serfdom significantly changed the political, social, and economic system. New demands and cha-llenges have emerged in the new environment. Not only the proletariat and the bourgeoisie but the whole society underwent fundamental transformations. Especially since the national liberation movement in Europe in the XIX century was quite strong, which led to the formation of nation-states. Georgia perceived these changes differ-rently. As an occupied part of the Russian Empire, it was naturally influenced by the ongoing events there. While the process of nation-building was underway in Europe, Georgia was looking for new ways to fight for freedom. The Georgian cultural and political elite, via raising public awareness, tried to create a common Georgian space and involve all social strata equally in the struggle for independence. This process was in progress from 1918-1921. Therefore, it is important to raise a point and analyze how the process of the national movement was manifested. The period of the First Republic is one of the most difficult periods in the history of Georgia. On the one hand, the ideological forms of the national movement were being formed and developed, the primary expression of which was an educated society, aware of the history of its own country. As it has been already mentioned, the process of the national-liberation movement starting from the 50s of the XIX century was aimed at the formation of an educated and conscious society imbued with the national idea. The logical continuation of these processes was the current events of 1918-1921. Independent Georgia took the path to the West and its goal was the Europeanization of various spheres of the country, and among them, a special place was occupied by the education factor. The starting point of the Georgian authorities was to transform the Georgian army, not only from a military-professional point of view but also they aimed to raise their educational and national consciousness. Before that, i.e. until 1918, such a thing was unimaginable for the Georgian soldiers, who were the main backbone of the Russian imperial court and the executor of its will. The national government, in turn, focused primarily on strengthening the soldier's national self-awareness

Зовнішня політика Грузії в умовах нового балансу сил на Південному Кавказі після закінчення Другої Карабаської війни

The article examines the specific features of Georgia’s foreign policy in the South Caucasus. The key interests that shape the foreign policy orientation of Tbilisi (European and Euro-Atlantic integration; liberation of the occupied territories; use of the state’s transit potential) are determined. The article analyzes the position of Georgia in relation to the current regional initiatives, which form the agenda of the South Caucasian politics after the events of the Second Karabakh War. The readiness of Georgia to play the role of a mediator in the peace process between Armenia and Azerbaijan is emphasized – however, at the same time, the limited potential of Tbilisi in this matter is pointed out. Concerns from some of the Georgian experts about the prospects of unblocking the Armenian-Azerbaijani border are describes, as such scenario may deprive Georgia of its exclusive role as a transit hub. The impossibility of Georgia’s participation in the work of multilateral regional formats, which include the Russian Federation, is explained. Also, the influence of the internal political factor on the foreign policy of Tbilisi is considered in the article. Aggravation of the confrontation between the authorities (“Georgian Dream”) and the opposition (“United National Movement”) exacerbates the situation, threatening the interests of the state. At the same time, the critical approach of certain Western experts to assessing the activities of the Georgian authorities is noted, as they see signs of a deliberate undermining of the pro-Western course from Tbilisi. These fears do not affect the immutability of European and EuroAtlantic integration, which is being implemented by Georgia. No alternative for such course is determined by public opinion, which demonstrates an extremely high level of support for the idea of membership in the EU and NATO. However, a clear pro-Western orientation at the same time limits Tbilisi’s regional potential. In fact, it is difficult for Georgia to find its place in the region in the context of an intensified competition for influence between the Russian Federation and Turkey, as well as under the conditions of decrease of Western influence in the South Caucasus

Territorial Conflict, Domestic Crisis, and the Covid-19 Pandemic in the South Caucasus. Explaining Variegated EU Responses.

Territorial Conflict, Domestic Crisis, and the Covid-19 Pandemic in the South Caucasus. Explaining Variegated EU Responses.

Georgia v. Russia (II)

On January 21, 2021, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or Court) issued its judgment in the interstate case of Georgia v. Russia (II). Georgia complained that Russia committed systemic human rights violations in the course of the 2008 war in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Both of these regions are de jure parts of Georgia, but they have not been effectively governed by central Georgian authorities since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. During the night of August 7–8, 2008, Georgian artillery attacked Tskhinvali (the administrative capital of South Ossetia). Russian forces entered South Ossetia and Abkhazia the next day. Russian and Georgian troops engaged in hostilities for five days, before agreeing a ceasefire on August 12, 2008. Since then, a significant military contingent of Russian troops has remained in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The Georgian authorities complained of systemic violations of European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) Articles 2 (right to life), 3 (prohibition of torture), 5 (right to liberty), and 8 (right to privacy), ECHR Protocol 1 Articles 1 (right to private property) and 2 (right to education), and ECHR Protocol 4 Article 2 (Freedom of movement).

Իսլամական արմատականությունը Վրաստանում. նոր միտումներ և մարտահրավերներ

The purpose of the paper is to study the main features and tendencies of Salafi Islam and Islamic radicalism in Georgia, to identify the threats and challenges facing Georgia as well as the region. The objectives of the article are to discuss the internal and external motives and impulses, preconditions and consequences of the spread of Sunni radical Islam in the Muslim communities of Georgia, the issues of their integration into the Georgian society, the causes and consequences of the propaganda of Salafism and Sunni Islamic radicalismamong the ethnic Shi’i Azerbaijanis of Georgia. The paper was written on the basis of monitoring of the international press and materials on this topic, an extensive study of professional literature on various sides of Radical Islam in Georgia. In the course of the study, the authors concluded that the spreed of Salafism and radical Islam in Georgia poses a serious threat not only to Georgia, but also to the security environment of the region. The Georgian authorities are losing real control over Adjara, gradually "handing it over" to Turkey. Therefore, a "platform of radicalism" can be formed here with the possibility of direct penetration into the surrounding areas. Adjara, which is actively used by various Turkish Islamic organizations, may also become a "hotbed of terrorism" against Armenia in the event of certain developments. The spread of radical Sunni Islamic ideology in the Azerbaijani-populated regions of Georgia is leading to the retreat of traditional Shi’i Islam. This phenomenon, of course, affects not only the religious map of the region, but also changes the existing geopolitical balance of power. Turkey, using its Islamic tools, is consistently pushing Iran out of Georgia's ethnic Azerbaijani-populated regions, squeezing the circle of Islamic radicalism around Armenia.

Models of Epidemiological Security Management in the Spread of the SARS-CoV-2 Virus.

The task of managing epidemic security during COVID-19 is considered. The spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus without and with vaccination is described by mathematical and computer models built on the basis of the epidemic control protocol adopted by the Georgian authorities. The mathematical model of the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is described using the Cauchy problem for a system of ordinary differential equations. For the management of epidemiological safety, a objective function has been built, which takes into account: the financial consequences of introducing a lockdown in the country and the cost of treating the infected. Among the parameters of the model, the governing ones are highlighted. The control parameters are used to minimize the objective function. In the work, mainly theoretical research is given. However, computer simulation and a computational experiment on the proposed computer model with constant parameters allows us to answer the question: what is the number of infected citizens in the country, in which the economy does not need a lockdown, and the recovery prognosis of those infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus is favorable.

Ethnic / Linguistic Minorities in Georgia and the Protection of their Linguistic Rights

While discussing the legal framework for the „linguistic rights” of ethnic/linguistic minorities, the Georgian authorities should first consider the position of the ‘fathers’ of the „European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages“ concerning the difference between the autochthonous (historical) and new minorities; However, full realization of the linguistic rights of the Georgian state language, autochthonous minorities or migrant minorities on the territory of Georgia is impossible until the complete de-occupation of Georgia. Academic, depoliticized descriptions and qualifications of the linguistic and ethnic situation of Georgia should be given essential importance in the process of Georgia’s integration with the civilized world. It is desirable to be timely balanced Russian imperial ideologies and qualifications in the field of Kartvelology at the international scientific or information field.

The Basis of Social Protests in Georgia in 2019

Coming to power in 2012, the Georgian Dream promised changes expected by Georgian society that was torn between striving for peace and prosperity, following the example of Western countries, and stabilizing relations with Russia. After seven years, this promise was not fulfilled, and the citizens were bitter about the internal and international policies of Bidzina Ivanishvili. For the purpose of this article, the research hypothesis was formulated that in June 2019 social protests broke out in the capital of Georgia, because the activities of the party headed by Bidzina Ivanishvili resulted in decreased social confidence in this formation. The authors of the article analyzed the activities of Bidzina Ivanishvili which might have sparked social unrest and identified the internal and external factors that resulted in the shrinking social confidence in Georgian authorities in recent years. The authors presented also the events of June 20, 2019, when thousands of people gathered in front of the Georgian parliament building to express their discontent with the presence of the deputy of Russian Duma, Sergei Gavrilov, at the parliamentary session, which resulted in nationwide protests.

THE ISSUE OF CULTURAL DIVERSITY AND TOLERANCE IN MODERN GEORGIAN POLITICS

Aim. Georgia has traditionally been a country of cultural diversity. Due to the proper political approach, Georgian authorities of all times have managed to successfully govern the peaceful coexistence of people of different nationalities and religions. It is true that in the post-Soviet period, there was some disagreement between the cultures inspired by external forces; however, generally, all the authorities made every effort to legally strengthen the inherited tolerant habit. The paper does not deal with the conflicts of ethnopolitical nature, staged by Russia. The mentioned issue is a part of the country’s domestic policy, which is important and still is relevant nowadays, therefore the paper aims to study the role of cultural diversity and tolerance in modern Georgian politics, the attitude to it, and how the country managed to preserve the centuries-old heritage.
 Methods. Based on several empirical materials, various researched-studied documents, scientific papers, analysis of government documents, the use of the method of historicism is presented in the paper.
 Results. The paper presents the current existing reality in Georgia in the field of cultural diversity and the effective steps of the state for the proper development of cultural diversity.
 Conclusion. Modern Georgian politics is motivated to involve ethnic and religious minorities in the process of monitoring and implementing the Culture Policy Action Plan, based on the recent history and new current worldwide tendency, which will guarantee the establishment of a tolerant society and democracy in Georgia.

Cultural Policy - Significant Challenges of the Georgian Government

The paper examines and discusses the role and place of culture in the formation of a modern peaceful environment based on the study of empirical material. Culture is presented - as the World’s Sustainable Development – in the field of economical activation and empowerment of social and environmental components; the importance of Georgian culture and its interconnection with tourism, as it fosters the promotion, and at the same time, draws a special interest toward the cultural tourism. This creates a common promotion of cultural tourism and contributes to the preservation of cultural heritage, the establishment of harmony and mutual understanding between people; is studied the development of cultural tourism attractions. Georgia's example demonstrates the importance of UNESCO-led projects and collaborations on unique cultural features; it aims to preserve the history of statehood and its originality, respect independence and faiths, etc., thus, promoting them in the world. The data presented in the paper show that with the active involvement of the authorities the current year (2019), (despite the problem in the country’s tourism sector) the positive trend of the increasing number of visitors has been maintained in the protected areas of the Ministry of Environment and Agriculture. The paper examines the efforts of Georgian authorities to create a certain environment and a fertile ground for the preservation of national heritage, cultural diversity and its new perceptions, the development of creative activities and the diversification of cultural life.

Shared Past, Different Future? Russian and Georgian Authorities’ Discourse Concerning Homosexuality

Russian and Georgian people share not only a common history but also a relatively common negative view on LGBT rights. Russia still does not have anti-discrimination laws and regulates ‘homosexual propaganda’. In contrast, Georgia has discrimination protection on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Why is public opinion in one country deteriorating alongside the passing of anti-discrimination laws, while in the other country, with little improvement in public opinion, it is prohibited to ‘propagandize homosexuality’? We explain how authorities discursively shape institutional changes related to LGBT rights. We assume that the formation of institutions is possible in the process of discursive struggle when actors defend their ideas and meanings about LGBT. Our argument addresses the theoretical framework of institutional change and queer linguistics. We analyze discursive changes in Georgian and Russian authorities debates from 2013 until 2019.