GEORGIA: OPPOSITION THREATENS TO OVERTURN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AMID GROWING INTERNATIONAL RECOGNITION OF THE RESULTS
By Vladimir Socor
Eurasia Daily Monitor, DC
Jan 9 2008
On January 8 the runner-up presidential candidate Levan Gachechiladze
(with 27% of the votes cast, according to the provisional final
returns) headed a group of opposition leaders that burst into Central
Electoral Commission (CEC) offices and encircled CEC chairman Levan
Tarkhnishvili. They threatened to evict Tarkhnishvili physically and
— in Gachechiladze’s words — to "punish" him as a "criminal" if
the opposition comes to power. Leaders of the nine groups supporting
Gachechiladze joined him in the jostling and shouting. Gachechiladze
resorted to obscenities not for the first time. The incident occurred
in the presence of journalists (Civil Georgia, EurasiaNet, Rustavi-2,
January 8).
Opposition leaders accuse the CEC of "rigging" the January
5 presidential election. They are threatening to call protest
demonstrations unless the CEC and the courts invalidate or revise the
election’s results. Western observers — present in record-high numbers
throughout the country — have validated the election, the provisional
final returns of which show Mikheil Saakashvili winning re-election
with close to 53% of the votes cast. The remainder is divided among
six other candidates. However, opposition leaders reject the Western
observers’ essentially positive assessment of the election and are
calling for a runoff or a rerun.
Meanwhile, many institutions and groups of international observers are
validating the election, alongside the four main observer delegations
— OSCE/ODIHR (Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights),
OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly
(PACE), and European Parliament — which did so jointly on January 6
(see EDM, January 7). All of these institutions and groups are urging
the opposition to recognize the legitimacy of the election just held.
The European Union’s Presidency — held by Slovenia since January
1 — supports the Western observers’ conclusion that "the election
was in essence consistent with most of the OSCE and Council of
Europe commitments and standards for democratic elections." It also
expects Georgia to "address the shortcomings that were identified"
(EU Presidency press release, January 7).
The Washington-based National Democratic Institute (NDI) and
International Republican Institute (IRI) have issued basically positive
assessments of the election. Significantly, both institutes have for
many years been working with opposition parties in Georgia and continue
to do so. According to NDI’s preliminary conclusion, the election
"met basic democratic principles," while problems encountered in the
process of balloting were irregularities, not rigging and not affecting
the expression of people’s will (Rustavi-2, January 7). The IRI, which
led an international delegation of observers, similarly concluded,
"The election broadly met international standards. However, technical
problems continue to affect the electoral process" (IRI press release,
January 6). Both institutes are recommending to the government and
opposition to work cooperatively to resolve these issues.
Presidents Toomas Ilves of Estonia, Valdis Zatlers of Latvia, Lech
Kaczynski of Poland, Viktor Yushchenko of Ukraine, Ilham Aliyev
of Azerbaijan, Robert Kocharian of Armenia, Nursultan Nazarbayev
of Kazakhstan, and Nicolas Sarkozy of France as well as Ukrainian
Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko have variously telephoned or written
to Saakashvili with congratulations on his reelection. Ilves also
cited the Western observers’ recommendations to Georgia to correct
remaining flaws and continually improve the quality of the electoral
process. Ukraine’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs cited Ukrainian and
international observers saying that the openness of the voting and
large presence of observers made it impossible to rig the election
(BNS, UNIAN, January 6, 7, 8; Turan, Agence France Presse, January
8). Estonian observers (including 10 members of parliament) and
Lithuanian delegation (totaling 131 members, the largest delegation
proportionate to the nation’s size) supported the Western positive
assessment of the election, despite "minor irregularities that do not
influence the outcome." Latvia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued
a similar opinion, citing the Latvian delegation of observers.
U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack and NATO spokesman James
Appathurai each issued statements endorsing the Western observers’
validation of the election (press releases, January 7, 8).
At the moment, the EU in Brussels seems rather disengaged from
the ongoing Georgian events. The EU’s High Representative for the
Common Foreign and Security Policy, Javier Solana, issued a brief,
vague statement, recognizing at least that the Georgian election was
"truly competitive." The EU’s External Affairs and Neighborhood Policy
Commissioner, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, issued a belated statement on
January 8 in which she cited the international observers’ essentially
positive evaluation of the election, urged the Georgian government
to address the shortcomings quickly, and called on the opposition
to use only peaceful and legal means (Council of the European Union
and European Commission press releases, January 7, 8). Solana and
Ferrero-Waldner are about to finish their terms of office. The EU’s
envoy for the South Caucasus, Peter Semneby, apparently could not
take a position on the Georgian elections in the absence of a clear
message from the top level in Brussels. Such a weak engagement in
Brussels reflects the broader inadequacies of the EU’s Neighborhood
Policy generally and in this region particularly.
Gachechiladze and the other presidential contenders cannot
realistically hope to overturn the election’s outcome. Their moves
seem designed at this stage simply to prolong the uncertainty and
look for new tactical openings. Some of them may also look for a
face-saving solution, after staking so heavily on toppling Saakashvili
and the government. Their main demand, before and during the election
campaign, was a Georgia without Saakashvili. Program and tactics were
subordinated to that goal.
The Gachechiladze camp’s Mephisto bargain with billionaire Badri
Patarkatsishvili showed that this camp was prepared to destabilize
the country for the sake of toppling the president. The other
presidential contenders stopped short of making that bargain for
funds, but used the same brinkmanship tactics. At the moment, they
all seem to be preparing to refuse to recognize the legitimacy of
the re-elected president and possibly boycotting him in the run-up
to the April parliamentary elections. Such a development could
bring with it another political crisis, fraught with artificially
induced polarization. Unburdened by the responsibilities of governing
and untrained for such responsibilities, the leaders of these small
parties see their chance of gaining de facto political influence in
a climate of political confrontation.