Reasons for Cautious Optimism About Georgia’s Elections

Georgians are known for exaggerating the significance of each election their country has had, but there is little doubt that the October 26 parliamentary elections are the most important in its independent history. The governing Georgian Dream party’s intensification of its authoritarian, anti-West rhetoric and its threats to ban opposition parties if it remains in power make this vote a referendum between Georgia’s democratic or authoritarian trajectory, and between a European or Russian future. While Georgian Dream’s rhetoric and actions lead many observers to be pessimistic about the country’s future, there are reasons for cautious optimism. 

First, the four leading opposition parties collectively are ahead of Georgian Dream by 22% in a recent poll. What is more, while they are not running under one list, they have signed the Georgia Charter, a document drafted by President Salome Zourabishvili after the passing of the controversial “foreign agents” law. It outlines how a new, temporary government should be formed after the elections and its priorities during its term. 

The charter commits the parties that signed it, if they win a majority in the next parliament, to forming a technocratic government in consultation with the president and to repealing all anti-democratic laws passed under Georgian Dream. This government should then prepare the ground for free and fair early elections in two years, while taking the necessary steps to bring Georgia back to the path of EU integration. In a country where mistrust of parties is high and the government uses all state resources to discredit and divide the opposition, the signing of the charter by these opposition parties offers voters reassurance about their commitment to common democratic, pro-EU goals.

The United National Movement (UNM), the largest opposition party, led by former president Mikheil Saakashvili, is one of the four parties. The fact that it signed the charter, thus agreeing to a technocratic government, also somewhat alleviates many voters’ fears that it will replace Georgian Dream in power in case of an opposition victory. Throughout its 12 years in power, Georgian Dream has retained a large part of its support by claiming that the “warmongering” and “anti-state” UNM is the only viable alternative to itself. Given that many Georgians are dissatisfied with Saakashvili’s years in power, this has fueled apathy and nihilism among voters. With the promise of a coalition, temporary, and technocratic government, the charter opens the way for Georgians to vote based on optimism instead. 

Alongside the president and the opposition parties, Georgia’s civil society organizations are the most mobilized they have been for elections.

Second, alongside the president and the opposition parties, Georgia’s civil society organizations (CSOs) are the most mobilized they have been for elections. Aside from defying the “foreign agents” law and organizing to hold a mass march and rally six days before the elections, CSOs are putting together unprecedentedly large election-observation and “get out the vote” campaigns. Earlier this year, over 30 of them united to launch the “My Vote for EU” campaign that encourages ordinary citizens to become elections observers. At the time of writing, 3,335 volunteers will observe the elections across the country, alongside international observers and CSOs.

Civil society, in cooperation with the president and opposition parties, has also spent the past months campaigning to get Georgians abroad, who mostly lean toward the opposition, to register to vote. This has led to a surge in Georgia’s consulates, with over 95,000 people now registered to vote abroad, according to the Central Election Commission’s latest information.

Given there is low trust in society that Georgian Dream will hold free and fair elections, a large number of domestic and international observers, coupled with a high voter turnout, will ensure that violations are adequately documented and that officials in different precincts will have a difficult time manipulating the results. 

Third, Georgia’s Western partners are taking the clearest and firmest stance against the Georgian Dream government they have ever taken. For years, Georgian Dream benefitted from the West’s ambiguity toward it. The EU and the United States prioritized stability over democracy in the country and closed their eyes to democratic violations. This allowed Georgian Dream to continue convincing some of its supporters that it was leading the country toward the EU.

In the past months, however, the EU and the United States have frozen some of their assistance to Georgia. Washington announced financial sanctions and travel bans on high-level officials responsible for human-rights violations, and the EU has said that it will stop all high-level meetings with the government. The EU ambassador has also made clear that Georgia’s EU integration would be impossible under it. This clear stance by Western partners signals to voters, 79% of whom favor EU integration, that a vote for Georgian Dream is equivalent to a vote against the country’s EU aspirations. 

Georgian Dream’s rhetoric and actions suggest that it will not easily let go of power. However, the mobilization and coordination among democratic actors inside and outside Georgia may leave it with no other choice. If voter turnout reaches around 60% as in 2012, when Georgian Dream took power, the party’s conventional election-rigging strategies—pre-election vote buying, intimidation of vulnerable groups and public servants—may not be enough to tilt the result in its favor. 

This may leave the government with complete election falsification as the only route to staying in power. Yet blatant falsification will most likely lead to strong resistance by citizens at home, including by taking to the streets as they did against the “foreign agents” law, and from Western governments.

For a government without a loyal cadre in the security forces, mounting domestic pressure and Western isolation may be unsustainable in the long run. The stakes are higher than they have ever been. High voter turnout and increased mobilization and coordination between Georgia’s citizens and its international partners could open a new chapter for the country’s democratic, European future. 

Anastasia Mgaloblishvili is a ReThink.CEE Fellow 2024 of the German Marshall Fund of the United States.