Georgia in October of 2012
07 February, 2013
Last year was fairly impressive in terms of certain developments, which took place in the Georgian politics. Last year, Georgia experienced serious difficulties in exercising of political power although the history confirms that this nation cannot be considered as very inexperienced in political dealings. The recent parliamentary election is serving as a good example, which illustrates how both the Georgian politicians and the Georgian society are capable of behaving in decisive political situations.
Parliamentary election for a number of different
reasons is the year’s dominant topic. The exacerbation of the electoral rivals became especially grave towards the end of the process. Some people were surprised by the outcome and others seemed to have become vague, having no idea how this complicated situation would untangle.

As a citizen of Georgia I’ve also been trying to get any possible information about the incumbent government and the way its opposition behaved, also what kind of position the foreign journalists manifested. Therefore, after having looked through the local newspapers I made up my mind to go ahead and read into the publications in The Economist and the New York Times. The role of a direct observer usually provides for a certain advantage to evaluate events objectively, which is a regular asset of the foreign press, whereas our Georgian journalists have advantage in terms of having information based on empirical knowledge. This means a lot!
The articles I have selected for discussion cover the period from the day of elections up until now. As far as every author has certain point of view and since not all authors are journalists, I have chosen to discuss the articles by the authors who seemed most interesting and truthful to me.
The first publication I chose is written in The New York Times by Job C. Henning who is a nonresident fellow at the Center for the Study of the Presidency and Congress and Nino Japaridze, the lecturer in the Department of global Affairs at George Mason University.
They believe that democracy in Georgia has made giant step forward as Saakashvili made a civil acknowledgement of his defeat in the elections. This is foremost good for Georgian people. Policies carried out by United National Movement to eliminate bribery, chronic power outages and also to set the stage for economic growth have long ago veered towards authoritarianism. Over past several years society and economy in Georgia became smothered.
Surely the issue of Ivanishvili’s personal money was not unimportant but it did not diminish the political choice by voters. The election was fair and proved that Georgians have indeed reasserted themselves. However, authors say that, in the role of opposition Saakashvili will have an opportunity to not only make up with some of his numerous political enemies, but also to burnish his endangered legacy. Changes Saakashvili enacted have enhanced executive powers of prime minister, with whom now he has to coexist.
Georgia is a model of Democracy for United States as it seeks to avoid impression within Arab societies that its policies are designed to create new client states.
All in all, Georgia has to continue to uphold fair political environment and endorse access to diverse sources of information.
While being written in a laconic way this article illustrates many important points of this issue. Authors discuss main topics of this process, whereas underline that Georgia has stepped into a new level of political life. They suggest to continue and struggle to uphold healthy political environment in the country and “once again punch way above its (Georgia’s) political weight in global affairs if it plays its card well”. This is another way how western journalists perceive the Georgian developments.