The most recent dispute in Georgian politics contains serious allegations of government misconduct ahead of the October 2012 elections and ambitions to form armed militias to intimidate opposition supporters. The allegations come as campaigning for the parliamentary election in October gain speed and can be viewed in the context of a framing contest between the government and opposition that has been ongoing for several years, the ultimate price of which is the international legitimacy of power in Georgia. 

Irakli Alasania, one of the front figures of tycoon Bidzina Ivanishvili’s political coalition Georgian Dream, stated during a meeting with foreign diplomats on March 15 that the Georgian government is setting up paramilitary units in the Samegrelo region bordering Abkhazia. According to Alasania, such units are formed to intimidate opposition supporters in the region and constitute part of the government’s preparation for the parliamentary elections scheduled for October 2012. In an appeal to increase international pressure on the Georgian government, Alasania raised the possibility of a Syrian “Homs” scenario in the Samegrelo town of Zugdidi.

On March 20, Alasania addressed a news conference holding an envelope which he claimed contained evidence of members, armament and financing of such groups, allegedly subordinated to Samegrelo’s chief prosecutor Roland Akhalaia and currently consisting of 500 members. Alasania stated he would refrain from making the information public but that he would instead submit it to the Georgian National Security Council (NSC) for review.

The Georgian Minister of Defense, Bacho Akhalaia (son of the aforementioned Roland Akhalaia) termed the allegations absurd and stated that the militias Alasania refers to are a voluntary, unpaid reserve system established in October 2011, providing basic military training for volunteers not eligible for compulsory reservist training. Alasania nevertheless challenged this description, claiming that the evidence to be presented to the NSC shows that the units are hired, paid and subordinated to officials within the law enforcement agencies.  

President Saakashvili and other officials have termed the allegations “immoral”, “idiotic” and “delirious.” Alasania’s claims are largely described as part of a smearing campaign intended to undermine the government’s international and domestic credibility ahead of the elections. Considering the tremendous import of Georgia’s international image as an ambitious reformer in its relations to the West and especially the U.S., the Georgian government can ill afford to become perceived as a regime willing to use paramilitary forces against its political opposition.

The recent allegations come in the midst of a controversy over Ivanishvili’s eligibility to run in the parliamentary elections, as well as the presidential elections in 2013. After Ivanishvili announced his intention to form a political party in October 2011, his and his wife’s Georgian citizenships was revoked by a presidential order. Georgian law allows single citizenship only and Ivanishvili also holds Russian and French citizenship, which he has pledged to revoke. Until the question of Ivanishvili’s citizenship is resolved, he is not allowed to run for public office but has stated that his wife, whose citizenship has been restored, will then run in his place. In addition, according to Civil Georgia Ivanishvili has been fined several times to a total sum of US$ 4 million for funding his own political organization, also in breach of Georgian law. While the measures taken against Ivanishvili’s political aspirations do fall within the framework of Georgian law, they are easily conceived as selective application of this law on part of the government to prevent a potent and well-funded opponent from presenting a serious political challenge. 

Georgian politics have seen extreme polarization, although to varying degrees, since the violent breakup of opposition protests in November 2007. The recurring images presented in the political polemic are that of the government as an authoritarian, power-seeking and reckless elite that does not hesitate to use the security apparatus to safeguard elite interests and whose commitment to democracy is no more than a façade occasionally presented to Western diplomats to retain the credentials obtained through the 2003 Rose revolution. In contrast, the opposition is regularly presented as an irresponsible, fractured clique of hysterics whose critique of the government aims to destroy its credibility with western allies in order to pave the way for a shift of government. On occasion, such descriptions have been combined with allegations of cooperation with Russia against Georgian interests and/or preparations for armed rebellion, warranting extraordinary security measures.

While selective facts can be presented to support each of these positions, the extremely polarized mode of politics in the country, and the failure so far to make evidence public makes the evaluation of allegations such as the most recent ones about paramilitary forces hard to assess for the Georgian public as well as Georgia’s international partners. Yet, the opposition’s voiced concerns over potential intimidation and violence during the election campaign should be taken seriously and Georgia will need a sustained long-term presence of international observers across the country to ensure that the unavoidable allegations of election fraud can be properly assessed. Much is at stake in the upcoming election cycles. The parliamentary elections in October will set the scene for the 2013 presidential elections that, provided that the Georgian constitution remains unaltered, will determine the transition of the presidency to Saakashvili’ successor. Whoever that will be, the free and fair conduct and absence of political violence in both upcoming elections will determine Georgia’s future with the West.