Prime Minister of Georgia Irakli Garibashvili has recently announced his decision to resign, explaining it was due to the fact that ''Mr. Ivanishvili also decided to leave his post at the peak of his popularity in November 2013, creating a good example of how to resign in due time," and noted that he "will continue to serve as an ordinary Georgian citizen and soldier."
Vestnik Kavkaza asked Georgian experts about the main Georgian achievements during the last two years when Garibashvili was prime minister, and what the government of the country failed to achieve.
Georgian political scientist Josef Tsiskarishvili told in an interview with a VK correspondent that, first of all, the figure of Garibashvili is associated with Ivanishvili, who introduced him as Minister of Internal Affairs, and a year later he appointed him to the post of prime minister.
"But unfortunately the prime minister’s independence coefficient was very low. Of course, he will be remembered as a person with certain positive qualities. He was active, but nobody saw him as independent. Due to the fact that Ivanishvili disliked yGeorgian President, who was presented to the voters by him. Since that period of time he dreamed only of one thing: how to evict him from the presidential suites,’’ Tsiskarishvili said.
"It was obvious that the Prime Minister ignored the existence of a constitutional body (the National Security Council). Due to the fact that he had no opportunity to argue with his teacher, Garibashvili organized his own national security council virtually bypassing the Constitution. Certainly, it negatively influenced the development prospects of Georgia. I cannot say that the country is upset by the fact that the young prime minister resigned from his post,’’ the analyst said.
The head of the Center for Strategic Studies of the Caucasus, Mamuka Areshidze, said in an interview with a VK correspondent that the main thing is that Garibashvili failed to fulfill his promises regarding the restoration of justice in full capacity.
"I was the co-founder of the party, then we dealt with it together. I believe that the leadership of Georgian Dream could do much more and achieve results in a more constructive way. Unfortunately, they failed to do so. The second thing is the economic component. They had the possibility of creating a development basis for the good of the Georgian economy. Unfortunately, they failed ti implement it,’’ the analyst said.
