Georgian Dream has appealed to its electorate to help it secure a constitutional majority in October’s elections, vowing to outlaw their political rivals, ban ‘pseudo-liberal ideology’, and to ‘peacefully reintegrate’ Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
On Tuesday, the ruling party published its appeal, outlining several goals it intends to achieve should the party secure a constitutional majority in October. Georgian Dream need to win 113 out of the 150 total seats in order to reach a constitutional majority.
They described the upcoming elections as a ‘referendum’ between ‘war or peace, moral degradation or traditional values, subservience to external forces or an independent sovereign state, the collective National Movement or Georgian Dream’.
The ruling party has been using the term ‘collective National Movement’ to refer to an undefined list of pro-Western liberal rival groups, applying it to all groups that either spun off from the United National Movement (UNM), are led by former UNM officials, or who the ruling party allege have cooperated with their primary rivals in some way.
In the appeal, the party stated that they would use a constitutional majority to remove the ‘collective National Movement’ and their ‘satellite or successor parties’ from politics by declaring them unconstitutional.
This follows a series of statements by senior party members, including its billionaire founder Bidzina Ivanishvili, vowing to crack down on the opposition. Their statements have also declared the need to hold the UNM accountable for ‘provoking’ the August 2008 War and allegedly attempting to pull Georgia into conflict with Russia.
Georgian Dream claimed earlier this month that the legal means needed to hold the UNM accountable were still being considered.
‘Georgia is currently facing an immediate threat of war, which must be averted at all costs today and tomorrow’, the party stated.
They also pledged to curb the spread of ‘pseudo-liberal ideology’ in the country, pointing to their queer ‘propaganda’ bill, which passed its first reading in June, with the remaining two readings expected to take place in parliament’s autumn session. However, the pledge appears to indicate that the party was reverting to its original proposal in March to restrict advocacy for equality ‘at the highest constitutional level’.
[Read more: Explainer | What’s in Georgia’s new anti-queer bill?]
Georgian Dream also vowed to ‘protect Georgia’s identity and national values’ through an additional constitutional initiative. The party did not elaborate further on the nature of the initiative, but cited ‘ongoing consultations’ with unspecified parties, and promised to provide additional details by the end of August.
In the appeal, the ruling party cited a need to ‘amend the constitution to align Georgia’s governance and territorial structure with the new reality’, so that Georgia could ‘restore its territorial integrity […] in a peaceful way’.
‘Given the dynamic developments around Georgia, we must always be ready for such eventualities’, read the appeal, echoing similar statements they and their proxy groups have been making, hinting at the possibility of regaining control over Abkhazia and South Ossetia through a ‘pragmatic policy’. Analysts have largely interpreted these statements as alluding to improving relations with Russia.
The statement made no mention of the major social and economic grievances that the Georgian public has consistently highlighted in opinion polls over the years, including poverty, unemployment, rising costs of living, and poor infrastructure, including poor roads and access to water.
‘A bogus defence of traditions’
Georgian Dream’s appeal was quickly met with criticism and condemnation from opposition groups, who warned of the appeal’s authoritarian undertones and that the ruling party intended to push Georgia away from its path towards EU integration.
Salome Samadashvili, a member of the Strong Georgia opposition alliance, dismissed the appeal as coming from a ‘bankrupt political group’ on an authoritarian trajectory.
[Read more: Opinion | Georgia’s queerphobic laws are a clear step towards authoritarianism]
‘After twelve years in power, these people have nothing to say to the public except that they promise to destroy the democratic opposition if they remain in power, and they are essentially aligning themselves with Belarus and Russia, potentially joining the Eurasian Union in the future as a dismantled democratic state’, she said.
Gia Khukhashvili, a political commentator and former ally of Georgian Dream, accused the government of seeking to establish a one-party rule.
‘If you look at the tone of this statement, at its points, it’s clear that these are something that Russia and Belarus have gone through […] A supposed, bogus defence of traditions, ultra-patriotism, pseudo-religious messages — all have found their way into this statement’, Khukhashvili noted.
Georgian Dream’s vague proposal to prepare Georgia’s legislation for a reintegration of Abkhazia and South Ossetia has also stirred speculation.
Roman Gotsiridze, a member of the Euro-Optimists party, argued that the proposal entailed recognising Abkhazia.
‘What kind of change would be necessary to establish relations with Abkhazia? It likely implies a confederation — recognising Abkhazia’s independence. Apparently, two independent states would constitutionally unite into a confederative entity, from which separation would be simple, as we know the nature of a confederation’, Gotsiridze speculated.
Gotsiridze further suggested that Georgian Dream might be planning to concurrently remove Article 78 from the constitution, which explicitly obliges Georgia’s constitutional bodies to ‘take all measures’ to ensure full integration into the EU and NATO.
While Georgian Dream have repeatedly stressed that the country’s pro-Western policy is unwavering, highlighting that this direction was enshrined in the constitution during their tenure, some pro-government groups have recently started questioning the need for such an article in the constitution.
‘Georgian Dream is acting directly on Russia’s orders […] This government has become extremely dangerous, and the only way to save the country is to send this treacherous regime to its political grave through elections’, said Gotsiridze.
Georgian constitutional scholar Vakhushti Menabde pointed out that Georgian Dream already possessed all the formal and informal means, including significant influence over the country’s Constitutional Court, to achieve the goals they outlined in Tuesday’s appeal.
Under the current legislation, the ruling party can appeal to the Constitutional Court to seek the deregistration of a political group if they argue that it conflicts with the country’s constitution.
While Georgian Dream have maintained they have remained committed to leading Georgia into the EU membership, their claim has been strongly contested by government critics, who highlight recent condemnation and punitive measures from the EU and US in response to the passing of the foreign agent law, along with strengthened ties with China, frequented government visits to Iran, and growing praise from Russian officials, all of which suggest a divergent path.
[Read more: Opinion | Georgia’s one-sided relationship with China comes with significant risks]
‘The more support Georgian Dream receives, the faster and more effectively Georgia’s relations with the United States and the European Union will improve, and the stronger Georgia’s national interests will be defended on the international stage’, the ruling party argued in the appeal.
Georgian Dream intensified their push for a constitutional majority shortly after a survey commissioned by pro-government TV channel Imedi projected that the ruling party would secure 59.3% of the vote.
Opposition groups quickly dismissed the survey’s results as unreliable and manipulative, pointing instead to an Edison Research poll for the opposition-leaning TV channel Formula, which showed Georgian Dream leading with only 32%, triggering the need for a coalition government, followed by the UNM-led Unity — National Movement coalition at 17%.
For ease of reading, we choose not to use qualifiers such as ‘de facto’, ‘unrecognised’, or ‘partially recognised’ when discussing institutions or political positions within Abkhazia, Nagorno-Karabakh, and South Ossetia. This does not imply a position on their status.
Read in Azerbaijani on MeydanTV.
