On 14 December 2024, Georgia’s parliament, through an electoral college, selected Mikheil Kavelashvili, a former professional footballer turned politician, as the country’s president. This development has reignited concerns over Georgia’s democratic trajectory, the consolidation of power by the ruling Georgian Dream party, and the nation’s fraught relationship with the West.
A Controversial Electoral Process
Kavelashvili’s ascension to the presidency marks a departure from Georgia’s tradition of direct presidential elections. Under constitutional amendments introduced by Georgian Dream, the president is now chosen by an electoral college, a body comprising members of parliament and local government officials. This change has been widely criticised as a tool for consolidating power within the ruling party, effectively sidelining broader public participation.
Opposition parties and civil society groups have condemned the process as illegitimate. Many opposition leaders boycotted the vote, pointing to alleged manipulation in the parliamentary elections that shaped the composition of the current legislature. Salome Zourabichvili, the outgoing president, declared her refusal to acknowledge the legitimacy of Kavelashvili’s election. She vowed to remain in office until new parliamentary elections are conducted under what she described as fair and transparent conditions. Her position has been bolstered by statements from Georgia’s former presidents, including Mikheil Saakashvili and Giorgi Margvelashvili, who also rejected the electoral outcome.
Bidzina Ivanishvili’s Shadow Over Georgian Politics
The election has further highlighted the pervasive influence of Bidzina Ivanishvili, the billionaire founder of Georgian Dream. Although Ivanishvili officially stepped back from politics in 2021, he remains widely regarded as the country’s de facto leader. His informal role has been scrutinised both domestically and internationally, with critics accusing him of steering Georgia toward an increasingly authoritarian model.
Kavelashvili’s candidacy was notable not only for his affiliation with the People’s Power party—a nominally opposition faction—but also for his alignment with Ivanishvili’s broader agenda. People’s Power, which initially split from Georgian Dream, is often viewed as an extension of Ivanishvili’s political strategy, designed to present an illusion of pluralism within a parliament where genuine opposition voices have been stifled.
The Anti-Western Turn
Kavelashvili’s election is emblematic of a broader anti-Western shift in Georgian politics. Known for his critical stance on Western policies, Kavelashvili has expressed views that challenge Georgia’s longstanding aspiration to join the European Union and NATO. This rhetoric resonates with segments of Georgian society sceptical of Western influence, but it starkly contrasts with the pro-European sentiments of a significant portion of the population.
Western governments have been vocal in their criticism of the developments in Georgia. The European Union, which has previously supported Georgia’s path to membership, has expressed concern over the erosion of democratic norms. Josep Borrell, the former EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs, described the electoral process as a setback for Georgia’s integration aspirations, warning that such actions could jeopardise the country’s candidacy status.
Domestic and International Reactions
Domestically, the election has deepened political polarisation. Public protests have erupted in major cities, with demonstrators accusing the ruling party of undermining democratic institutions. These protests have been met with a heavy-handed response, including arrests of opposition activists and journalists. Human rights organisations, including Amnesty International, have raised alarm over the shrinking space for dissent in Georgia.
Internationally, the election has placed Georgia in a precarious position. While neighbouring countries such as Azerbaijan and Armenia may continue pragmatic engagement, Western nations are likely to distance themselves. The United States has issued a statement urging Georgian authorities to adhere to democratic principles, while France’s President Emmanuel Macron directly criticised Ivanishvili for undermining political pluralism.
Implications for Georgia’s Foreign Policy
Kavelashvili’s presidency could complicate Georgia’s foreign policy, particularly its relations with the West. Ivanishvili’s apparent strategy of leveraging anti-Western sentiment to consolidate power risks alienating Georgia from its European and American allies. This approach could also embolden Moscow, which continues to occupy Abkhazia and South Ossetia, territories internationally recognised as part of Georgia.
While Ivanishvili and his allies may hope that the West will eventually re-engage on their terms, this gamble risks leaving Georgia in a diplomatic limbo. Russia’s reluctance to recognise Georgia as a fully sovereign state further complicates the situation. Moscow has consistently advocated for a “three-state dialogue” involving Georgia, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia—a position that remains unacceptable to most Georgians.
Read also:
Georgian President Salome Zourabichvili Refuses to Step Down After Mandate Ends
