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.
The hunger strike which lasted for 17 days in front of the Georgian Parliament was called off by the opposition on March 25th without any political concessions from the ruling party.
The opposition stopped hunger strike after Patriarch for the second time called on the conflicting sides to reach a compromise. Although no agreement was reached with the ruling party, the opposition disbanded albeit their promises to carry on “till the end”.
It is hard to predict whether the oppositions’ ratings will fall due to their inability to score major victories. Ever since the presidential elections this January, the opposition has been actively seeking to win ground. Despite holding numerous protests, publishing memorandums and fist wagging, they have not achieved any of their major goals.
One of their more “successful” scores has been to push the authorities to reform the Public Broadcaster, which in past was under the government’s influence. Although a compromise was reached to de-politicize the television, the process and procedures put in place to make this happen would make even the EU bureaucrats scratch their heads.
What started off as a call to remove the general director of the television, ended up in complex negotiations, elections of board members and separate elections of the new general director. All in all, the new team should be in place for April 4th — about 3 months after the compromise was reached to reform the Public Broadcaster.
In the meantime, the only television station outside the government’s control, Imedi TV has not only been shut down under mysterious pretext, but even changed ownership to a complete stranger and a man widely perceived as representing acting government’s interests. [for more details read here].
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.
Georgian presidential elections are over. The winner is Mikheil Saakashvili with some 53.4% in his favor. Most heads of states have congratulated Saakashvili with re-election. Even the opposition — who cried wolf from the start — seems to have shifted it’s focus to the parliamentary elections this Spring.
Despite overall “positive” assessment by the election watchdogs, the post election interim report by the OSCE points out even more irregularities.
The election administration at all levels and the courts did not fully and adequately consider and investigate a considerable number of complaints regarding irregularities in voting, counting and tabulation of election results.
OSCE/ODIHR EOM observers described the tabulation process at the DEC level as slow, not very well organized, and often chaotic. In some DECs, they noted a tense atmosphere during tabulation. There were cases in which PEC protocols given to the OSCE/ODIHR EOM differed from those provided by DECs. For example, protocols provided by DECs for Batumi (PECs 11 and 73), Lentekhi (PEC 1), and Dmanisi (PEC 30) showed a significant increase of votes cast for Mr. Saakashvili.
The CEC announced that the overall turnout was 56.19 per cent. In several DECs, the turnout was considerably higher than the average. Some 23 PECs reported 100 per cent turnout, while another 205 commissions reported turnout between 90 and 100 per cent.
The election administration at all levels, and the courts, did not fully and adequately consider and investigate a considerable number of complaints regarding irregularities in voting, counting and tabulation of election results.
Much more is in the report. Please take a few minutes to read it. I think it is clear that manipulation took place, but, to be in line with the international observers, SOMEHOW these irregularities didn’t effect the final result.
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.
I liked the articles by The Economist on Georgia: “Misha’s Mess” (November 15) and “Getting out of a mess in Georgia” (January 7). None ask “Why the mess”.
From a bird eye view it is puzzling why the crisis in Georgia has developed to a point where a compromise means a defeat to the opposition or the authorities. Although it is unusually freezing in Tbilisi, tens of thousands of people have come out to vent their anger AGAIN.
In November, the major demand of the protestors was to hold the parliamentarian elections in Spring. Constitutionally, this is when they were supposed to be held.
More than a year ago, it was Saakashvili’s initiative to prolong the parliament’s mandate for 6 months and shorten his own term with the same period. The parliament, which is completely dominated by Saakashvili’s United National Movement, approved the decision to hold both elections simultaneously sometime this year.
The argument for this is still a mystery. Somehow this decision had something to do with the elections in Russia — basically, the argument was that “We will not hold elections when Russia does, so as to avoid destabilization”. Whatever that means. In fact, it was more likely aimed to squeeze Saakashvili’s unpopular National Movement into the parliament on Saakashvili’s charisma and account.
Then came the dreadful November 7, when the protesters were brutally dispersed, beaten and many later imprisoned. Imedi TV outside the government’s control was stormed and closed down. Snap presidential elections were then set for January 5 so as to rehabilitate the authorities’ democratic credentials. Along with the elections, the plebiscite asked whether the population wanted to hold the parliamentarian elections in Spring or Fall.
The elections were brilliant says Saakashvili. The White House, along with a handful of other countries, have congratulated Misha with a victory. The OSCE said that everything was “essentially in line with the western standards”. Fate of the elections are sealed one would think.
Then, in a very unusual and unexpected interview with Frankfurter Rundschau, Head of OSCE Observers Mission Dieter Boden said “there was crass, negligent and deliberate falsification during the vote counting.” Moreover:
We are getting information from our observers that serious violations were fixed during the process of counting of votes in Batumi. Next day of elections, when OSCE mainly positively evaluated Georgia’s elections, these important violations have not been revealed yet. [says Boden]
The Georgian authorities preferred not to comment on this statement.
In fact, if one reads the OSCE preliminary report, it is hardly conceivable how these elections were free and fair. Here is what one observer, member of the Estonian Parliament says on her blog:
What started after that was amazing. When the station had closed, several strange people arrived, including policemen. They took part in counting the ballots. Members of the commission tried to falsify documents. The final results were as follows: from 1981 listed voters, 1693 voted for Saakashvili, while other candidates got only 118 votes.
Although there were about a thousand observers present in Georgia, most couldn’t reach the polling stations in the regions. In other words, in a lot of places the observers were simply absent. Imagine the way elections were conducted in those places.
That Saakashvili won with a 3% margin, on the background of such violations, is a matter of concern, to put it mildly. The opposition will not back down, and I don’t see why they should.
Besides, what was the point of carrying out the elections which were intentionally marred with the fraud? It is disappointing to see Saakashvili, who came to power on the wave of protests against rigging the elections in 2003, being charged with such violations. And he should be.
Saakashvili’s elections should have been flawless. It was his choice to hold the early presidential elections — so as to find a way out of the November crisis in Georgia, or so he says. Now that the opposition, quite correctly, blames the authorities for fraud, the crisis looks likely to re-ignite.
Compromise on holding the second round is the only way out of this mess. Otherwise confrontation is unavoidable.
The November crisis was explained by Saakashvili’s government as the product of “machine of lies” — the Imedi TV + the political aspirant and oligarch Badri Patarkatsishvili.
What about now? Is it the bought up observers? Irresponsible opposition? Some other enemies? Russia by any chance?
The bottom line is that the elections were supposed to be so clean, that no one could even cite a single violations. But from what the reports say, it was far from that idyllic vision of the triumphant beacon of democracy. And its not because it’s a young and fragile , making steps on a bumpy road of “challenges”, but because particular people intentionally step over the boundaries.
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?”.
“Many critically disposed people [referring to foreign election observers] arrived in Georgia, because many foolish things have been written about Georgian in recent months,” Saakashvili said. “Over 1000 observers have arrived, that is an absolute record - it is approximately six-fold more compared to Ukraine’s previous elections in terms of per capita [ed. How Impressive!!!]. Conclusions were extremely well-disposed. These people arrived with one mood and left [the country] with absolutely different one. It means that democracy and political process has developed in Georgia.”
I guess “foolish things” is anything that didn’t praise Saakashvili’s achievements. Especially after November 7.
Take a look at the extremely well-disposed conclusions in the previous post. I wonder what should happen for the international observers to say the elections were undemocratic?
“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.
Saakashvili, it all looked like a fairytale: a young democracy is was going to be rescued by the benign West. 
