Republican gambit

What was bound to happen sooner or later finally occured.  There was much talk about the possible collapse of the ‘Georgian Dream’ coalition, yet nobody expected it to happen.  What the collapse actually meant in reality was that the Republicans withdrew from the coalition: the rest of the parties within the coalition have a secondary status. It was were the Republicans who sealed the deal: they stated that they would run separately in the October parliamentary elections, though they would not abandon the coalition and would maintain their posts in government.

In response to the aforesaid, Prime Minister Giorgi Kvirikashvili and some other Georgian Dream leaders reiterated that such conditions were acceptable for them. At least for the time being.

If the Georgian Dream had been a true or, as we put it, ‘European-style’ coalition, such behavior would have been quite natural:  political parties should first determine their real political weight by means of the elections, and only afterwards whether they should join or not join a coalition. However, the Georgian Dream is a different kind of formation: its essence lies in being under the patronage of Georgia’s informal ruler, Bidzina Ivanishvili.

The Republicans made no secret of the fact that they got the ministers’ posts and seats in Parliament only through an act of kindness by Ivanishvili and they spared no words of gratitude to him.  Having decided to run separately in elections, they have somewhat distanced themselves from their master, though haven’t fully separated themselves from him.

This decision is characterized by ambiguity, which is typical for this party.  No matter how often the Republicans would say they are going to stay in the coalition, the public will take it either as their withdrawal or the beginning of their withdrawal.

What happened? Have the Republicans lost their nerves, or have

they finally gained self-respect?

Until recently, the party leaders often made it clear that they were going to stand in the elections as part of the coalition. Therefore, it is obvious that it was a forced decision.

The Republicans have been recently often the subject to open or hidden criticism on part of the coalition partners: it seems they have been pushed to leave. However, in response to that, one of the most prominent party members, Tina Khidasheli, has made it clear that unlike Irakli Alasania and his Free Democrats, their ‘nerves would not be broken and they would not withdraw from the coalition.

So, what was the ‘last straw’?  It seems that this was an emotional decision.

The Republicans have been really reprimanded that they got in the government by virtue of Ivanishvili and that they have no chance to independently obtain seats in Parliament.

Georgian Dream’s key men have been stating one after another (clearly addressing the Republicans) that probably the time has come for the coalition members to separately try their hands in elections.

The Republicans have not dared untie the Gordian knot all at once.

The Republican Party’s official statement makes it clear that they divide the Georgian Dream into two parts: there is the good ‘Dream,’ epitomized by Prime Minister Kvirikashvili, and the bad one, represented by the ‘Stalinist, anti-NATO and video-blackmailing’ MPs.  Republicans are ready to cooperate with the first group but are distancing themselves from the second one.

How come?  As is always the case, the road leads us back to the key stakeholder–Bidzina Ivanishvili. He purposefully did not express his position when a clear anti-Republican campaign was launched in the coalition. Then, who represents Ivanishvili’s true face:  the civilized and politically correct Kvirikashvili, or the exotic and odious Tamaz Mechiauri and Gogi Topadze with their ‘Stalinist’ and anti-NATO sentiments? The Republicans do not burn their bridges and place their stake on the victory of Kvirikashvili’s wing. But what can one do if Ivanishvili prefers to remain a mysterious like Janus:  can it be both Kvirikashvili and Mechiauri?

What are the Republicans’ hopes?

Everybody knows why the Republicans have hesitant until now, but nobody knows whether they will get into the future parliament or not, i.e. whether they can manage to overcome a five-percent threshold. The chances of their individual participation in elections has not been measured by any publicly known studies.

Throughout their relatively long history, only once, in the spring of 2008, they stood in elections separately and managed to received than 4% of the vote. Today, they are stronger from an organizational standpoint–and that’s again due to Georgian Dream-but is it enough for success?

The rumors about the Republicans’ possible withdrawal from the coalition have been immediately followed by speculations about their alleged pre-election alliance with the ‘Free Democrats.’

This is quite natural. These two parties should strive for a similar kind of electorate. However, the Republicans and Free Democrats previously set up the alliances twice and in both cases they split up on the Free Democrats’ initiative: they obviously have difficulty of getting along with each other.

Today, the Free Democrats rule out any possible alliance with the Republicans, which is quite logical, because as their surveys show, they are able to get seats in Parliament on their own. Besides, that’s too much of a good thing even for the Georgian politics to be simultaneously on friendly terms with the governmental Dream’s so-called “good wing and in coalition with the oppositionist Free Democrats.

Thus, the Republicans closed their eyes and plunged into uncertain future. Nobody knows what they are in for.  It’s a dubious position: having one foot in ‘Georgian Dream’ and one foot outside of it will put them in a difficult situation during the election campaign. In these circumstances, Muslims would say, ‘Inshallah.’

What will the ‘Dream’ be like without the Republicans?

As it is known, the pre-election Georgian Dream coalition will no longer exist: the parties within the coalition will stand in the elections independently.  This raises certain questions.  First of all: have the “Dream’s election chances changed after the partners’ withdrawal?  Since there are no relevant studies, one can come to this conclusion based on one’s instinct.  Both the coalition’s and the Georgian Dream’s electoral attractiveness is mainly determined by Ivanishvili’s reoutation and by the availability of administrative resources. Therefore, it is less likely that the coalition’s collapse will cause serious problems for the party. Some even say that the Republicans’ withdrawal may help Dream regain part of its electorate, since many of Dream’s supporters hate the Republicans with the same fervor they do the United National Movement.

It’s more a matter of principle how the political profile of the ‘Dream’ party would differ from that of the ‘Dream’ coalition. When Irakli Alasania’s pro-Western ‘Free Democrats’ left the coalition and moved onto the opposition side two years ago, the diplomatic community expressed its concerns:  Does this mean that Georgia will change politics will change? It turned out that nothing has changed much.  However, it should be noted that it was steadfast pro-Western Republicans who assumed the functions of Alasania’s team (including the Defence Ministry and some parliamentary committees), after the latter withdrew.  And now, the Republicans are also withdrawing.

Withdrawal of one more pro-western party will, to a certain extent, mar the ‘Dream”s image.  The current official pro-European-oriented policy will continue to be pursued, but the contrast between this course of action and those representing ‘Georgian Dream’ in Parliament, is much too aparent:  The allegiance of the majority of the ‘Georgian Dream’ members lies with Putin rather than with Europe. Thus, doubts about consistency of the “Dream”s pro-European policy, will be deepened.

As was mentioned above, “Janus is Ivanishvili’s political nature: he needs to show both a European face and that of an obscurant, which any reader of ‘Asaval-Dasavali’ will definitely enjoy.

Until now, the Republicans kept up that very ‘European facade.’  Whereas now, there’s only Prime Minister Kvirikashvili left, which is hardly enough. He will probably try to enrich the ‘Dream”s election list with some decent candidates, who can make public appearances.  But will he manage to do that?  Those candidates should have European values and, at the same time, should be loyal to Ivanishvili to the bitter end.  It is not that easy to find someone with these two qualities, though, probably there will be people willing to step up.

•  In the 2012 parliamentary elections, the Georgian Dream political coalition, set up by business tycoon Bidzina Ivanishvili, defeated Mikheil Saakashvili’s National Movement, which had been in power in Georgia since 2003.

•  Georgian Dream-a coalition of political parties in Georgia. It has been Georgia’s ruling political force since 2012.  The ‘Georgian Dream’ coalition was founded by four political parties. Those were: Bidzina Ivanishvili’s ‘Georgian Dream-Democratic Georgia’ party, Irakli Alasania’s ‘Our Georgia’-Free Democrats’ party; Davit Usupashvili’s “Republican Party of Georgia’ and Kakha Shartava’s ‘National Forum.’  Later on, the Conservatives and Industrialists also joined the coalition. ‘Free Democrats’ withdrew from the coalition on November 5, 2014.

• There will be parliamentary elections in Georgia in autumn 2016.

Ghia Nodia is a Georgian political analyst who served as the Minister of Education and Science in the Cabinet of Georgia from January 31, 2008 until 10 December 2008. Since 1992, he has chaired the Tbilisi-based think-tank Caucasus Institute for Peace, Democracy and Development.

* The views and opinions expressed in the article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of JAMnews

 published:1.04.2016