Article
Paul Stronski
{
"authors": [
"Paul Stronski"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "russia",
"programs": [
"Russia and Eurasia"
],
"projects": [
"Changing Geopolitics of Eurasia"
],
"regions": [
"Caucasus",
"Georgia"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
In Georgia, the New President’s Big Runoff Win Masks Rising Polarization
Georgian society has been politically divided for years, so the heated tone of the recent presidential election was not all that surprising. Increasingly entrenched political polarization, however, would complicate the consolidation of Georgian democracy
Published on Dec 5, 2018
Source: World Politics Review
In the South Caucasus state of Georgia, Salome Zurabishvili, who was backed by the ruling Georgian Dream party, won a bitterly contested presidential runoff last week against Grigol Vashadze, who was supported by the opposition United National Movement. Zurabishvili’s 16-point margin of victory was unexpectedly wide given her razor-thin lead in the first round of voting held in October, and the election process was marred by accusations of electoral irregularities and an unlevel playing field. In an interview with WPR, Paul Stronski, a senior fellow in the Russia and Eurasia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, discusses the election results and explains why entrenched political polarization could spell trouble for the future of Georgian democracy.
World Politics Review: What accounts for the heated and aggressive tone of some of the rhetoric during the presidential campaign in Georgia, and how did Zurabishvili manage to defeat her opponent in the runoff?
Paul Stronski: Georgian society has been politically divided for years, so the heated tone of this election was not all that surprising, although some of the rhetoric was more extreme than normal. The general debasement of politics around the globe—most visibly seen in the United States since 2016—may have contributed to the candidates’ decisions to go low in this campaign, but the polarization of Georgia’s political space likely played an important role as well.
Salome Zurabishvili and Grigol Vashadze were the formal candidates on the ballot, but as in every Georgian election since 2012, the race was dominated by outsized political personalities who are no longer officially serving in government. As usual, those were the billionaire former prime minister and Georgian Dream founder Bidzina Ivanishvili and former President Mikheil Saakashvili. As a result, instead of choosing between two well-articulated policy visions for the future, Georgian voters were faced with a choice between two political factions that have long opposed each other tooth and nail. Each accused the other of cronyism, corruption and authoritarian tendencies in black-and-white terms. It was ugly...
This article was originally published by World Politics Review.
About the Author
Paul Stronski
Former Senior Fellow, Russia and Eurasia Program
Paul Stronski was a senior fellow in Carnegie’s Russia and Eurasia Program, where his research focuses on the relationship between Russia and neighboring countries in Central Asia and the South Caucasus.
- Russia’s Growing Footprint in Africa’s Sahel Region
- Russia in the Balkans After Ukraine: A Troubling ActorCommentary
Paul Stronski
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
- Is Frustration With Armenia’s Pashinyan Enough to Bring the Pro-Russia Opposition to Power?Commentary
It’s true that many Armenians would vote for anyone just to be rid of Pashinyan, whom they blame for the loss of Nagorno-Karabakh, but the pro-Russia opposition is unlikely to be able to channel that frustration into an electoral victory.
Mikayel Zolyan
- After Ilia II: What Will a New Patriarch Mean for Georgia?Commentary
The front-runner to succeed Ilia II, Metropolitan Shio, is prone to harsh anti-Western rhetoric and frequent criticism of “liberal ideologies” that he claims threaten the Georgian state. This raises fears that under his leadership the Georgian Orthodox Church will lose its unifying role and become an instrument of ultraconservative ideology.
Bashir Kitachaev
- Tokayev’s New Constitution Is a Bet on Stability—At Freedom’s ExpenseCommentary
Kazakhstan’s new constitution is an embodiment of the ruling elite’s fears and a self-serving attempt to preserve the status quo while they still can.
Serik Beysembaev
- Georgia’s Fall From U.S. Favor Heralds South Caucasus RealignmentCommentary
With the White House only interested in economic dealmaking, Georgia finds itself eclipsed by what Armenia and Azerbaijan can offer.
Bashir Kitachaev
- The Kremlin Is Destroying Its Own System of Coerced VotingCommentary
The use of technology to mobilize Russians to vote—a system tied to the relative material well-being of the electorate, its high dependence on the state, and a far-reaching system of digital control—is breaking down.
Andrey Pertsev
