Georgia’s hopes to gain the NATO Membership Act Plan at the Bucharest summit last week were dashed by a polite refusal from the alliance members. In exchange for the setback, Georgia was promised that the door which was open for it all these years, would now be wide open.
MAP has been on Georgians’ minds for a long time now. Ever since the Rose Revolution which brought into power the Western educated Mikheil Saakashvili, it all looked like a fairytale: a young democracy is was going to be rescued by the benign West.
MAP was going to be one of those rescue missions Georgians have been expecting for a long time. Only Georgia was refused, but with some encouragement: around December his year we will be having another tea gathering and we will look over this issue once more. Thank you, keep trying.
So why was Georgia refused MAP?
MAP is a process of preparing the country for entry into the NATO, which can take years — Albania for example kept it under the pillow for the whole 9 years. With Georgia’s territorial conflicts, uneasy neighborhood and explosive regional dynamics, to match Albania’s 9 years in the waiting line for NATO would be an act of flabbergasting optimism.
This being said, MAP would only be the first step towards the NATO membership, which could be dragged out endlessly. It is essentially a political decision and without a strong political will within the alliance of a couple dozen countries with different views, there always will be something to point at. Even so, Georgia did not even get that green light which could be blinking for years.
In the meantime, some voices from the NATO are calling for reforming the whole idea of MAP — have something along the lines of “doors wide open, but no guarantees”. How cynical would that be if Georgia finally received a reformed MAP which would not guarantee the membership at the end of the day!
Another facet of refusal just has to be Georgia’s recent “hiccups” - situation in the country which saw a carefully crafted image of Beacon of Democracy fall under the category of “one of those special post Soviet democracies”.
The November 2007 events that grew into dispersal of the demonstrators, state of emergency, forceful shut down of TV stations, political reprisals and questionable presidential elections — just gave the NATO skeptic members superb arguments to postpone Georgia’s aspirations for another few annual meetings.
And it does make sense: NATO countries don’t want to worry about such things happening within their alliance. Four years ago, if one listened to Saakashvili, such a mess would be automatically excluded as “democratic institutions would ameliorate conflicts in a consensual manner”. But, things change…
There is of course the Russia factor. Russia has been vehemently opposing NATO’s expansion to its borders. Recently Russians have even threatened to use “all means” to stop this from happening. With oil and gas being a very handy commodity for the Europeans, it is unlikely that many would want to upset the reemerging and resourceful Russian bear.
In November 2007 Imedi was forcefully shut down by Georgian SWAT teams for allegedly airing “calls for government overthrow”. To put it very shortly, Imedi TV was taken off the air in November because it focused on topics which belittled and threatened the Georgian authorities.
It was later reopened after European mediation headed by the former polish dissident and media ombudsman Adam Mikhnik brought the conflicting sides to compromise.
The message from the West was that quality of democracy in Georgia was determined by media freedom and that Imedi TV is a part of free media.
After debates, consultations, dialogues, time wasting, damaged equipment repair etc. the Imedi TV was reopened and then after a short period of time it went into self-imposed exile. The official reason behind Imedi’s second time disappearance was that the journalists did not want to work in a TV station whose owner (Badri Patarkatsishvili) was incriminated in an attempt of government overthrow.
This version is close to the “dog ate my homework” excuse. It has been almost three months since the TV station was closed down. In the meantime, its “government overthrowing” owner has passed away, new journalists have been born and … Imedi TV is still closed.
What happened with regard to Imedi TV is a mystery. One thing is certain: someone does not want to see this station working and is doing everything possible to keep it that way.
One hope for helping the Imedi TV come back into the Georgian social life was through oppositions’ pressure. But… the Georgian opposition, which had its voice heard thanks to the Imedi TV, has somewhat forgotten about the Imedi TV topic. Instead of focusing on the Imedi TV issue, the opposition turned to protest the Georgian Public Television’s bias towards the acting authorities.
Badri Patarkatsishvili was found dead on February 12 in his mansion in London. Condolences to his family and to all who believed in this person’s integrity.
Everyone is shocked. A 52 year old wealthiest Georgian died of sudden heart failure. At this point the investigation conducted by the Scotland Yard confirms the official version of his death. The results of toxicology examination will be published within several weeks.
Badri’s death is a huge loss for the Georgian people. It will take years before Georgia will find an investor of his caliber, let alone a person who thought in terms of using his wealth for the good of his country.
Many have said that Badri wanted to buy everything in Georgia, triple his wealth (estimated at $12 billion) and help Russian oligarchs satisfy their appetites. The same people recently started calling him his middle name, “Arkady” instead of “Badri”, in an obvious attempt to underline his “non-Georgian” background. An absolutely shameful strategy.
This person has done so much for Georgia that it would take long to list all of his deeds. He covered costs of treating the Georgian children with leukemia, he supported the Georgian Olympics sportsmen and above all, he established Imedi TV.
Imedi TV was one of the few media outlets outside the Georgian government’s control. The television channel was stormed on November 7, later re-opened and then shut down again. Why Imedi, the most popular Georgian television channel, has disappeared from the public eye is a mystery. It could have been victimized by the clash of geopolitical interests in Georgia.
Since November events, Patarkatsishvili openly confronted the Georgian authorities. He bid for presidency, but fearing for personal security, he stayed outside Georgia throughout the elections. In the meantime, based on secret recordings with a high government official Erekle Kodua, Patarkatsishvili was accused of attempting to overthrow the government.
All his assets in Georgia were frozen or confiscated. The opposition distanced themselves from him. He was slandered, marginilized and abandoned.
Two excellent articles by Lincoln Mitchell and Vladimir Papava in Harvard International Review ask fundamental questions about what has been happening in Georgia.
There are many problems in Georgia — it would take a very long time to account all of them. But, to be fair, there is no comparison to the problems just a few years back.
Before Mikheil Saakashvili, Eduard Shevarnadze ruled Georgia for the most part of the 1990s (excluding a few decades in the Soviet times). His government was incapable, ineffective and impotent. Electricity, which is essential for any kind of economic development, was always scarce.
Crime, corruption, stagnating economy, ineffective institutions, fractured country and consistently fraudulent elections — this was the Georgia under Shevarnadze. Not to mention the traumatic civil wars and wars for territorial integrity in the beginning of 1990s.
In short, there is no comparison to today’s Georgia. Many things have improved: electricity is rarely a problem, streets look decent, crime rate has gone down, there is an unprecedented economic growth and more importantly, Georgia has appeared on Europe’s map.
Not everything is rosy of course. Under Saakashvili, media has been constantly pressured to report the “right” news, judiciary has been increasingly centralized, human rights have been repeatedly violated, enemies of the state have been discovered and neutralized almost monthly — to mention a few.
Former Defense Minister Irakli Okruashvili’s shocking allegations, disastrous break up of the November demonstration and storming of the Imedi TV channel has further distanced Saakashvili from his democratic credentials.
Georgia’s barely-squeezed-through second term president Mikheil Saakashvili met with the Public Defender Sozar Subari. He probably hasn’t done this for the last 3 years. Many times, Saakashvili’s team blamed the Public Defender for oppositional views. In a very detailed open letter, Subari expressed his views concerning what went wrong in once “Beacon of Democracy”.
Why Saakashvili at all met with the Public Defender, can be easily explained by his opening statement: “Allow me to congratulate you on your election for the second Presidential term.”
Right now the authorities have softened considerably. There is a reason to believe that more than half of the cabinet will change. New faces will come to eradicate poverty in Georgia. In short, everything will be alright after those few bad apples are removed from the basket.
In the meantime the opposition has not accepted Saakashvili’s victory due to election violations. Although the OSCE has branded the elections as “broadly democratic”, they have also noted certain “concerns”, which they claim didn’t effect the overall result.
I have written about these violations in the past. And how they didn’t influence the 3.4% with which Saakashvili avoided the second round run-off, is still an open question to me.
In any case, Saakashvili met with the Public Defender because he liked the opening statement of his letter. The main message is however more important than congratulations. After all, Public Defender’s competence is human rights, not election observance.
It’s a bit lengthy, but very much worth understanding why all the mess has happened in Georgia over the last few months.
Sozar Subari: Open Letter to President Saakashvili (excerpts, some minor editing)
INFALLIBILITY:
There is no time for the Human Rights, (for) first we have to build the state”- this is a slogan of the governmental beau monde that declared the monopoly on infallibility and veracity. Who disagreed with this has been declared to be an enemy of the state.
The officials seriously taking part in the estimation of country’s political course openly and cynically insulted the Human Rights and, as a rule, appeared as protectors of those public servants who, in the full sense of the word, scorned the Human Rights.
Only substitution of old faces with the new ones in the Parliamentary list is not enough. What has to be improved is the attitude towards the citizens, their rights and their dignity.
CONSTRAINTS
“Everybody acknowledges that our society is being faced with the gravest situation in the field of Human Rights and, in this way, the citizens’ trust to the state is depreciating and the state consciousness is going corrupt. We have to face the truth – the recent developments and crisis in our homeland has been engendered not by the state’s adversaries’ abstract or concrete actions (though they will of course try to profit from), but by the state, when the trampling down the Human Rights by the government almost became a mode of everyday life.”
The homicides, contumelies, assault and battery, violation of ownership, demolition, bursting into and taking away property and afterwards discharging all this in TV with a cynical smile resulted in the November 2. The inexperienced public servants almost competed for an effective embittering of the people. The violence and licence became the tools for showing his/her worth in work.
Prime Time, is a popular political talk show led by a former Imedi TV journalist Inga Grigolia. Two days ago, its guest was the incumbent Mikheil Saakashvili, who talked much about his plans, mistakes, the brilliance of the elections, etc.
In the beginning of the show, a relevant question is posted and the audience votes during the show. A hypothetical example: “Do you think the person interviewed is lying?” a. Yes b. No c. Maybe — public sends sms-es and in the end a general opinion poll is presented. 55% think he is a liar.
So, one would expect a relevant question during Saakashvili’s interview. Such as “Do you think the elections were fraudulent”?
But, of course, why ask the right question when you can ask something else. The question was: “Did you go to the elections?”.
“The news coverage of private broadcasters monitored showed imbalance in favour of the ruling party’s candidate. Although, the news on public TV was somewhat more balanced in the time allocated to all candidates, the tone of its coverage favoured the former President.”
“…on contentious issues its members [Central Elections Commission] were not always observing the neutrality required of election administration, and acted in a partisan manner.”
“…inaccuracies on the voter list remain.”
“The distribution of vouchers for such things as utilities and medical supplies to vulnerable groups was criticized as an alleged misuse of budgetary funds in support of Mr. Saakashvili.”
“The vouchers prominently displayed that they were a subsidy from the President. Healthcare vouchers, as well as employment scheme leaflets, featured visually outstanding number “5”s – the number on the ballot under which the UNM has run in elections since 2004. Distributors of vouchers sometimes asked recipients whether they would vote for Mr. Saakashvili, and asked them to sign documents confirming their support. Vouchers were in some cases distributed from UNM offices.”
“The inauguration of a new pipeline by Mr. Saakashvili in Akhalkalaki, as well as the official opening of Tbilisi-Senaki-Leselidze highway lighting system, were given the appearance of presidential events, not in accord with Mr. Saakashvili’s status as a candidate who does not currently hold public office.”
“The campaign was overshadowed by widespread allegations of intimidation and pressure, among others on public-sector employees. These included a number of confirmed cases of pressure on opposition supporters by the police and local officials to desist from campaigning, threats of arbitrary arrest or job dismissal and cases of landlords who were pressurized not to let premises for use as opposition campaign offices. Isolated instances of violence against opposition activists, including kidnapping, were reported and verified.
It is rather hard for me to believe that Saakashvili won the elections in the first round. The exit polls aired at 10 pm yesterday, which claimed Saakashvili’s victory with over 50%, prompted [premature] celebration and a pop concert among Saakashvili’s supporters. it should be noted that the organizations and medias that conducted these polls are affiliated with the authorities.
Then comes the question: why celebrate the results which were delivered by handpicked people? Why weren’t the conductors of the exit polls agreed upon with the opposition?
This remains a mystery, unless someone wanted to gain advantage artificially. The foreign observers so far say they didn’t encounter extraordinary violations which would change the end results. The votes are being counted — 10% so far. The opposition claims victory and mass violations.
Some handpicked reactions: the author of the ResistanceGeorgia blog, who was an observer on one of the districts, says there “were serious violations all over.” Violations included “carousels” whereby certain groups voted on several different districts, voters’ intimidation and media bias.
presa.ge reports that one of their journalists experimented with the liquid substance used at the polling stations — he managed to wipe off the ink and entered to vote again, after which he informed this fact to the Central Elections Committee.
The reporter says that someone warned of vehicles with groups of activists approaching the district where he was located. One member of Saakashvili’s National Movement went outside and the group turned back.
Another journalist was threatened with physical liquidation for snooping around the polling station.
The election monitors “hailed the elections, but noted some shortcomings” - usual mumbo jumbo. It would take breaking into the polling station, violence and changing the ballot boxes when the monitors were inside for them to note something. To be fair, they must listen to what the opposition says. The final reaction is yet to be publicized.
In the meantime, the opposition gears up for demonstrations to protect their votes. The authorities have said they will uphold the stability in the country once again (I guess the same way they did on November 7).
Again: why conduct exit polls to which the opposition does not agree? This is provocative — there had to be a consensus on this issue. The opposition could do the same thing: get different exit polls and claim victory. If the consensus was reached, there would be less room for possible “instability” in the country.
It is relatively calm in Georgia, almost like before the storm. With the elections set in less then 24 hours, Georgians are gearing up to make their choice. There are several things that can happen after the elections date.
1. The outcome is a tie and two weeks later the second round is held. In this case, the period before the January 19 will be mostly a continuation of the pre-elections agitation.
2. The incumbent Saakashvili beats his rivals with over 50% of vote. If this happens, than there is a high chance that the opposition will reject the result, as according to their polls, the second round is inevitable. People “will protect their votes” by going out into the streets. Only, it seems they will not have the permission to hold rallies in Tbilisi on 6th of January, as Saakashvili’s team has booked the privilege in advance.
Why would the opposition refuse to accept Saakashvili’s victory in the first round? For number of reasons: first, those polls that claim that has such a chance, are closely affiliated with Saakashvili. One such research center is Greensberg Quinlan Rosner, which is funded by Saakashvili’s party. Of course their results put Saakashvili way ahead of his opponents.
Second, the exit polls will be planned by parties which are not acceptable to the opposition for their bias towards the authorities. Among them are state controlled televisions and Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies. While it is clear that the state controlled media is biased (why later), I am not sure if the same stands for the GFSIS and other bodies that will craft the exit polls. But. The point here is that these parties MUST be acceptable for all sides. Such could be some European based organizations, but it seems the authorities don’t find this crucial.
Third, that voters’ lists hold a million more people than during the elections four years ago, is another motivation. Four years ago there were 2.4 million voters, now there are 3.4 — it is explained by the Central Elections Committee that 1 million is those people who live outside Georgia.
If one listens to what the opposition hypotheses, than Misha has a 24% advantage if those outside Georgia are assigned to him. Can the observers note if this takes place? I am not sure how that would happen, but if certain boxes filled with ballots are sent from outside Georgia to be counted by CEC, it is easily imaginable that they could be stuffed with votes for Saakashvili.
So why is the media biased. For example, everyone knows that Saakashvili has spent millions (maybe even hundreds of millions) for campaigning. Everyone knows that dozens of hundreds of his supporters are bussed into the location where he holds his speech. Everyone knows that those in the state sector are forced to go outside and cheer for him. The television is mute over these things. Maybe a shot or two of the busses that carry Misha’s enthusiasts would more fair.
Another example — a few days ago Lavan Gachechiladze’s supporters held a rally in Tbilisi. The media mentioned this rally as the “by the way of the day” — a couple of shots of people standing purposelessly and opposition members shouting in the microphone. Looked like a fiasco that attracted a few thousand people at best. It later turned out that there were more than 30,000 people present during the demonstration.
On another occasion, the Rustavi 2 aired a program where “all the presidential candidates” were asked how they planned to spend their New Year. For some reason Badri Patarkatsishvili and Levan Gachecheladze were not included in the show.
Before the New Year, now ex-president Saakashvili was given time to address the nation — others were not. Yesterday, Saakashvili’s demonstration in Zugdidi was allocated 20-30 minutes on every major channel. On some occasions his demonstration was replayed.
Saakashvili, it all looked like a fairytale: a young democracy is was going to be rescued by the benign West. 
