Skip to main content

A new start for Georgia

Despite the continuing pressure from Russia, Georgia has been able to hold presidential elections that have been generally recognised as free and fair.

The incumbent, Mikheil Saakashvili, has been able to hold on to office, with about 52% of the vote. It is a slap in the face to Russia, which is the only country that has refused to recognise the elections as free and fair. Despite the intimidation, subversion and occasional violence, Russia has not been able to achieve its goal of undermining the independent minded Mr. Saakashvili and replacing him with someone more compliant to Russian wishes.

When the Russian fomented protests forced the election, there were concerns expressed that Mr. Saakashvili would attempt to create an authoritarian regime, similar to those in neighbouring Azerbaijan and Armenia. However, the continued engagement with liberalism, openness and democracy by the government has allowed a democratic solution to emerge. Despite desultory protests, the fact is that the elections, closely watched by international observers have indeed been free and fair.

As the Putin regime continues to challenge the West- the latest action being the appointment of the outspoken nationalist Dmitri Rogozin as Ambassador to NATO- the re-election of Saakhashvili is a significant victory for the forces of Liberalism against the faltering dead-end authoritarianism of the anti liberal Vladimir Putin. It remains to be seen, whether either the West or Mr. Saakhashvili himself can effectively capitalise on this victory, but it is a token of hope.

Comments

Anonymous said…
The 1996 presedential elections in Russia were also free and fair according to numerous western observers.
Cicero said…
and of course perhaps they were.. what has happened since is less happy, however.
Anonymous said…
and of course perhaps they were.. what has happened since is less happy, however.

If you judge the fairness of elections based on your preferred candidate winning, then I guess they were fair, but not by any other measure.
Anonymous said…
"Despite the continuing pressure from Russia, Georgia has been able to hold presidential elections"

What does this mean? You mean Russia tried to sabotage the elections?

What if someone tells you the elections were fraud? For instance Dieter Boden, head of OSCE mission to Georgia? Would you say "continued engagement with liberalism, openness and democracy by the government has allowed a democratic solution to emerge"
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Popular posts from this blog

Post Truth and Justice

The past decade has seen the rise of so-called "post truth" politics.  Instead of mere misrepresentation of facts to serve an argument, political figures began to put forward arguments which denied easily provable facts, and then blustered and browbeat those who pointed out the lie.  The political class was able to get away with "post truth" positions because the infrastructure that reported their activity has been suborned directly into the process. In short, the media abandoned long-cherished traditions of objectivity and began a slow slide into undeclared bias and partisanship.  The "fourth estate" was always a key piece of how democratic societies worked, since the press, and later the broadcast media could shape opinion by the way they reported on the political process. As a result there has never been a golden age of objective media, but nevertheless individual reporters acquired better or worse reputations for the quality of their reporting and

We need to talk about UK corruption

After a long hiatus, mostly to do with indolence and partly to do with the general election campaign, I feel compelled to take up the metaphorical pen and make a few comments on where I see the situation of the UK in the aftermath of the "Brexit election". OK, so we lost.  We can blame many reasons, though fundamentally the Conservatives refused to make the mistakes of 2017 and Labour and especially the Liberal Democrats made every mistake that could be made.  Indeed the biggest mistake of all was allowing Johnson to hold the election at all, when another six months would probably have eaten the Conservative Party alive.  It was Jo Swinson's first, but perhaps most critical, mistake to make, and from it came all the others.  The flow of defectors and money persuaded the Liberal Democrat bunker that an election could only be better for the Lib Dems, and as far as votes were concerned, the party did indeed increase its vote by 1.3 million.   BUT, and it really is the bi

Media misdirection

In the small print of the UK budget we find that the Chancellor of the Exchequer (the British Finance Minister) has allocated a further 15 billion Pounds to the funding for the UK track and trace system. This means that the cost of the UK´s track and trace system is now 37 billion Pounds.  That is approximately €43 billion or US$51 billion, which is to say that it is amount of money greater than the national GDP of over 110 countries, or if you prefer, it is roughly the same number as the combined GDP of the 34 smallest economies of the planet.  As at December 2020, 70% of the contracts for the track and trace system were awarded by the Conservative government without a competitive tender being made . The program is overseen by Dido Harding , who is not only a Conservative Life Peer, but the wife of a Conservative MP, John Penrose, and a contemporary of David Cameron and Boris Johnson at Oxford. Many of these untendered contracts have been given to companies that seem to have no notewo