Plebiscites: necessary questions or campaign tactics?
By M. Alkhazashvili
(Translated by Diana Dundua)
(Translated by Diana Dundua)
Thursday, November 29
Voters will face two plebiscites when they head to the polls in January. The first asks whether parliamentary elections should be held in spring or fall, and the second whether Georgia should integrate into NATO.
The question of the timing of parliamentary elections has been central to the recent political turmoil in Georgia. However, putting the NATO question to the public seems less necessary.
On November 2, when anti-government protests began, the key demand was for parliamentary elections to be rescheduled for April, after constitutional amendments last year pushed parliamentary elections back, and presidential elections forward, to coincide some time in the fall.
The move courted controversy among the opposition, who deemed it “undemocratic,” and who emphasized the importance of sticking to the constitution.
One of the opposition’s more practical concerns was that the personal popularity of Saakashvili would carry the ruling majority to a resounding victory if the presidential and parliamentary elections were held together.
With snap presidential elections scheduled for January 5, this concern has been mitigated. But the plebiscite is still important for the opposition, who want to reaffirm the necessity of abiding by the constitution and not allowing amendments to be made at the president’s whim.
The United National Council, a coalition of opposition parties, has based their campaign around dramatically reducing the powers of the office of president.
If their candidate, Levan Gachechiladze, wins the upcoming election, he will be a placeholder while Georgia is transformed into a parliamentary republic.
The plebiscite on NATO seems to be largely part of the ruling party’s campaign strategy. With the majority of Georgians in favor of joining the Alliance, the plebiscite is unlikely to reveal any unexpected opinions.
However, it may serve as a reminder to the population of the distance the Saakashvili administration has taken Georgia toward the goal of NATO membership.
With international opinion towards Georgia at a low point after the violent crackdown on protestors on November 7 and the continued broadcast ban on Imedi TV, ruling party officials have repeatedly claimed NATO membership remains within close reach.
In a televised interview on Monday, ruling party MP Givi Targamadze said that while the recent political crisis may have “complicated” Georgia’s chances of receiving accession status at the NATO Bucharest summit in April, the situation was not “tragic.”
As a trademark of the current regime—and an issue that, according to an International Republican Institute poll taken in August, unites around 80 percent of Georgians in terms of their foreign policy views—pushing the NATO goal to the forefront of voters’ minds in January may be a clever campaign tactic.
On the other hand, the parliamentary elections plebiscite gives the opposition a chance to reiterate their agenda of reducing the power of the president and emphasizing the importance of abiding by the constitution.
The question of the timing of parliamentary elections has been central to the recent political turmoil in Georgia. However, putting the NATO question to the public seems less necessary.
On November 2, when anti-government protests began, the key demand was for parliamentary elections to be rescheduled for April, after constitutional amendments last year pushed parliamentary elections back, and presidential elections forward, to coincide some time in the fall.
The move courted controversy among the opposition, who deemed it “undemocratic,” and who emphasized the importance of sticking to the constitution.
One of the opposition’s more practical concerns was that the personal popularity of Saakashvili would carry the ruling majority to a resounding victory if the presidential and parliamentary elections were held together.
With snap presidential elections scheduled for January 5, this concern has been mitigated. But the plebiscite is still important for the opposition, who want to reaffirm the necessity of abiding by the constitution and not allowing amendments to be made at the president’s whim.
The United National Council, a coalition of opposition parties, has based their campaign around dramatically reducing the powers of the office of president.
If their candidate, Levan Gachechiladze, wins the upcoming election, he will be a placeholder while Georgia is transformed into a parliamentary republic.
The plebiscite on NATO seems to be largely part of the ruling party’s campaign strategy. With the majority of Georgians in favor of joining the Alliance, the plebiscite is unlikely to reveal any unexpected opinions.
However, it may serve as a reminder to the population of the distance the Saakashvili administration has taken Georgia toward the goal of NATO membership.
With international opinion towards Georgia at a low point after the violent crackdown on protestors on November 7 and the continued broadcast ban on Imedi TV, ruling party officials have repeatedly claimed NATO membership remains within close reach.
In a televised interview on Monday, ruling party MP Givi Targamadze said that while the recent political crisis may have “complicated” Georgia’s chances of receiving accession status at the NATO Bucharest summit in April, the situation was not “tragic.”
As a trademark of the current regime—and an issue that, according to an International Republican Institute poll taken in August, unites around 80 percent of Georgians in terms of their foreign policy views—pushing the NATO goal to the forefront of voters’ minds in January may be a clever campaign tactic.
On the other hand, the parliamentary elections plebiscite gives the opposition a chance to reiterate their agenda of reducing the power of the president and emphasizing the importance of abiding by the constitution.