Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Georgia Author Ghia Nodia

1. Taking the road away from Europe – how far could Georgia go (and can it be reversed)?

Author:
Ghia Nodia
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Abstract:
Earlier this year, as a result of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Moldova and Ukraine were granted official EU candidate status… but not Georgia. Instead, Georgia has been left behind on the waiting list, with its application due to be reevaluated by the EU sometime in 2023. Yet Georgia has an extremely pro-European society highly in favour of their country continuing its journey towards closer integration with the EU. So what happened? This CEPS Explainer argues that the ruling Georgian Dream party’s anti-Western rhetoric and democratic backsliding has actually diverted Georgia down a road away from its key Western allies. Until this is rectified, Georgia may be stuck on the waiting list for some time yet. But all hope is not lost – regardless of the government’s current actions and contradictory statements, Georgia’s highly active and pro-European civil society may hold the key in getting their country back on track towards its European future.
Topic:
European Union, Regional Politics, Democratic Backsliding, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe, Eurasia, and Georgia

2. The Mobilization of Conservative Civil Society

Author:
Richard Youngs, Gareth Fowler, Arthur Larok, Pawel Marczewski, Vijayan Mj, Ghia Nodia, Natalia Shapoavlova, Janjira Sombatpoonsiri, Marisa Von Bülow, and Özge Zihnioğlu
Publication Date:
10-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
As the domain of civil society burgeoned in the 1990s and early 2000s—a crucial component of the global spread of democracy in the developing and postcommunist worlds—many transnational and domestic actors involved in building and supporting this expanding civil society assumed that the sector was naturally animated by organizations mobilizing for progressive causes. Some organizations focused on the needs of underrepresented groups, such as women’s empowerment, inclusion of minorities, and LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) rights; others addressed broader societal issues such as economic justice, social welfare, and antipoverty concerns. In many countries, the term “civil society” came to be associated with a relatively bounded set of organizations associated with a common agenda, one separate from or even actively opposed by conservative political forces. However, in the past ten years, this assumption and outlook are proving increasingly incorrect. In many countries in the developing and postcommunist worlds, as well as in long-established Western democracies, conservative forms of civic activism have been multiplying and gaining traction. In some cases, new conservative civic movements and groups are closely associated with illiberal political actors and appear to be an integral part of the well-chronicled global pushback against Western liberal democratic norms. In other cases, the political alliances and implications of conservative civil society are less clear. In almost all cases—other than perhaps that of the United States, where the rise of conservative activism has been the subject of considerable study—this rising world of conservative civil society has been little studied and often overlooked. This report seeks to correct this oversight and to probe more deeply into the rise of conservative civil society around the world. It does so under the rubric of Carnegie’s Civic Research Network project, an initiative that aims to explore new types of civic activism and examine the extent to which these activists and associations are redrawing the contours of global civil society. The emerging role and prominence of conservative activism is one such change to civil society that merits comparative examination. Taken as a whole, the report asks what conservative civic activism portends for global civil society. Its aim is not primarily to pass judgment on whether conservative civil society is a good or bad thing—although the contributing authors obviously have criticisms to make. Rather, it seeks mainly to understand more fully what this trend entails. Much has been written and said about anticapitalist, human rights, and global justice civil society campaigns and protests. Similar analytical depth is required in the study of conservative civil society. The report redresses the lack of analytical attention paid to the current rise of conservative civil society by offering examples of such movements and the issues that drive them. The authors examine the common traits that conservative groups share and the issues that divide them. They look at the kind of members that these groups attract and the tactics and tools they employ. And they ask how effective the emerging conservative civil society has been in reshaping the political agenda.
Topic:
Civil Society, Politics, Political Activism, and Conservatism
Political Geography:
Uganda, Africa, Europe, South Asia, Turkey, Ukraine, Caucasus, Middle East, India, Poland, Brazil, South America, Georgia, North America, Thailand, Southeast Asia, and United States of America

3. Democracy and its Deficits: The path towards becoming European-style democracies in Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine

Author:
Ghia Nodia, Denis Cenusa, and Mikhail Minakov
Publication Date:
12-2017
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Abstract:
Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine are three participating states of the European Partnership that have chosen to conclude Association Agreements with the European Union, often at the expense of relations with their most powerful neighbour, Russia. They are also rather similar in their levels of democratic development. Within a post-Soviet space, they stand out for their relatively high level of democratic freedoms and political pluralism; none of them, however, can be considered a consolidated democracy, and most analysts describe them as uncertain or hybrid political regimes that combine features of autocracy and democracy. This paper offers a comparative analysis of the three countries’ political systems and aims to interpret both the roots of their relative success, and the nature of the deficits that prevent them from consolidating their democratic institutions. Among these deficits are problems stemming from ethnic, regional and cultural conflicts; strong and weak features in their general constitutional systems; the links between democratic development and government capacity to produce public goods; state capture (including control over the most influential media organisations) by powerful oligarchs and endemic corruption; underdevelopment of political parties and party systems; insufficient trust towards institutions of electoral democracy and a resulting propensity to use extra-constitutional means of political struggle. Civil society organisations have also failed penetrate the wider public and the anti-liberal discourse of traditionally dominant churches and anti-Western media and civil society groups is often supported by Russia. Despite these structural challenges, the commitment to European values and norms demonstrated by societies in these three countries gives hope that they can eventually consolidate their democratic institutions. It is argued that closer ties to the EU are important in explaining their relatively high level of democratic development. For this reason, the consistent and enhanced commitment of the European Union to this region is crucial to their continued success in this area.
Topic:
Democratization, Politics, European Union, Partnerships, Democracy, and Regional Politics
Political Geography:
Europe, Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia