On Current Crisis of Human Consciousness

On Current Crisis of Human Consciousness


By Bakar Berekashvili


Current heavy discussions among the intellectuals about conformist nature of modern society are closely related with the crisis of human consciousness in the modern world. In my own view, there is no doubt that conformism makes human much more depending or subordinating to something or to somebody. And conformism itself is a logic consequence of uncivil consciousness which definitely separates citizen not only from state but also from world, from nature as such. We are born in this world as free individuals and the idea of civil consciousness asks us to follow this holy value of freedom in order to keep our individual identity and thus to be in eternal contact with world, with our planet with our own beliefs and views.

The crisis of consciousness is not a simply new phenomenon of our time. And this is not also an abstract, unrealistic term which exists only within very definite space just as a part of our inner imagination. But mostly, crisis of human consciousness is a process which has its roots from old time and we still witness it. For example, if the crisis of human consciousness during the middle Ages was human admiration towards the idea of holy wars that should serve for prosperity of their countries, currently the clear reflection of the crisis of human consciousness is conformist and uncivil discourses which dominate over the minds of modern individuals. But here, of course I do not mean that conformism is also new phenomenon, of course this is also old one but point is that new post-industrial and post-modern society presented their own and new character of conformism.

There is a logic question on our minds. So, what are the basic reasons of conformism and why are people striving to gain conformist nature? Well, I would say that no person, as such, is encouraged and devoted to be conformist, but current trends of social and political thinking makes human to be conformist and subordinated one. But, of course we can seek the roots or let’s say the reasons of conformism which made society and individual as a member of society to follow conformist lifestyle.

Well, Georgian philosopher, Merab Mamardashvili thought that economic well-being or social welfare is not absolutely positive phenomenon for human, just because of that economic well-being makes individual as passive citizen with uncivil consciousness because he or she only strives to gain economic prosperity and for this purpose individual may sacrifice everything and thus to be value-free person, which of course is a clear example of conformism. And so, with such attitude, an individual gradually separate himself from nature and from the idea of individual identity and such identity makes this nature and our planet wealthy because diversity as such in many senses and terms is completely useful thing, and diversity of various individual identities is a source of attractive and brave human race.

Obviously, as I have mentioned, I believe that current crisis of consciousness is based on the idea of conformism, but mention should be made that economic benefits are not the only reasons for origin of extremely conformist society of our time. But, I believe that another reason of conformism and especially in contemporary Western Europe is raising and development of bureaucratic character which exists not only within particular institutions but also within individuals. Bureaucratic character for Europe is not new, of course, but this is alerting challenge for such Europe who claims to be democratic to have such strong reflections of bureaucracy. And there is no doubt that bureaucracy stimulates and encourages conformism and just for simply reason, and reason is that itself bureaucracy has conformist nature and bureaucracy can not survive without conformism.

But, if we take into the consideration the case of current Russian society, we can easily conclude that crisis of human consciousnesses and development of conformism is comprehensively related with human fear and this is not only fear of physical liquidation but also fear to loose happy and careless life full with economic wealth and one day you may loose all these if you decline to be loyal with existing political authority or with existing adapted social and political values in Russia. I would say that current crisis of human consciousness is deeply reflected in Russia as Russian citizens lost ability of free thinking and thus declined keeping individual identify, free thoughts and free imaginations, even inner, invisible imaginations.

Currently I am in Georgia, which is my native country and talking now from the heart of Tbilisi where crisis of human consciousness is also, of course, deeply visible. I can list three main reflections of current crisis of human consciousness in Georgia, and they are: passive citizenship, snobbish social identity and of course, I suppose you need not guess it and this is conformism. And this is so pity that especially young people in Georgia are victims of this conformism and passive citizenship, but this is also true that they decided to follow this road of passive activity as citizens just because of that they are motivated to meet economic wealth and to dedicate their life for accumulation of economic wealth and such approaches of course helps young people to be very popular and to satisfy their interest on any social and political level, from sexual intercourse with beautiful girls to holding high political position or probably non-political but proud positions and to be known among the people, and especially among the poor rural people who has a dream to have such family member. Young people, here in Georgia strive to gain education not for sole purpose to live with truth but for very poor pragmatic reasons which is to be popular and desirable person for some clans and snobbish social groups and also, current capitalist system and social thinking made human consciousness of young Georgians as very greed for mass popularity and wealthy.

The crisis of human consciousness with its all negative challenges is a legacy of wars, decomposition of society and social disarticulation which started existence from old ages. This is very clear that current crisis of human consciousness also creates obstacles for social justice, solidarity and common understanding among the nations which should be key foundations for post-modern societies for eternal survival. This is indeed very visible for us also that contemporary world capitalist order for which conformism as a reflection of human consciousness has vital importance damages holy ideals of non-conformist and active citizenship. There is no doubt that capitalism co-exists with current conformist nature of society perfectly and without any serious resistance.

Luchino Visconti, in his brilliant and dramatic film La Terra Trema, tried to show us that this is capitalism which made human consciousness and consciousness of society as such very conformist and loyal with any kind of negative and damaging challenges of life, and if somebody wish to change local social lifestyle he is completely sacrificed and potentially dead if there is no social consolidation within society around the idea of solidarity and common respect of human dignity.

I believe that there is no other way in modern world than to change the crisis of human consciousness with all trends which it contains. And of course, the only way for us is unification, worldwide civil unification for protection of eternal peace, dignity and our individual identity

Thank you very much and as John Lennon said I hope one day you’ll join us and the world will be as one:)

On Civil Society in Post-Soviet Countries

This is a foreword written by Bakar Berekashvili for March Issue of A Different View, IAPSS Monthly Magazine.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Foreword: In Memory of Merab Mamardashvili
by Bakar Berekashvili

“Truth is higher than nation”

Merab Mamardashvili

Dear friends,

I am especially happy to see another issue of A Different View which aims to discuss and evaluate development of civil society in post-soviet countries, to seek and analyze several key mistakes and achievements which we face now in this area. And I am very excited that this issue of ADV is dedicated in memory of Merab Mamardashvili, outstanding Georgian philosopher and public intellectual who gave his brilliant contribution in promotion of civic and democratic values in former soviet countries, including Georgia.

Merab Mamardashvili spent most part of his life in Russia where he graduated philosophy from Moscow State University and he deeply believed that it was his mistake to study in Russia. He studied in the country where soviet tyranny and oppressive regime of soviet system was awfully reflected and where academic freedom and right for free thinking among the scholars and intellectuals merely did not exist due to so-called political correctness. And even within such terrible conditions which Mamardashvili faced in Russia he remained faithful towards his values and principles which were reflected with his compassion of democratic state based on strong free civil society. Mamardashvili strongly promoted the idea of civic participation and need for civil society for any state and he delivered his lectures with such visions and views during Soviet era and despite high pressure from state bureaucracy he never joined large group of conformists which existed in academic community of USSR.

Despite high criticism of Soviet Union by Mamardashvili, this is a great mistake to say that Mamardashvili disliked Socialism, in contrast, Mamardashvili had his sympathies towards philosophical and conceptual basis of Socialism and he thought that Socialism was great European idea. And his critical reflections towards Soviet Union was relevantly accurate because Soviet Union did not manage establishing of real Socialism where social justice and solidarity should be guaranteed, instead of this Soviet Union and its Bolshevik founders established great tyranny and managed to close minds for majority of its citizens.

Citizens and civic groups were central for Mamardashvili in formation of state. He deeply trusted that citizens and society in general should emancipate their minds from such stereotypes, biases and prejudices which can disturb democracy and civil harmony in country. In late 1980s Mamardashvili returned in Georgia and worked for the Institute of Philosophy of the Academy of Sciences of Georgia and he also delivered number of lectures in philosophy at Tbilisi State University. This was time while in Georgia there was large scale promotion of nationalistic discourse from opposition political forces who soon took power in Georgia and also from large part of society there was active propaganda of nationalistic ideology. Mamardashvili strongly confronted with such nationalistic discourse and criticized those people who were in favor of such way of thinking Many people during this time did not like Mamardashvili because they thought that cosmopolite nature of Mamardashvili’s thinking was damaging for Georgia and he was especially discriminated by Zviad Gamsakhurdia, famous Georgian Nazi politician whose political team gradually started growing the power and finally it took state power in Georgia by the end of 1990s and in Spring of 1991 Gamsakhurdia became president of Georgia.

Merab Mamardashvili died by heart attack in November 1990. By that time he was on the peak of popularity in the groups of European intellectuals and philosophers, his writings are very valuable in contemporary Europe but unfortunately in Georgia still Mamardashvili is not respected and not many people know about his brilliant intellectual life.

One year later from the death of great Georgian philosopher, Soviet Union formally destroyed and this happened in December 1991. All member states of Soviet Union remained alone towards new challenges and initiatives. Some managed successfully to develop in progressive ways and some could not do it because of weak and powerless society.

Civil society is a very dangerous word for many governments in majority of former soviet countries. For example, this word “Civil Society” has cruel essence for the governments in Russia, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Uzbekistan and etc. Deaths and murders of journalists, human rights defenders and civil society activists in these countries show high level of dictatorship and totalitarianism which is established in these countries by their political leaders. Formation of civil society eventually means opening of the minds of citizens and their active civic participation which of course will be defeating phenomenon for corrupted political regimes in post-soviet countries and that’s why they brutally attack idea of civil society.

However, in terms of development of civil society in post soviet countries there are still some progress together with regress. For example in Georgia we have thousands of NGOs, civic groups and associations of citizens who strive to promote and advance democracy in Georgia; however regress is that many such institutions and associations are controlled by the government and lost real significance of civil society organizations. Also, universities which are central actors of civil society are totally controlled by the ideological mechanisms created by state authority.

This is an achievement for civil society development in former soviet countries while we see brave life of Gari Kasparov in Russia against government, while we see how Kasparov and his group struggle for protection of human rights and solidarity in Russia, and this achievement is caused by small part of citizens in Russia who wish to bring down totalitarianism and to replace it with democratic order.

I hope this issue of ADV will give clear landscape and basic trends of development of civil society in post-soviet countries and will give its modest contribution to promotion of the idea of civil society in former soviet countries. This issue also includes links on the topic of the month where you can learn more about civil society in former USSR and countries of Eastern Europe. I am really very thankful to all persons who contributed to this issue of A Different View.


Best regards,

Bakar Berekashvili

An Open Letter to Mr. Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, President of the Party of European Socialists (PES)

An Open Letter to Mr. Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, President of the Party of European Socialists (PES)


Dear Mr. Rasmussen,

At the very beginning I would like to express my genuine appreciation personally to you and to the Party of European Socialists which you lead currently. I believe that PES is one of the most important intellectual and political players in promotion of human rights, democracy and social justice in Europe.

I decided to write you this letter, firstly as a citizen of Georgia and then as young political scientist who is extremely worried about political and social identity of Georgian country. This letter is just sincere expression of my thoughts and reflections on current political and social processes in Georgia and I decided to send this letter exactly to you as I consider you and your organization as a strong voice for freedom, democracy and social solidarity across Europe.

This letter is also modest attempt from my side to push PES to be critical about contemporary Georgia and to be critical not only towards political authority, but also towards political opposition and towards some basic stereotypes and social values which affects democratic transformation of Georgia.

On Political Authority in Georgia

In 1991 Georgia gained independence. Oppressive soviet regime which lasted approximately 70 years left hard legacy for Georgia. However, people tired with oppression and humiliation by Soviet nomenclature had deep hope for brilliant democratic future of Georgia. But this hope was destroyed by the nationalist regime led by Nazi president Zviad Gamsakhurdia who brought only brutality and disrespect of human dignity in Georgia. Then Gamsakhurdia’s regime failed and Eduard Shevardnadze took political power in Georgia. High level of conformism, large roots of corruption, terrible types of state bureaucracy and many other things became basic political and social values in Georgia under president Shevardnadze. And in November of 2003, through the Rose Revolution, citizens of Georgia brought down Shevardnadze’s hybrid political regime. In 2003 new hope was born into the hearts of Georgian citizens and this was a hope for being European country, hope for building European democratic country.

Today, Georgia is gradually losing this hope and it even started to lose this hope one year later after the Rose Revolution, while it became clear for everyone in Georgia that Mikheil Saakashvili and his political team is not an example of democratic government. Lack of intellectual resources and embittered young political officials turned out to be the most important problem in Georgia. Embittered faces of Georgian ministers and political figures and their hate speech towards different view remind citizens of Georgia brutal political regime and state repressions in Georgia during 1930s. However, I totally disagree that current political regime in Georgia is relevant with Bolshevik political system just because of that Bolsheviks carried fundamentally different ideological identity than Saakashvili’s government, but mention should be made that the forms of hate and discriminative approach towards different political opinions in contemporary Georgia is very relevant to Soviet Georgia during 1930s.

Saakashvili claims to be a patriot of Georgia and in the name of patriotic spirit he regularly violates the most important value of each individual on our planet – a dignity. Human rights and human dignity became unserious discourse in Georgian under Saakashvili, for his political regime the most important thing is statehood and not democracy, but he forgets that statehood without human rights protection and democratic values is a monster that has much in common with tyranny and nothing common with humanism. Saakashvili claims that national security and national interest of Georgian nation is more valuable principle than a human and his dignity. And this is a terrible mistake of Saakashvili. This is a mistake which definitely shall lead Saakashvili to his political apocalypses.

In his brilliant work The Republic Plato said “I am the wisest man in Athens because I know I don't know. I am only singularly ignorant. The rest of the citizens are twice ignorant. They think they know, but they still don't know”. The idea to know something or the idea of knowledge is also sensitive issue around Saakashvili and his political authority; they think that they own objective truth and everybody should admit to this truth discovered by Saakashvili. But point is that there is no hegemony over objective truth in our humankind, because objective truth itself is a phenomenon that could not be hold by human. But still, despite this, Saakashvili thinks that this is exactly he and his government who knows what objective truth is and even not only knows but they hold and maintain such objective truth. So, Saakashvili decided to be a god, a real god who knows everything. And this is another great mistake of Saakashvili, particularly to identify himself with god and therefore to be known as Misha Almighty!

Georgian philosopher Merab Mamardashvili believed that a state without citizen is a monstrosity. He talked about necessity of civic life during Soviet era where relationship between the state and citizen merely did not exist just because of that Soviet Union saw a citizen not as an actor in state building but as an animal who should be feed by country. Mamardashvili pointed out that the result of October Revolution of 1917 in Russia was that state stepped in and tried to mediate everything, and according to Mamardashvili this was the death of civil society. Unfortunately, same happened in Georgia after the Rose Revolution of 2003, state decided what is good for society and what is bad for society, state started to rule the country without citizens, political authority did not consider citizens as source of any power and consequently Georgian state started to be formed as a state without citizen. Political authority neglected to accept citizen as a foundation of state, instead of this they accepted foundation of state their principles and doctrines because as noted above they think that they know everything and they dominate over the truth. Therefore, Georgian country is under great threat, I do not see this country with its citizens but I see this country as a country without citizen.

The great shadow of conformism is still visible in Georgia. Young people, encouraged with their aspirations to become influential officials agree to do everything with neglecting of moral values and honesty in order to achieve their holy aim – dominate over employees at their public offices. The sense of naughty makes young state officials unmerciful towards other people who do not share their opinions or simply criticize them. Strong desire of young people employed at various public agencies to became promoted officials stimulates them to peach against their colleagues and even against their friends within their agencies. Impregnated with envy and grief, young people at public offices try to humiliate others who are honest and intellectuals and unfortunately number of such intellectuals at Georgian public offices is extremely low. There is a significant gap in Georgian young generation and this gap frequently divide them into numerous parts which definitely does not constitute any foundations for consolidation of young people in Georgia to obtain freedom, dignity and democracy in this country.

The universities are most important institutions on our planet whose key purpose is to provide team of young intellectuals for country who should contribute to development of democracy, civil society and social justice together with all parts of society. This is very clear that in Georgia the idea of university and academic freedom is very neglected and disregarded by state authority. For example, Tbilisi State University which is a first university not only in Georgia but in South Caucasus does not realize real functions of higher educational institution. Unfortunately, critical and creative thinking among the students of university suddenly disappeared and university administration together with governmental structures successful try to offer the only dominant discourse for students and teachers and like during 1930s, university administration argues students and teachers that their task is only to study and teach and not to be involved in civic and political life. The rector of Tbilisi State University directly calls to all students and teachers not to join any actions and manifestations against state authority, because he thinks that such engagement will be relevant with high treason and everybody should be faithful before Georgian government. This is also cynical that current officials of Tbilisi State University who unmercifully attack different views in Georgia are persons who follow political conceptions of Georgia’s former Nazi president Zviad Gamsakhurdia. This is a tragedy of Georgian educational system that nationalistic discourse and nationalistic doctrines are pretty respected at Tbilisi State University which definitely will lead this educational institution to ignorance. In fact, in contemporary Georgia, there is not even the only higher educational institution that is not managed and controlled by state authority and so Georgian universities became not a place of creative and critical discourses but they became outlets of Georgian government. This is extremely bad fact that student self-government of Tbilisi State University is a key player in abusing academic freedom and student rights at the university and with this action, conformist students prove their loyalty to president Saakashvili.

Many intellectuals of our era and also previous centuries develop and agree the idea that revolution should take place in the minds of individuals and that revolution just for institutional changes will not bring any well-being for the country. I totally agree with this idea that this is important to have revolution in the minds of individuals and therefore to revise some social and political values. We expected revision of social and political values after the Rose Revolution of 2003, and we had a hope that old traditions and negative values would be finally broken down but, now we are disappointed, because we clearly see that nothing has changed. After the Rose Revolution we have received just new political authority with the same old taste.

On Political Opposition in Georgia

Speaking about political opposition in Georgia is doubly emotional thing for me than speaking about weaknesses of Georgian authority. Currently, in Georgia there are several opposition parties who criticize president Saakashvili and his team. However, I believe that these opposition parties, including their political doctrines or conceptions are much more dangerous for Georgian country and generally for Georgian society than Saakashvili and his government. Here, I mean below, I shall try to urge my opinion.

Religious nationalism is the most important characteristic sign of any opposition party in Georgia. Almost all opposition parties absolutely agree to the idea that state should derive its political legitimacy from adherence of Eastern Christian Orthodox values and consequently opposition strives to form theocracy in Georgia which is a central value of religious nationalism. Almost all opposition parties agree that they should listen to the advices given by Georgian patriarch, leader of Georgian Orthodox Church. And almost all opposition parties declare in their political conceptions that they recognize Eastern Christian Orthodoxy as the only doctrine who should rule the country and frequently representatives of these parties deliver their hate speech in manifestations and within Georgian media against ethnic and religious minorities in Georgia. Especially, such opposition parties as are: Political Movement “Freedom”, Political Party “Conservators” and Political Party “New Rightists” are famous with their hate speech and with their adherence for religious nationalism in Georgia. For example, recent statement of Davit Gamkrelidze, leader of “New Rightists” where he considers possibility for Georgian patriarch to be a regent of the country and to establish monarchy as a crucial political order clearly reflects nationalistic nature of his political party, mention should be made that part of old intelligentsia and part of new generation support Gamkrelidze because they consider them as a “Truly Georgian” and obedient before Georgian Orthodox Church. But the most important dangerous opposition party which I consider in Georgia is Political Movement “Freedom” who is chaired by Konstantine (Koko) Gamsakhurdia, a son of Georgia’s ex-Nazi president Zviad Gamnsakhurdia. Mr. Gamsakhurdia is the most dedicated protector of the nationalistic regime led by his father in early 1990s, he actively promote same nationalistic discourse like his father and if you take a look to the mission statement of his political party, you shall easily discover that this is a neo-Nazis political party in Georgia which will overflow everybody and everything who do not share “Georgian” values if they could take the power in Georgia.

Brutality against different view, embittered faces and dark political past are another characterizing sings for Georgian opposition like for Georgian state authority. Almost all politicians currently engaged in opposition activities has non-democratic and uncivil individual nature and they criticize Georgian government not for the reason that they would like to build democratic Georgian state but they criticize them because they wish to take power in country and just to satisfy their personal ambitions. I do not believe that Georgian opposition can save the country; in contrast, I believe that Georgian opposition, due to its ineffectiveness and numerous weaknesses can bring much more injustice and brutality in Georgia. I strongly believe that that nationalism and xenophobia which are their ideological identity will destroy not only democratic transformation of country and but in case of their coming in state power, Georgia will face serious isolation and marginalization from international community which could have fatal consequence for Georgian country.

This is a real tragedy of Georgian opposition that some of the parties who declare that their ideological identity is linked with liberalism are not faithful before their values. Republican Party, for example, which is considered as a political party based on liberal values and principles decided to join United Opposition due to their hate towards Saakashvili and therefore started to cooperate closely with Nazi and neo-fascist politicians such are Gachechiladze, Gamsakhurdia, Gamkrelidze and many others. This decision made by Republican Party deeply disappointed me, because I saw how this party betrayed their values and principles just in order to gain some political popularity and political dividends and therefore to take power in Georgia after Saakashvili. Actually, I strongly disagree with disseminated idea that political pragmatism is relatively nice thing. I think that political pragmatism makes any political movements vulnerable to betray their values and principles and to neglect idealism, in such case they frequently forget faithfulness towards their political principles and thus they loose their independent and different thinking towards various topics and problems. I am very sorry that Republican Party became real victim of such political pragmatism in Georgia and as a result of such approach we can easily see how Republican Party successfully managed friendship and collaboration with nationalist opposition parties in Georgia.

Another key problem to which opposition faces currently is ineffectiveness to maintain their proposals and initiatives on various social issues in Georgia. Problem is that Georgian opposition does not stand on progressive path and it simply generates dark and regressive ideas and therefore it is not able to propose any successful and attractive proposals before the society. Georgian opposition, similarly with Georgian state authority regularly reflects their hate towards different view and critical opinion expressed towards them. Opposition discriminates all critical opinions dedicated to their activities and they consider all the persons who criticize their mission and political outlook as supporters of government. Therefore, we can easily conclude that both opposition and political authority are talking in same context towards different view and critical evaluations of their activities and political vision.

On Myths and Stereotypes within Georgian Society

I do not think that current crisis in Georgia is caused only by political authority or political opposition. I do not see only political and social crisis in my country but also I see huge crisis in the minds of Georgian society, in the minds of individuals who has shared old stereotypes and myths on various topics and which of course damages progressive development of Georgian state and society. Georgian film director Tato Kotetishvili, in his excellent film Anemia which was released in 1988 reflects its sorrow that even after Perestroyka, part of Georgian society still stayed in old communist stereotypes and they assess our life with non-existing myths and stereotypes created by Soviet dictator Stalin. Unfortunately, Tato Kotetishvili died several years ago and he could not see contemporary Georgian society who still remains in same system of social values created by Soviet order. Furthermore, now Georgian society mixed it Soviet values into nationalistic values and we have got hybrid which totally destroys possibilities to create tolerant and open society in Georgia.

Popular Georgian stereotype or tradition to assess human in terms of his or her work career is still characterizing and damaging for country. Especially young people in Georgia are extremely motivated to take high positions in governmental structures and with this action to increase their authority within society and so they are surrounded with high sense of naughty and consider themselves as individuals who own monopoly on wisdom. Such people are always concentrated to humiliate others who are subordinated upon them due to job conditions. And scared with the possibility to lose the job, the people who are supervised by such young nomenclatures frequently experience degrading treatment form such young bureaucrats. Even, within Georgian young generation there are clans and cycles who try to establish their own order and make everybody to follow their demands. Unfortunately, such clans of young people can be found in Georgia in many governmental and even non-governmental institutions.

Lack of critical and creative thinking within Georgian society and especially among the young people is especially sensitive for Georgia. This is a Georgian stereotype that people are pro-governmental or ant-governmental; there is almost no sense in society to be critical against both political authority and political opposition. People who live in this country with great wealthy are pro-governmental and loyal with every steps taken by political authority, while people who live with extremely poor conditions in Georgia hate government and embittered by their poverty they passionately support opposition and therefore people lost ability of thinking as they assesses the things according to their social well-being. And this is a tragedy of Georgian country while we have here extremely rich and extremely poor people. And so, today we have got broken bridge, two divided parts of Georgian society: reach and poor and this is a problem which was noted and discussed yet in the second half of 19th century by Georgian writer and publicist Ilia Chavchavdze in his works. Unfortunately, such broken bridge on which Ilia Chavhavadze talked about exists in contemporary Georgia as well.

Recently, brilliant Georgian public intellectual and writer Naira Gelashvili talked about problems of modern Georgia. She absolutely truly noted that this country is not developing through free thinking and that people still carry some myths and stereotypes which definitely do not bring free and creative thinking in the country. I agree with her opinion that like in Soviet Union, in modern Georgia political authority does not appreciate free thinking. And the greatest problem of Georgia is that neither government and nor society is committed to have free thinking, creative and critical thinking which is a crucial source for formation of open and tolerant society. I think the snobbish character of Georgian society mixed with its nationalistic nature will bring only extremely negative results for Georgia. We should recognize and we should always keep in mind that only free and critical thinking can bring Georgia on the way of eternal peace, universal prosperity and real democracy.

Despite the fact that one could assess my opinions and reflections as very pessimistic, I still have a hope, and I hope that once Georgian country will stand on a proper path which should bring peace, democracy and social justice in the county.




Sincerely yours,
Bakar Berekashvili


21 February 2008
Tbilisi, Georgia

On Human Rights

This is a foreword by Bakar Berekashvili writtent for December Issue of A Different View, IAPSS Academic Magazine.

Dear Friends,

I am writing you this letter from Georgia, from my native country where I was born in 1983 while Georgia was a part of USSR. By that time, doctrine of human rights in Soviet Union was considered as a negative European idea and political discourse giving nothing to the nations. Then Soviet Union collapsed and Georgia gained independence. But human rights still were not basic part of Georgian political agenda due to authoritarian-nationalist government which came into power in Georgia after dismantle of Soviet Union and seriosly damaged country’s reputation in international arena. Then in early 1992 this nationalistic regime was brought down as well, but still no progress for Georgia in terms of human rights protection just because of that new president Eduard Shevardnadze who was a former communist leader did not care of human rights and established hybrid regime in Georgia. Then like their incumbents Shevardnadze’s government was removed and by peaceful means, particularly by the Rose Revolution of 2003 and opposition leader Mikheil Saakashvili became country’s president in 2004.
On 7 November of 2007, huge peaceful demonstration was organized in Tbilisi by which people protested Saakashvili’s political regime and accused Georgian president in abusing of human rights and democratic principles in Georgia. So, still here we see again that even in case of Saakashvili who enjoys of having good international reputation, Georgia could not achieve to be formed as a democratic country. Saakashvili responded protestors with dispersal of rally and by announcing state of emergency which was canceled few days later. He also announced conduction of early presidential elections in January of 2008 and so few days ago he resigned. Georgians intend to vote in January, some shall vote for Saakashvili and some shall vote for opposition, but they shall vote with new hope, with the hope for better Georgia, but also there are significant part of Georgian society who gradually lose this hope. And this is a drama of Georgian democracy.
It turned out that this is extremely difficult for Georgia to preserve human rights and democratic principles and to take succeesful steps for democratic transformation. I have already noted above that Georgian governments of any period could not manage establishment of truly democratic regime in the country. But what I always urge to my friends and distinguished colleagues is that this is not only political authority in Georgia who makes problems for human rights and democracy in Georgia, but also this is a Georgian society who lives with double standards. Point is that on the one hand Georgian society wants to live in democratic country where protection of human rights will be guaranteed, but on the other hand this is exactly Georgian society who has nationalistic nature of thinking and snobbish character as well which are in confrontation with the protection of human rights and human dignity. However, I do not want to be a pessimist and I should say that I see progressive groups in Georgian society, not very strong and capable in decision making process of Georgia but I see them and they make me to think about possible perfect democratic future of Georgia.
Georgia is not the only country in this diverse world that has troubles with human rights protection. Just observe other countries of contemporary humanity and one would easily discover worse situations in the field of human rights protection. Let’s think about post-soviet space where we can see Russia, Belarus, Uzbekistan and other countries where political authorities still consider the idea of human rights protection in soviet context and they achieved to form conformist and scared society who can not think about protection of human rights even in their inner mental world. Russia, for instance, is a clear example how authority managed to take control over the minds of individuals who acknowledge the only dominant discourse offered by the government.
The enlightenment era played crucial and decisive role in emergence of contemporary idea of human rights which is so much important and simultaneously disrespected in modern world. The ideas and conceptions developed by Lock and Kant provided clear determination of what individual rights are and why human rights are necessary for humanity. Then other philosophers of next centuries gave us more explanations in which conditions human rights are protected and how people and governments should deal with human rights protection. So, what is called for society where human rights protection is guaranteed? Karl Popper, 20th century Austrian-born British philosopher suggests that this is an open society who can provide strong basis and environment for protection of human rights and individual liberties. And the open society is the most important enemy of any totalitarian and dictatorial regimes of our world, because the open society is an idea and concept developed by 19th century French philosopher Henri Bergson who argued that within open society political authority is trasparent and tolerant and according to Popper open society itself is an enemy of closed society where the idea of human rights protection is strongly neglected by the government. Democratic countries have open societies and totalitarian countries have closed societies and where the closed space is discovered there can be also definitely discovered darkness.
On 10th December the world celebrates Human Rights Day because exaclty on 10 December of 1948 United Nations General Assembly adopted Universal Declaration of Human Rights and we decided to dedicate this issue of A Different View to Human Rights. With this issue we would like to explain how we see human rights today and to identify who respects true ideals of human rights and fundamental liberties in this world. This issue of A Different View may serve as a small but a very smart contribution for promoting and defending human rights worldwide. This is very important that the work of IAPSS has few dimensions and among them is to support protection of human rights and democratic values and for this purpose since its establishment, IAPSS carried out numerous activities focusing to promotion of human rights and democracy, and this issue of ADV is just continuation of IAPSS work in promoting basic principles of human rights, democracy and civil society.
I am really very happy to present before you this December issue of ADV and this became possible with existing of strong, motivated and common spirit within editorial board of ADV. I would like to say many thanks for everyone who took part in preparing of this issue of ADV. Special thanks for Zia Hosszu, Editor-in-chief of ADV and brilliant intellectual who did excellent job in preparing of December issue. I would like also to say many thanks for Irma Qehajaj, Co-Editor of ADV for her contribution in promoting of magazine. I am very thankful and especially grateful for Gábor Beregszászi, Michael Teodoro G. Ting Jr., Nikolett Sebestyén, Zsanett Papp and Kamilla Németh for their excellent articles on the topic of the month.
Finally, I wish to ask our intellectual readers to provide us with their very valuable comments, remarks, and suggestions. We are always more than happy to hear about your innovative ideas for our magazine and also to accept your articles for the next issues of ADV which will be also very interesting and attractive for all of us.

Reflections on Contemporary Georgia – Vision from Czech Republic

Reflections on Contemporary Georgia – Vision from Czech Republic (This article is simultaneously published for the newspaper The Georgian Times on 15 October 2007)

By Bakar Berekashvili

„There is no guarantee that the civil society is always benign. But we must take the risk. The civil society corresponds to the historical possibilities of man and history as a drama of good and evil. This is the dignity of man: the choice of good and evil.“

Merab Mamardashvili



Brief Discourse on Georgia’s Desire to become European Democratic Country

Georgia’s political and social aspirations are an open secret. These aspirations are based on country’s strong desire to build democracy and civil society in Georgia, to integrate into the European space of democratic and civic values and thus to confirm again for modern world that Georgia is a democratic European state. But definitely the task is not so simple, it is very challenging and still full with various obstacles. Georgia still has to pass a long way of democratization in order to achieve its democratic goals and finally to be formed not transitional democracy but real democracy in our own country.

In Czech Republic, where I live now, it took approximately 10 years to become democratic country. Since 1989 when communism died in this country, Czech Republic started rapid consolidation of democratic values that was doubtlessly led by Václav Havel. Currently, Czech Republic returned to its hostorical roots and enjoys to be democratic European country. However, here I mean no way that there are no problems in Czech Republic and that here we have absolute democracy. In fact, there is no absolute democracy in our universe.

It took 10 years for Czech Republic to achieve its goals and to become European democracy. And despite perfect progress which it experienced by the end of 1990s, it was possible for Czech Republic to join EU only in 2004, while it joined NATO in 1999. So, even for Czech Republic which is located in the central area of Europe and whoese political and social values always were truly European, it was still hard work to rehabiliate and to become real European democratic society.

So, now we can imagine how difficult it is for Georgia to pass sensitive way of democratization which should lead us to be formed as European democratic country. Despite some progress which Georgia achieved since Rose Revolution of November 2003 that can be seen in police and military reforms, Georgia still faces serious difficulties in building a democratic and civil society. It is still very difficult for some to say whether Georgia has opportunity to become European country and these problems and obstacles are not only related with political authority.

Weak civil society, conformist young generation, ineffective and powerless opposition, lack of critical judgjment within society – these are main problems and obstacles for building of real democracy in Georgia. This is not what Georgia gained after the Rose Revolution, but this is simply soviet legacy of Georgia, this is a sorrowful destiny of Georgia that even Rose Revolution could not change. It is hard to agree with the Georgian opposition groups who claim that Saakashvili’s administration established dictatorship after the Rose Revolution. I would say that so-called idea of „strong hand“ is a very successful model of geverning Georgian country and Saakashvili just follows this model. The only power that can stop implementation of the idea of „strong hand“ is only society or people. And the idea of „strong hand“ is not linked with the philosophy of dictatorship, it is just another phenomenon which is characterizing for former soviet countries, including Georgia.

Czech Intellectuals on Georgia’s Democratization

Despite serious defficulties and problems which Georgia faces now, here in Central Europe Georgia is still very promising country and model of democratic transformation after the Rose Revolution. Saakashvili is a popular person both in Brussels and other cities of Europe. Rose Revolution of November 2003 made good impressions for European intellectuals to think and speak abouth bright future of democracy in Georgia, some of them think that it will take long time for Georgia but still they beleive that Georgia selected good path for democratization. Petr Kratochvil, Deputy Director of the Prague Institute of International Relations said following: „There is no doubt that democracy in Georgia has improved after the Rose Revolution. However, comparing with the west, Georgian democracy is still under the way of development and not such strong as it is in west. Czech Republic also experienced demoractic reforms and it took couple of years, however we still achieved to become democratic in short period. Regarding Georgia, I think it will take much long time“. However, Petr Kratochvil also noted that there are some important steps that Georgian government should take in order to achieve its democratic goals: „Well, point is that if you want to have a real democracy this is important not only to adopt democratic laws and access democratic principles, but also to implement them. Georgia should be stronger for implementation of adopted laws and democratic principles as well. I think that the most important for Georgia is to strengthen institutional buildnig, to carry out strong anticorruption measures, to support building of autonomious capicity and etc. Also, poverty reduction should be important subject for Georgia.“


This is not only Czech think-tanks who think that democracy in Georgia improved and who believe in perfect democratic future of Georgia, but the Czech officials think also similarly. This is what Tomas Szunyog, Director of South-East and Eastern European Department at the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs said: „We hope that Georgia can become fully democratic country and not transitional one. We have full confidence with your government and this is very clear that you made very good progress in terms of democratic development after the Rose Revolution. I would like also to note that there is a stable political landscape in Georgia, economic policy is developing and social standards of living are higher“.

Above mentioned speech given by Mr. Szunyog is a very clear example of political symphaties provided by some influental Czech politicians and decision makers towards Georgia. And this is not only Czech Republic in Central Europe who has such political symphaties towards Saakashvili’s government, you can see such support in other countries as well.

What are the reasons of European support for current political authortity in Georgia? Another Czech intellectual, Marek Vozka who is very familiar with Georgia and currently works for influental Czech foundation „People in Need“ said: „I would say that before the collapse of Soviet Union and during the collapse of it, every member countries of USSR stayed on same political line. After collpse of USSR, some countries still remained on same old line, including Russia. But as for Georgia, it is very visible especially after the Rose Revolution that situation changed significantly. Saakashvili’s government is much more effective and the reforms which your government carried out are democratic“



Georgia’s Membership to EU and NATO – A Pessimistic Landscape

However, despite of positive point of views expressed by leading Czech experts on current political processes in Georgia, they have still sceptical view on the question of Georgia’s possible membership for EU and NATO. This is well-known that Georgia strives to join EU and NATO and declared that this is strong political will of contemporary Georgia to became full member of European family. Here, in Czech Republic, almost majority of Czech experts and academicians beleive that Georgia has less chances to join EU. „As regarding EU, here subject is much more pessimistic. And again problem comes from EU, and problem is that EU has adopted and introduced to Georgia ENP as a substitute of Georgia’s membership to EU, like it did for Ukraine and Moldova as well. I think that that question of Georgia’s membership to EU is a subject of political decision.“, said Petr Kratochvil.

So, it seems that we should not be happy to enjoy with having ENP in Georgia, however many Georgian NGOs and government itself try to make sure people that ENP is a step for EU membership. But the truth is that ENP is a substitute for Georgia to EU membership, the Georgian NGOs tend to misrepresent it, probably, due to so-called „Political Correctness“. As for NATO, here Petr Kratochvil is still sceptial, however, he noted that chances for NATO are bigger for Georgia: „Well, I understand why Georgia has such a strong desire to join NATO, but this topic for me more or less is sceptical and this not due to Georgia but due to NATO approach. Well, point is that NATO itself is very sceptical about Georgia’s membership, and this is not so much linked with the factor of Russia as many interprets it, but this is due to frozen conficts which exist in Georgia. However, if you compare with chances for EU membership, it is very clear that chances for NATO are bigger.“ he said.

Representative of Czech government also thinks that Georgia’s possible membership to EU is a very complex question, however Czech government fully supports to Georgia’s aim and aspiration to join EU but at the same time they say that this would be very long and difficult way for Georgia. This is what Tomas Szunyog said: „This is very complex question. Currently, EU is mostly focused of having negotiotions with applicant countries which are Croatia, Macedonia and Turkey. Also mention should be made that another issue is whether Georgia is ready to join EU. I think that Georgia still has many tasks to implement in this regard and it needs to pass long way“. Regarding NATO, here Mr. Szunyog strongly beleives that Georgia is a serious partner of NATO, however, here also he beleivs that this would be long way for Georgia „Georgia is a serious partner of NATO. We would also strongly support Georgia’s inclusion to MAP. This is right that you carried out positive defense reforms but joining of NATO is more demanding then only military reforms. I would say that this will be a step-by-step process for Georgia“ said Thomas Szunyog.

It is very clear that Georgian population is not aware of what NATO is. Curiously, most of the people beleive in popular political speech in Georgia that NATO is a pro-humanist, democratic union, while in fact NATO frequently broke down the basic principles of democratic values and the case Balkan region is a very clear example of it.

Why Georgia is Important for European Demoracies?

At first glance probably this question seems to be both difficult and simple. Petr Kratochvíl answered this question perfectly: „Georgia is a very important country for Europe, because we share same common values. Georgia shares European and generally western values and I would say that Georgia is a part of European community in many aspects“.

This is more then truth. But at the same time we still have to take many steps to be perfect member of European family and this is not only linked with building strong political and economic system, but this is importantly related with strengthening formation of strong free civil society in Georgia and to the promotion of basic civic and democraties values. Georgia should form effective society with creative and critical judgjment and to defeat conformism as a legacy of soviet social lifestyle.




Bakar Berekashvili is intern at the Institute for European Policy in Prague

The Georgian Times interviewed Bakar Berekashvili

Why do we need this lustration law?

By Nino Edilashvili, Georgian Times

23 March 2007

The knowledge of who the spy was is power. Who knows this, he naturally can rule him. - Georgian philosopher A. Bakradze
Why do we need this law? To be tolerant with those who collaborated with the former regime, or to condemn them for their past sins against us? This was a key question raised at the meeting on lustration on March 9.
The Tbilisi-based Goethe Institute, together with funding from the Heinrich Boell Foundation, arranged a meeting with Dr. Joachim Gauck, Federal Commissioner for the Files of State Security of the former the Eastern-Germany’s ,,shtazis'' (State defense service) archives. The main aim of the meeting was to share Eastern Germany’s experience with a lustration law with the Georgian audience.
MP Nika Rurua, Giga Zedania, Associate-professor at Ilia Chavchavadze State University, and Ivliane Khaindrava, an opposition-minded MP, participated in the discussions.
Lustration- which derives from the Latin Lustrum and describes a ceremony of purification of the Roman people after every five-year census - in the current world implies exposing those who collaborated with the former communist regime. This topic is very sensitive in post-Communist countries. The meeting hall was overcrowded and, despite repeated requests of moderator Lasha Bakradze to finish the discussion, the meeting exceeded the scheduled time by several hours.
According to Joachim Gauck, who is a legendary person in Germany, society’s attitude towards a lustration law is a kind of benchmark of tolerance for its own enemy. He said that the Eastern-European countries regulated this issue in such a way that it did not provoke any kind of discord among European society. Dr. Gauck advises Georgian society to choose the same path and promises to give consultations in how to achieve that.
In the communist era the best way to climb up the carrier ladder was to apply for membership in the ruling communist party. Georgia, with 70 years of communist history, was on one of the first places with a number of communist party members. According to popular statistics, every 10th Georgian was a member of the communist party. Many of them cooperated with the regime as agents, and the communist regime could control the situation with a dense network of spies. There were very few dissidents who were against the regime and were announced the people’s enemy for several years. After the collapse of this regime the former dissidents who wanted to know the truth and be rehabilitated started active work to adopt a lustration law. But their attempts ended unsuccessfully.
An opposition-sponsored draft law on lustration which was submitted to Parliament in 2006 November is the third attempt to initiate a law on lustration since Georgia gained independence.
The draft law, which was proposed by the Democratic Front parliamentary faction, says that those who worked in ex-Soviet special services, held high positions in the Soviet Communist Party, or served as KGB agents will be banned from holding key positions in the government. But it is a kind of tolerant, because this draft law will not have to publicize the full record.
Georgia's current government demonstrated its approach to lustration law when the new government formed (2004) under the leadership of late PM Zurab Zhvania signed the “10 Steps to Independence". The authorities pledged to pass a law on lustration, but no document has been proposed so far by the government. This subject is still a very unpopular topic for the ruling party and media alike. It is very difficult to recall any kind of initiative related to lustration that the government has proposed since then. It seems that lustration law is a very sensitive topic among the members of the government. That’s why the parliament majority don’t have a unified position, and that was the main reason why this draft law was rejected in February.
Giga Bokeria, MP from the ruling National Movement party, said in an interview with Civil Georgia in mid-November that “debates within the ruling majority are not yet over.” But he added he would support an “even tougher” law on lustration.
Nika Rurua, an active figure of National Movement party and the deputy chairman of the Parliamentary Committee for Defense and Security, tried to justify the parliamentary majority's careful approach to this issue at the 9 March meeting. He said: “Lustration as a process is not technically ready. 84% of the documentation is destroyed, or the main list of agents is currently in Moscow and unavailable to the Georgian side.” Rurua claimed that the very few documents in the hands of Ministry of Internal Affairs will not shed light to the issue.
The government-affiliated Liberty Institute NGO recently proposed a new and tougher vision on lustration which is kind of alternative to the parliamentary opposition's blueprint.
According to this proposal, lustration should target not only former KGB employees and Communist party functionaries, but also those who have been cooperating with Russian state structures since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.
The meeting on March 9 raised a key question on lustration: why do we need this law? To be tolerant with whose who collaborated with the former regime or condemn them for their past sins against us?
According to former political dissident Levan Berdzenishvili, it is important and absolutely necessary to expose the identity of the person who squealed on him to KGB, and who banned his colleagues from the university to attend his court trial.
Journalist Davit Paichadze, the Deputy Dean of Social and Political sciences of Tbilisi State University: “It would be better if Georgian society learns who, for example, Vazha Lortkipanidze [former state minister], Temur Shashiashvili [Shevardnadzes former governor], Zaza Shengelia[former director of TV broadcasting] are.”
Representatives of the young generation are opposed to the radicalism of the lustration law supporter. Bakar Berekashvili, a young independent researcher on Eastern Europe issues, told GT that the former dissidents who want to adopt the lustration law do not the follow dissident values, since tolerance was the most important idea for the communist era dissidents. “For them [the former dissidents] the main problem was the system, not individuals. They didn’t fight to bring those who squealed on them to justice."
According to the young researcher, in Georgia, which is building its democratic institutions, Georgian intellectuals should talk about how to help improve the democratization process and protect human rights rather than to adopt a lustration law. The adoption of the lustration law will only clarify who squealed on whom, but brings nothing to Georgian democracy itself.
"In my opinion, the State should begin digging into history, what happened 25-30-40 years ago, when it has finished its most important function – shaping a true democratic country." He added.
According to 35th US President John F. Kennedy, public peace does not require that that every one like his neighbor. It requires only that they live with each other with tolerance. So this lustration law will be one more test for Georgian society to verify how tolerant it is and whether it is ready or not to look back firmly at its past, neighbors.

Georgia's Rose Revolution

By Bakar Berekashvili (First published on 25 December 2003 for the webpage of the Youth for International Socialism)

November 23, 2003 was a very significant day in the history of Georgia. For the first time in Georgian history a revolution took place in the old southern Caucasus state. About 100,000 people forced Shevardnadze to resign. Shevardnadze's regime failed and a new era was opened in Georgia; an era without Shevardnadze and without his politics.

Eduard Shevardnadze and Georgia before the "Rose Revolution"

Eduard Shevardnadze was born to a poor family in a little village in Georgia called Mamati, January 26, 1928. His father, a teacher, did not earn enough money to feed the family, including Eduard and his three brothers and one sister. Shevardadze remembered that when he was a child he did not even have shoes for the walk to school. His friends also say that Eduard was a very poor child who was always hungry. During his child hood he worked as a post man, and used to read many newspapers. Eduard's father, Ambrosi Shevardnadze always noted that Eduard would become a great man who would one day govern the country. When Eduard was about 17 years old, he decided to enroll in medicine. He was step-by step building himself a good future. He then took an important position in a communist office in Kutaisi, the second largest city in Georgia. At the same time he enrolled in the Faculty of History, his second specialty.
He then moved from Kutaisi to Tblisi, the capital of Georgia, and worked in various positions of the Communist Party. He then became the Minister of Internal Affairs, and then became the First Secretary of the Georgian Communist Party, becoming the number one man in Georgia. He eventually received the post of Foreign Affairs Minister of the USSR, the second in command next to Mikhail Gorbachev, who was the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Shevardnadze then resigned as Minister of Foreign Affairs, and on the December 21, 1991, the USSR collapsed.
During his activities in the USSR, Shevardnadze demonstrated that he needed 'Marxism-Leninism' and the Communist Party in order to create a good political career for himself. The truth of the matter was that he was not a defender of Marxism-Leninism and that he was a very ambitious politician who was involved in bribery. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Georgia held presidential elections. Zviad Gamsakhurdia, a writer and strong anti-communist was elected president. Unfortunately, Zviad Gamskhurdia could not govern the country. There were many reasons for this, among which were his Nazism and his lack of ability to play the political game. He also appointed uneducated and people incapable of doing anything to very important positions in the government. It should be noted that Gamskhurdia himself was an intellectual, but also a person whose government caused many problems in Georgia. The situation soon became difficult. Civil war erupted in Abkhazia, an autonomous region of Georgia, which demanded independence. The civil war is a black spot on recent Georgian history. Georgians were killing one another and the level of destabilization was very high. Gamskhurdia, time and time again, lost control of state power and his government eventually collapsed. He left Tblisi and his place of living was unknown. Some thought that he was in the North Caucasus, but he had in fact died in Jikhashkari, a village in western Georgia. According to official information, he had committed suicide. After the withdrawal of Gamskhurdia, the opposition came to state power. A military council governed the state under the leadership of Jaba Ioseliani. Jaba Ioseliana and his supporters contacted Shevardnadze in Moscow, and asked him to return to Georgia to become the head of state. Shevardnadze agreed and arrived in Georgia in February 1992. In the fall he became the head of state, and at the same time a tragic war erupted in Abkhazia. Georgia lost many young citizens in the course of the war and eventually lost its territorial unity. Shevardnadze worked hard to create stability. In 1995 an assassination attempt was made on his life, but he survived. Shevardnadze arrested Jaba Ioseliani as an organizer of this act of terror. He also tried to arrest Igor Giorgadze, who was the Minister of State Security, whom Shevardnadze claimed had been involved in the assassination attempt. Giorgadze fled Georgia and was declared the number one terrorist in the country by Shevzrdnadze. Giorgadze has been sought by Interpol since 1995.
In August 1995, the parliament of Georgia approved a new constitution which was to be the Georgian model of western style democracy. Parliamentary elections were held in the same year and Shevardnadze's party, the "Citizens' Union of Georgia", took first place. Presidential elections also took place and Shevardnadze became the president for a five - year term. Shevardnadze declared that Georgia's foreign orientation would be pro-Western. He also claimed that Georgia was entering a new era - an era of democracy. Both elections were rigged but the US and its western allies did not say a thing, because Shevardnadze was the go - to - man in Georgia. The economy began to improve under Shevardnadze. The years 1996-1997 were not bad years for Georgia. During this time the budgetary system was more proper. Georgia also developed NGOs and became a strategic state for the US in the Caucasus region. The Georgian state sent out many foreign delegations and investments and grants were increased both to the state and to NGOs. However, Georgia still had many problems such as corruption and improper management. From 1997 on, the situation hadn't really improved and the level of corruption increased. Shevardnadze helped create a strong oligarchy and his family came into great wealth. There were however not many problems in foreign policy. In 1999, Georgia became a member of the Council of Europe. The population still lived in poverty and social problems were becoming quite severe. For any state it is important to feed its people and to not blatantly fill the pockets of oligarchs and officials, who in Georgia had helped Shevardnadze to come to power. The US was aware of everything that was going on but again was silent. In 1999, parliamentary elections were held and the Citizens' Union yet again gained first place. These elections were also rigged and the US still did nothing. In 2000, presidential elections were held and Shevardnadze became president for a second term. Georgia was in a state of regression from 2000-2003. Bribery became the main force in politics. Un-professionals were appointed to key posts in the government and the oligarchy became stronger. The level of poverty was becoming quite high and people began to detest Shevardnadze. From 2000-2003, Zurab Zhvania and Mikhail Saakashvili became the main force of opposition to Shevardnadze. Zhvania was the Chairman of Parliament who had resigned and Saakashvili was Shevardnadze's former supporter. Saakashvili also formed a new political party called the "National Movement", and quickly became Shevardnadze's number one enemy.

The Creation and Activities of the student movement "KMARA" ("ENOUGH")

"KMARA" was created by the students of the Tbilisi State University and was the Georgian version of the Serbian "OTPOR". On April 14, 2003, KMARA announced its formation and held a demonstration of 300 students. The demonstration began at the State university and continued to the President's office. KMARA activists carried Georgia's former Soviet flags in their hands and burned them near the President's office. There were also pictures of Shevardnadze and his supporters on these flags. KMARA was sponsored by the infamous financier George Soros. His foundation in Georgia was called the "Open Society - Georgia Foundation"and was anti-Shevardnadze. This organization financed KMARA. The main goal of KMARA was the removal of Shevardnadze by peaceful means. This movement held a number of demonstrations against Shevardnadze's government. KMARA had many posters which exclaimed "ENOUGH". KMARA did have its problems though, and it was a problem of neutrality. A very well-known anti-Shevardnadze NGO in Georgia was the "Liberty Institute", and activists of KMARA were subordinated to this institution. In turn, the Liberty Institute was subordinated to Georgia's two main opposition parties: the National Movement and the united Democrats. The Liberty Institute was the founder of KMARA and controlled its finances. The movement was initially progressive but it became very ugly and many anti-intellectuals became part of the movement by the middle and end periods of its activity. KMARA was also supported by other non-politicians. There were various groups of singers and writers who supported it, for example. This decision to support KMARA was a wrong one. KMARA was also the strongest pro-American movement. It was greatly influenced by American organizations and pro-Western NGOs in Georgia. During the electoral campaign KMARA urged the population to vote in the elections. Its leading activists believed that Shevardnadze would rig the elections and that KMARA and the opposition parties, along with the people, could go through with a revolution to oust Shevardnadze - they wanted a repeat of Serbian events in Georgia.

The Georgian Opposition Parties

There were many opposition parties in Georgia before the Rose Revolution. These included the National Movement, the United Democrats, the New Rightists, the Labour Party, and Unity. There were also two other so-called opposition parties: The Union of Democratic Revival of Georgia, which was lead by Aslan Abashidze, the head of the autonomous republic of Ajara. He had formerly been in opposition to Shevardnadze but was in reality one of his biggest supporters. The second was called Industry Will Save Georgia". Leaders of this party were businessmen who claimed to be in opposition to Shevardnazde but in reality they supported him. The US and its allies greatly supported two real opposition parties: the National Movement and the United Democrats. The leader of the National Movement, today a candidate for the presidency of Georgia, was Mikhail Saakashvili. Saakashvili, who is a very young politician, received his education in the US as well as in some European countries, and as great of a name both in Georgia and abroad. Saakashvili was a member of the Georgian parliament some years ago. He was also at one time the head of the parliamentary faction of the Citizens' Union of Georgia. He was a Shevardnadze supporter, and was appointed the minister of Justice in Shevardnadze's administration. Eventually, as a mark of protest against Shevardnadze, he resigned and became a Member of Parliament from Vake (Tbilisi). Saakashvili created a political movement called the "National Movement"which formed a faction in parliament. From 2002 on, Saakashvili increased his detestation of Shevardnadze. He always noted in his public speeches that Shevardnadze was a symbol of evil and that he had helped some attain wealth while the levels of poverty were rising greatly in Georgia. Saakashvili also confronted many other high officials involved in bribery that supported Shevardnadze. He promised society that he would arrest all individuals that were destroying Georgia. In 2002 Georgia held elections of local self-governmental bodies and Saakashvili along with his party won. Saakashvili, who had promised Tbilisi that he would develop the economy and would increase the level of well being in the area, left parliament and became the Chairman of the Tbilisi City Assembly. He increasingly criticized Shevardnadze and his popularity with the people was improving greatly. The United Democrats was the second largest opposition party in Georgia, the head of which was Zurab Zhvania, who was the Chairman of Parliament from 1995 until 2001, and was during this time a Shevardnadze supporter. Zhvania left his post as Chairman in 2001 and moved into opposition. Like the National Movement, the United Democrats was pro-American in orientation and was strongly supported by the US and Geroge Soros. Zhvania did not have as great of a name as Saakashvili, but he knew how to play the political game and won support from the White House. Zhvania criticized Shevardnadze but was not quite as radical as Saakashvili. He was in favour of being constructive and has close relations with strong figures in Georgia. After Zhvania, Mrs. Nino Burdjanadze became the Chairman of Parliament. She was a member of Zhvania's political team and the daughter of a famous Georgian businessman and the wife of a Georgian high official. In the months leading up to the parliamentary elections in 2003, Burdjanadze officially declared that she supported Zhvania and became on e of the leaders of the United Democrats. During the pre-election campaign the United Democrats were renamed and became a block called the "Burdjanadze-Democrats. Burdjanadze became a top figure in the party. Zhvania played very cleverly. He was not formally the leader but was in fact deciding everything. He was used to controlling not only his own party but also many pro-American organization in Georgia. The other opposition parties such as the Labour Party, the New Rightists, and Unity turned out not to be a strong opposition and also found themselves in opposition to the National Movement and the United Democrats. Shevardnadze had his own political block in the parliamentary elections which was called the "Block for New Georgia". The leaders of the new block were very horrible high state officials and included those members of parliament whose hatred of the population was demonstrated by their dirty political and financial activities. Shevardnadze also found support in the Union of Democratic Revival, Abashidze's party, which was a formal opposition party only to become Shevardnadze supporter during the revolutionary days. This regime was also supported by Industry Will Save Georgia.It is important that there were not and still are not any real leftist, centrist, or right - wing parties in Georgia. The Labour Party is formally leftist but in reality is not, because it includes many oligarchs and anti-intellectuals. The New Rightists do not also represent a genuine right-wing party.

The Media and NGOs before the Rose Revolution

Anti-Shevardnadze TV stations, the press, and NGOs were very active before the Rose Revolution. The TV station "Rustavi2, which was strongly pro-American, had struggled against Shevardnadze for many years. The newspaper "24 hours" was anti-Shevardnadze because the owner of the newspaper, Erosi Kitsmarishvili, is also the owner of "Rustavi2". Along with truthful information "Rustavi2" also disseminated lies for many years. It is a commercial organization sponsored by the US and is carrying out Western interests in Georgia. It can be said that the TV station did not search for the truth. Shevardnadze's media support came from the television station "Channel 1". It was very ugly TV because it served Shevardnadze and was reporting on how good he was. This of course is a great lie.There were many NGOs that struggled against Shevardnadze; all of which were sponsored by the Soros Foundation, UNDP, USAID and other Western foundations and organizations. Leaders of such NGOs were the Liberty Insti tute, whose leaders were very popular figures but most people could not stand them. The Liberty Institute was a very ugly NGO. It was developing a strongly anti-Marxist campaign in Georgia and it compared Shevardnadze with Karl Marx. This of course points to the anti-intellectualism in the Liberty Institute. It also prepared many reports for the US, providing improper information regarding the rights of national minoritie s and religious rights in Georgia. They did this for money. In the pre-revolutionary processes the Soros Foundation played the greatest role with support of the NGOs. The NGOs struggled minute by minute against Shevardnadze, but unfortunately this was not a struggle for a better life in Georgia. I am afraid that it was a struggle to gain a lot of money. Parliamentary Elections in Georgia On November 2, 2003, Georgia held parliamentary elections. The Central Election Commission was controlled by Shevardnadze. This election was of great political importance for the political situation in Georgia. On November 2, the NGO "Fair Elections" began a parallel counting of votes.This was sponsored by the West. Exit polls were also applied. Rustavi2 contracted the Global Strategic Group USA to take the exit poll results. The government was against the use of exit polls by any organization and tried to break down, in vain, this decision of Rustavi2. In contrast, the government contacted the PR group Nikolo M., who contracted the Austrian sociological group Sora with taking exit poll results. By the evening the exit poll results were different from one another. Global Strategic Group said that the winner was the National Movement and Sora claimed that the government block had won. After two weeks the Central election Commission published the results of the elections from first place to last: the government block, the Union of Democratic Revival, the National Movement, the Labour Party, the Burdjanadze Democrats, and the New Rightists. Fair Elections also published the results of parallel counting: the National Movement, the government block, the Labour Party, the United Democrats, the Union of Democratic Revival. The opposition was angry and they warned Shevardnadze to change the results and to recognize the results of Fair Elections and the victory of the National Movement. Saakashvili, Burdjanadze, and Zhvania met with Shevardnadze, but nothing came from this meeting. Shevardnadze said that he didn't know what had happened and that his party had won. Opposition parties held a number of demonstrations as a warning to Shevardnadze and denounced the results of the Central Election Commission. Then the opposition and KMARA halted all demonstrations for three days. The opposition was gathering people from all parts of Georgia. The demonstrations were then renewed on November 20, 21, 22 where about 100,000 people were demanding the resignation of Shevardnadze. Mikhail Saakashvili declared that all negotiations with the president had been stopped and that they now had only one demand: 100,000 people cried "Resign; Go Home!" The streets of Tbilisi were filled by the largest number of people - people who were fed up with Shevardnadze and his regime. The government ordered the Armed Forces and the police to defend constitutional order. The streets of Tbilisi were also gulled by thousands of armed soldiers. Shevardnadze tried to stay at his post, but it was too late - the Revolution was over.

November 23: the Birthday of the Rose Revolution and the Death of the Shevardnadze Regime

On the morning of November 23 the demonstrations became larger. Students, professors/teachers, workers, and many other youngsters as well as older people were demanding the resignation of Shevardnadze. The opposition and KMARA were of course active, but KMARA was just a little group of protesters. There were many people and it was they who were the force of the Revolution and not the opposition parties and KMARA. An emergency situation was declared in Georgia. The Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs met with protesters and supported them. Mikhail Saakashvili and other leaders of the opposition parties stressed that Shevardnadze was finished and that he would resign in a few hours. By the afternoon the situation was out of control. People moved to the President's office and soldiers could not provide any resistance. Tbilisi was visited by many foreign journalists and the situation in Georgia was covered by CNN, the BBC, and other well known TV stations. Saakashvili gave an interview to CNN. The US supported the opposition. By the afternoon Saakashvili entered parliament where the new parliament was in session and spoke to Shevardnadze. Saakashvili and some people entered parliament and told Shevardnadze to go home. Shevardnadze left the building under guard. Some members of parliament were beaten by people. By the evening Saakashvili said that if Shevardnadze would not resign, the people would go to his residence. The process was really uncontrolled. The streets of Tbilisi were paralyzed. Not even God could stop the people. Soldiers and policemen stood aside. Shevardnadze stayed alone and the many governmental supporters left Tbilisi. Saakashvili visited Shevardnadze and after speaking with him,Saakashvili said that the President of Georgia had resigned and that a Rose Revolution had taken place in Georgia. People were very happy. The streets of Tbilisi were filled with many happy people. Everyone was drinking, singing and dancing. Georgia celebrated the withdrawal of Shevardnadze who had governed Georgia for many years, and who could also not build a democratic state. Georgia after the Rose RevolutionOn November 24 the world was informed that a Rose Revolution had taken place in Georgia and that Shevardnadze had resigned. According to the Constitution of Georgia, the Chairman of Parliament, Nino Burdjanadze, was to become the head of state. Burdjanadze is now the interim President of Georgia. Many events have taken place since November 23 and many things have changed. The Opposition came to power, Zurab Zhvania became the Minister of State, and a member of the United Democrats became the Minister of Internal Affairs. Shevardnadze stayed in Georgia and began to write his memoirs. Several state officials left their posts and have left Tbilisi. Some people were arrested. The US expressed its support for the Opposition and it is now clear that the US supported the Rose Revolution. It is very good that corrupt officials have left their posts. All government bodies, executive, legislative, and judicial are now subordinate to the government. There are still problems such as the fact that the Liberty Institute along with the Soros Foundation and the US embassy are actually governing the country. Some people who are well known as being corrupt have been appointed to important positions. Georgia's coffers are empty and the government cannot pay its salaries. Many young ambitious, anti-intellectual, and pro-American people have become high officials.On January 4, Georgia will hold new presidential elections. The candidate of the Opposition is Mikhail Saakashvili. Saakashvili is saying that a new era will begin in Georgia - an era of prosperity. But does Georgia stand a chance of achieving it? I don't think there is an answer, and if we look at the current situation, I think that the promises of the Rose Revolution will stay just that - promises. So I think that prosperity and the well being of the people lies in their own hands and with Saakashvili. People must not allow him to be a governer such as Shevardnadze was. The majority are going to vote for Saakashvili, but they must know the words of John Lennon who said that we must create our life our selves, and not rely on presidents. Let's see what will happen.