German expert on the Caucasus from the Berlin ‘Science and Politics” Foundation, professor Hoeve Halbach shared his view of the ongoing processes on the South and North Caucasus with a VK correspondent. The first part of the interview deals with issues of Georgian politics.
- Herr Halbach, how would you comment the most recent interesting event in Georgian political life: Georgian millionaire Badzina Ivanishvili joining the ranks of opposition?
- Up until now it seemed that Saakashvili consolidated his position despite all opposition actions in 2007, 2008 and 2009. Some experts even suggested that when his presidential term runs out in 2013 he would use the “Putin scenario” and occupy the post of the Prime Minister. However, no the media talks about a ‘new challenge’ for Saakashvili. Ivanishvili’s fortune is as big as the whole budget of Georgia, so his support of the opposition made the political future of Georgia uncertain once again.
- It is not a secret that Mr Ivanishvili has close economic ties with Russia…
- Yes, he made his fortune in Russia, and that makes him a suspicious figure for Georgian government. I don’t know if he could really prove to be a Russian ‘Trojan horse’, as up until now Mr Ivanishvili didn’t show himself as a politician. He is a prominent figure for Georgian economy: his business in Russia is connected with banking, he owns a series of pharmacies there, but he also has enterprises in Georgia. He could have started an active political career long ago. He has a potential to create media agencies to promote his position, so it is a real challenge to the acting government. However, the government has already responded to this challenge by forfeiting his citizenship.
- You’ve mentioned the media-aspect of Georgian political life. What is its condition in the present moment?
- All TV-channels are under a great deal of influence from the government. There’s only one opposition channel. As for the newspapers and magazines, they are free, just like in other neighboring countries. However, in all post-Soviet countries the public opinion is generally formed by TV and radio. And the fact that they are under a scrupulous control of the state points out the lack of media freedom. In my opinion, in this regard the situation in Georgia is better than in Azerbaijan. But in the late period of Shevarnadze presidency the media was even freer.
- Are you saying that Saakashvili is moving towards autocracy?
- If we’ll take the changes in the constitution initiated by him, that we’ll have to say ‘no’. He broadens the powers of the Parliament and cuts presidential powers (however, they still remain wide enough). These measures are not as cardinal as those taken in Kyrgyzstan, but I still wouldn’t characterize Saakashvili as an autocrat akin with Central Asian leaders, however, his team monopolized the access to power, and this monopoly is no longer controlled by the people.
As far as the pronounced democratization is concerned, I don’t see any progress here. The ‘rose revolution’ made many promises, and the democratization was one of them. However, it was probably made to please the West. Two other most important promised were restoration of state agencies efficiency and the reclaiming of the territories de-facto lost for Tbilisi control. As you see, the in this aspect thing got even worse, as Abkhazia and South Ossetia declared their independence.
Democratization also doesn’t fully answer European standards, and Saakashvili’s Georgia isn’t more democratic than Shevarnadze’s. However, Saakashvili and his team made a great progress in the question of restoring state agencies’ effective work. Their fight against the corruption was a success, unlike in all other post-Soviet states.
So the results of Saakashvili’s rule so far are of a ‘hybrid’ nature, there have been successes and failures. Georgia is neither ‘democracy beacon’ as Bush used to say, nor a ‘fascist regime’ as Russian authorities claim.
- What do you think of Saakashvili’s idea to create a confederation with Azerbaijan?
- I was in Georgia when Saakashvili proposed this idea last year. So I asked my Georgian colleagues to explain this idea to me. But they couldn’t. Later, the President’s advisers commented that he didn’t mean it literally, that he just stressed the intensity of the two countries’ relations. It is true that Georgia has better relations with Azerbaijan than with Armenia, even though the latter is closer to Georgia in the aspect of religion. But as far as the ‘Southern transit corridor’ project is concerned, it will be arranged between Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey, leaving Armenia out. Georgian-Azerbaijani relations are a fine example of cooperation in the region.
- Georgia and Russia finally reached an agreement on the WTO issue. Each side tries to present it as their diplomatic victory. Do you think that there’s an actual ‘winner’ here?
- Such a reaction is only natural. In this case I believe that Russia gained the most. It has been trying to enter this organization since 1993. Georgia learned how to compromise. The agreement on border monitoring, however, doesn’t really change the status-quo neither to Russian nor to Georgian advantage.
- Do you think that the number of states recognizing the sovereignty of Abkhazia and South Ossetia will grow any time soon?
- It is possible that some other island-state in the Pacific, smaller than Ossetia itself, will agree to do that in exchange of some dividends from Russia. But I don’t think that any major state would recognize them unlike in the case of Kosovo.
To be continued
Interview by Orkhan Sattarov
