Browsing by Author "Orjonikidze, Tamar"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The Constituent Assembly of Georgia and the Batumi Oblast
    (Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi state university, Faculty of social and political sciences, 2019-06) Orjonikidze, Tamar; ორჯონიკიძე, თამარ
    The Constituent Assembly of Georgia (1919-1921) is the most important stage in the history of Georgian Parliamentarianism. The study of its experiences is multifaceted and interesting, including the care of the restoration of territorial integrity of Georgia. During the first year of the work of The Constituent Assembly the jurisdiction of the Democratic Republic of Georgia did not apply to Batumi Oblast and Batumi Oblast was only returned to Georgia in July 1920. The Constituent Assembly systematically reviewed the issues of “marginal regions” and including the Batumi Oblast, the existing situation and the issue of their status in the state of Georgia. The work is prepared on the basis of the content analysis of the Stenographic Reports of The Constituent Assembly of Georgia (1919- 1921). The study showed, that in 1919 the condition in the Batumi Oblast was discussed on 7 meetings and in 1920 during 6 meetings of The Constituent Assembly. As a result of the survey the problems that were discussed in the respect of the mentioned Oblast are revealed. It was primarily to prevent the activities of hostile forces operating in the Batumi Oblast and to aid the development of a special state policy for integration the Batumi Oblast and its population into the Democratic Republic of Georgia. For the Batumi Oblast in accordance with the request of local political forces of Adjara, it was considered necessary to introduce autonomous governance in the composition of the Democratic Republic of Georgia. The issue was discussed at the sessions of the Constituent Assembly as well as on the session of the constitutional commission established by the Constituent Assembly, which was included in the 1921 Constitution of Georgia under the relevant Article (107). The separate regulation of autonomous governance should be developed separately (Article 108). The paper discusses the debates on this issue. Based on the biographical analysis, it was shown that three residents of the Batumi Oblast (Heidar Abashidze, Osman Mikeladze, Kadir Shervashidze) were members of the Constituent Assembly. It is important to consider the fact, that neither the main nor the additional elections have been held in Batumi Oblast. The work deals with the activities of these individuals in the Constituent Assembly. The Batumi Oblast was the last region of Georgia, which remained in the hands of the Georgian government during the February-March War of 1921 and was also a place, where the Constituent Assembly of Georgia completed its work. The last meeting of The Constituent Assembly was held in March 17, 1921 in the City Council building in Batumi. Based on the resolution, the Government of Georgia under the supervision of Noe Zhordania was granted the authorization. Afterwards he went into emigration to protect the interests of Georgia.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Issues of Election Finance and Political Ethics in the 2018 Presidential Elections in Georgia
    (2020) Orjonikidze, Tamar; Zedginidze, Natia
    Georgia, in terms of democratic transition, currently fits one of the types of hybrid regime profile countries, which is known as competitive authoritarianism. Although according to the theory of authoritarianism such regime is authoritarian indeed, it is trying to imitate democracy to the fullest extent. Opposition, which is tolerated, can access mass media, freedom of speech and real competition during elections do exist and many democratic standards are being met, but by and large, elections are conducted unfairly and the ruling political party is making strong efforts aiming at flawing elections as soon as it feels the danger of losing the power, abusing the use of state resources to the benefit of the political force in power. The nature of competitive authoritarian governance in the country was clearly revealed during 2018 Presidential elections, when it became necessary to hold the second round. The first (October 28) and the second rounds (November 28) of elections differed considerably. The first round, despite some violations, was conducted more fairly with regard to meeting democratic standards but as soon as the real threat of defeat of the government -supported candidate, Salome Zourabishvili became evident, the government resorted to various forms of electoral fraud. There is discussed the results of Presidential elections of 2018 year in Georgia on the bases of Anatomy of Competitive Authoritarianism. In particular, there are shown two important aspects of the sense of competitive authoritarianism: Inequality of government and opposition in terms of attracting election finance and an unsuccessful attempt to develop a document reflecting the ethical principles of behavior of election subjects during the election campaign. The article is prepared on the basis of electronic and printed media materials regarding the election campaign finances, as well as interviews with people involved in development of the ethical principles presidential candidates behavior.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Myths about Stalin in Modern Georgian Politics
    (Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi state university, Faculty of social and political sciences, 2021-06) Orjonikidze, Tamar
    There are no political forces in Georgian politics today that would use the word “Stalin” in their name, but this does not mean that the topic of Stalin has lost its political actuality. This is evidenced by the frequency of publications about Stalin in the Georgian press and heated debates, which periodically explode (for example, either in connection with the erection of a statue of Stalin in Gori, or vice versa, due to the intensification of the demand for the liquidation of communist symbols). In order to reveal the myths about Stalin, the report examines the publications about Stalin in the Georgian print press of 2020-2021. Articles about Stalin were regularly published in some newspapers (“Georgia and the World”, “Asaval- Dasavali”), and the monthly newspaper “Stalin” was published. The Georgian press is one of the most important sources for spreading myths about Stalin. Publications about Stalin are published in other newspapers on the occasion of the next anniversary of the victory in World War II and Stalin‟s birthday. The analysis of the Georgian press shows that there are spread mainly two types of myths about Stalin: in the first type of myths, Stalin is presented as a great politician who worked for the good of the Soviet Union; the second type of myth features Stalin, who took care of Georgia and did many things for its benefit. The first types of myths (“Stalin - the great politician”) were created in Russia and are based on memoirs of Stalin and works of modern Russian authors having publicist-historical nature. Myths about Stalin have been one of the mainstays of modern Russian state ideology since the 2000s. The basis of their transfer to Georgia is Stalin‟s Georgian origin - the idea is held that Georgians should be proud of Stalin, who headed the world‟s most powerful state and determined the fate of the world. The second types of myths, which talk about the steps taken by Stalin for the benefit of Georgia, are mainly based on the memories of Stalin‟s modern Georgian figures. These myths should show how well Georgia was as a part of a “great state” - Soviet Union. The weakest place to establish the image of “Stalin - the benefactor of Georgia” is the transfer of Georgian territories to neighboring countries after the Sovietization of Georgia in 1921. In this regard, it is noted that it is the fault of Lenin, to whom at that time Stalin could not resist. The active spread of myths about Stalin, the introduction of a positive image of Stalin in Georgia, the glorification of his deeds strengthen the anti-democratic movements, which occupy not so strong, but still important place in the political life of modern Georgia.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The Representatives of National Minorities in the Constituent Assembly of Georgia (1919-1921)
    (2020) Matsaberidze, Malkhaz; Orjonikidze, Tamar
    The paper reflects on the works and activities of the representatives of national minorities in the Constituent Assembly of Georgia in 1919-1921, through the analysis of the documents, stenographic reports of the sessions of the constituent assembly and those-days Georgian press and archival materials. The 20 per cent of the population of the Democratic Republic of Georgia (which was established on May 26, 1918) were ethnic minorities: Armenians, Turkish Muslims (they are denoted as “Tatars” in those-days documents and later they were re-named as Azerbaijanians), Russians, Greeks, Abkhazians, Ossetians, Germans. A portion of them were integrated in the Georgia society, whereas others found themselves alienated in the newly declared Georgian state and demonstrated separatist tendencies; a great majority of national minorities tried to become accustomed to the new life in the new state. The government of the Democratic Republic of Georgia granted extensive rights to the national minorities residing in the country and tried to integrate into the socio- political life of the newly created state. To this end, the significant work was undertaken by the governing political party – the Social Democratic Worker’s Party of Georgia – to ensure representation of all significant national minorities of the country into the Constituent Assembly through its party list. The paper analysis the activities of the representatives of national minorities in the Constituent Assembly of Georgia and reflects on their biographies to highlight their future fate in the emigration or under the Bolshevik repressions. Representatives of some ethnic minorities (Muslims, Greeks) established their own political parties/unions before the elections (The National Congress of the Muslims of Georgia; The Muslim Union of the Borchalo District; The Hellen’s Union of Georgia) although they did not manage to elect their nominee in the Constituent Assembly. The Armenian minority participated in the elections of the Constituent Assembly through the Dashnak Party and the Social-Democratic Worker’s Party of Russia. Only Dashnak Party was successful to send the nominee in the Constituent Assembly. Representatives of ethnic minorities were also presented in the electoral list of the Georgian political parties. In this respect, the Social Democratic Party of Georgia performed extremely well as through its party list the representatives of all major ethnic groups residing in Georgia were elected in the Constituent Assembly. The concept “People of Georgia” reflected the policy of integration of ethnic minorities, which denoted all citizens of Georgia, irrespective of their ethnic and religious belonging. The term was used by the ruling Social Democratic Party and by the representatives of the government of Georgia in their rhetoric. The policy of integration of national minorities only partially was successful, primarily due to the fact of the short time-span of the existence of the Democratic Republic of Georgia. In 1921, after the occupation and Sovietization of Georgia, the conquerors of Georgia manipulated and instrumentalized a portion of the national minorities against the central authorities of Georgia. The representatives of national minorities in the Constituent Assembly of Georgia were also affected by the Communist repressions, irrespective of the fact whether any of them collaborated with the Soviet government beforehand. Representatives of national minorities elected in the Constituent Assembly through the party list of Social-Democrats, which emigrated abroad, remained on the position of defending the interests of Georgia.