The recent crackdown on protests in Tbilisi has drawn parallels with Ukraine’s political turmoil during Viktor Yanukovych’s presidency over a decade ago. At the core of the issue lies Georgia’s wavering stance on European integration, a path fraught with domestic and geopolitical challenges.
In Ukraine’s case, Yanukovych’s administration faced public outrage after halting the signing of the Association Agreement with the European Union in 2013. Ostensibly, this delay stemmed from Kyiv’s objections to the conditions set by the EU, yet it was widely interpreted as a strategic manoeuvre to pivot away from the West and align closer to Moscow. Similarly, Georgia’s current government, led by the Georgian Dream party and its influential founder Bidzina Ivanishvili, has announced a deferral of EU integration until at least 2028. This move has sparked concerns over the nation’s commitment to democratic reforms and European values.
A Missed Historical Opportunity
Georgia’s hesitancy comes at a time of extraordinary geopolitical flux. The ongoing Russian aggression against Ukraine has significantly reshaped the EU’s neighbourhood policy, accelerating European aspirations for countries like Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine. Observers note that without the Ukraine war, Georgia’s bid for EU candidate status might have languished for years, if not decades. This window of opportunity is now at risk of being squandered.
Critics argue that the Georgian government’s rhetoric about postponing EU aspirations mirrors Yanukovych’s strategy. Both administrations have framed their reluctance as a response to “unjust” EU demands, attempting to deflect accountability. However, the underlying motives appear to stem from a desire to preserve domestic political control and avoid the transparency and accountability required by EU integration.
Challenges in the European Path
Georgia’s delay in European integration has far-reaching consequences. The reforms necessary for EU accession involve aligning with European standards in governance, judiciary independence, and human rights. These measures not only strengthen state institutions but also counter corruption and reduce oligarchic influence. For Ivanishvili, whose financial and political networks dominate Georgian politics, these reforms pose a direct threat to his grip on power.
Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze’s statements about deferring integration risk undermining Georgia’s credibility as a serious candidate for EU membership. This, in turn, complicates the negotiation process and reinforces perceptions of Georgia as a state veering towards authoritarianism.
Russia’s Role in Georgia’s Trajectory
The spectre of Russia looms large over Georgia’s political and territorial future. Unlike Yanukovych, whose alignment with Moscow was overt, Ivanishvili’s government maintains a more ambiguous stance. However, the parallels are striking. Yanukovych’s reluctance to pursue EU integration was coupled with a crackdown on political opponents and civil liberties. Similarly, Georgia’s government has faced accusations of stifling dissent and curbing press freedom.
Georgia’s situation is further complicated by its territorial disputes with Russia. Abkhazia and South Ossetia remain under Russian occupation, and Moscow has shown no interest in restoring Georgia’s territorial integrity. Instead, Russia’s long-term strategy appears aimed at weakening Georgia’s sovereignty, potentially reducing it to a satellite state akin to its occupied territories.
Moscow’s focus on Ukraine has temporarily shifted its attention away from the Caucasus, but this respite is unlikely to last. Russia’s ambitions for regional dominance persist, and its eventual designs on Georgia are clear.
Civil Society: A Beacon of Hope
Despite governmental inertia, Georgia’s society remains staunchly pro-European. Polls consistently show strong public support for EU integration, rooted in the belief that alignment with the West offers the best path for Georgia’s survival as an independent state. This sentiment reflects the broader geopolitical realities of the South Caucasus, where smaller states must navigate between regional powers to secure their sovereignty.
Protests in Tbilisi highlight the disconnect between the government’s actions and the will of the people. As seen in Ukraine’s Euromaidan movement, public mobilisation can play a decisive role in shaping a nation’s trajectory. However, sustained civic pressure will be required to counter the entrenched interests of Georgia’s political elite.
The Path Forward
Georgia’s government faces a stark choice: embrace the reforms necessary for EU integration or risk international isolation. The latter path not only endangers the nation’s democratic progress but also its very sovereignty. By deferring European integration, the Georgian Dream party risks aligning the country with a model of governance that prioritises authoritarian control over democratic accountability.
The lessons from Ukraine’s past are clear. Attempts to delay or derail European integration for political expediency only exacerbate domestic instability and weaken a nation’s geopolitical position. For Georgia, the stakes could not be higher. Its European aspirations are not merely a policy choice but a fundamental question of its survival as a democratic and independent state.
The coming months will test the resilience of Georgian society and the international community’s commitment to supporting its European path. For now, the echoes of Ukraine’s past continue to reverberate in Tbilisi, serving as both a cautionary tale and a call to action.
