The parliamentary elections in Georgia on October 26, 2024, resulted in the success of the ruling Georgian Dream Party, which managed to secure approximately 53.92% of the total votes cast, thus guaranteeing a parliamentary majority with 89 seats out of 150. This outcome enables the party to form a new government independently and continue in power for a fourth term, shaping both the domestic and foreign policies of Georgia up to 2028.
In contrast, the main opposition parties, which were organized under four major alliances, failed to end the ruling party’s dominance, collectively garnering about 37.78% of the total votes, accounting for 61 parliamentary seats, according to preliminary results announced by the Central Election Commission of Georgia on the morning of October 27.
Although this election marks the tenth parliamentary election in Georgia since its independence from the former Soviet Union in 1991, the current political landscape has gained unprecedented momentum due to various internal and external variables, characterized by a more complex competitive environment. Notably, the country is witnessing its first experience with electronic voting systems at polling stations and the full implementation of a proportional representation system to allocate the number of seats deserved by each competing party. Additionally, the electoral battle took on the character of a referendum on Tbilisi’s future foreign policy direction, pitting the pro-Russian ruling Georgian Dream Party against the Western-aligned opposition parties, who believe that the advancement of this Caucasian nation is contingent upon Brussels.
In light of the above, the tense political context in the country has led to widespread political participation, reaching approximately 58.73%, as citizens sought to influence Tbilisi’s future over the next four years. Given the current scenario, several questions arise regarding the implications and reasons behind the results of the Georgian parliamentary elections, as well as the anticipated ramifications on both domestic and external fronts in light of subsequent developments following the announcement of these results.
Interpretation of the Results:
Several conclusions can be drawn regarding the current electoral landscape in Georgia that may, in turn, explain some aspects of the preliminary election results:
The Dominance of the Pragmatic Political Discourse of the Georgian Dream Party:
It appears that the ruling party’s campaign successfully mobilized a broad sector of citizens to vote in its favor. On one hand, the party distinguished itself from the opposition alliances by positioning itself as a representative and defender of values concerning independence from Western pressures, adherence to traditional Orthodox values, and a commitment to peace principles. On the other hand, it instilled a sense of fear regarding Tbilisi’s future if opposition parties supported by Western countries were to dominate the political landscape, especially considering that the country entered a war with Russia in 2008 under one such party’s governance, losing sovereignty over 20% of its territory.
Moreover, the Russian-Ukrainian war likely played a crucial role in garnering popular support for the Georgian Dream Party’s discourse, particularly amidst fears that opposition control could provoke Russia, violate Georgian territories, or involve them in Western proxy wars against Moscow. Therefore, the party made sure to adopt three main slogans that resonated with citizens’ feelings of security and stability: “No to war… No to foreign agents… No to the world war party.”
In line with this, the Georgian Dream Party portrayed itself as more capable of implementing a calm and balanced policy to manage Georgia’s affairs, which retains strong historical and cultural ties with Moscow, and shares almost a thousand-kilometer border with it. Promises were made to negotiate with Russia for the reintegration of Abkhazia and South Ossetia into Georgia through a federal union, while simultaneously aiming for Tbilisi’s accession to Brussels but under less stringent conditions that preserve the nation’s “national dignity,” as previously stated by the party’s founder and former Prime Minister, Bidzina Ivanishvili, on October 15.
The Notable Decline of the United National Movement’s Popularity:
Since losing the parliamentary election in 2012 to the Georgian Dream Party, the popularity of the United National Movement has gradually eroded, as it was the ruling party from 2004 to 2012 and the second-largest party in parliament from 2012 to 2024. This is evident from the declining voting percentages and, consequently, the number of seats the party has secured since then. For instance, the party’s seats declined from 65 in 2012 to 27 in 2016, then 36 in 2020, and finally to the lowest number in its history this year with only 16 seats.
This decline can be attributed to the Georgian Dream Party’s election campaign, which repeatedly accused the United National Movement and its former leader, Mikheil Saakashvili, of provoking Russia and leading the country into a war that resulted in the loss of its regions Abkhazia and South Ossetia after their occupation by Moscow when they declared independence from Georgia in 2008.
Additionally, this decline can be explained by the political rift within the opposition party itself just months before the recent elections, stemming from the ousting of its previous leader and current leader of the Citizens’ Party, Nika Melia, in 2023. Melia attempted to establish an alliance of multiple parties under his leadership, named the “Coalition for Change” last July. Ironically, this coalition, which presented itself as a viable third alternative to the Georgian Dream and United National Movement, managed to secure the second-highest position in the current parliament, which had been exclusive to the United National Movement since the 2012 elections.
Fragmentation of the Opposition Voting Bloc:
Despite the agreement among most opposition parties on the necessity of engaging with the West and their signing of the “Georgian Charter” proposed by President Salome Zourabichvili on May 26 as a plan aimed at enhancing unity and coordination among opposition forces ahead of the elections, they completely failed to form a unified front against the ruling party, leading to the fragmentation of opposition-supporting votes. As a result, several prominent parties, such as the Liberal Ghirchi Party, the Georgian Nationalists Alliance, and the Georgian Labor Party, lost all their seats in the previous parliament, totaling nine, due to their inability to surpass the 5% electoral threshold mandated by lawmakers for current parliament entry.
The opposition parties managed to secure 85% of the votes from migrants, as most live in Europe, and embarrassed the ruling party in some major cities, even defeating it in the capital Tbilisi, where they collectively garnered 46% of the votes, alongside 5.3% for the Liberal Ghirchi Party. Conversely, the Georgian Dream Party achieved significant advances in various other regions, especially in the southern and mountainous, multi-ethnic areas, where its victories exceeded 70% and 80% in some places, resulting in the party obtaining a parliamentary majority.
The failure of opposition parties to form a single coalition can be attributed to multiple schisms and distinctions within the opposition itself, along with the nascent formation of many participating opposition parties, indicating that they lack prior political or managerial experience and have been unable to establish a broad popular base to motivate voters to favor them.
Potential Ramifications:
The potential ramifications of the Georgian parliamentary elections are manifold, particularly in light of the opposition parties’ rejection of the results or their acknowledgment of defeat, coupled with varying international reactions and a Western trend towards questioning the integrity of the electoral process. The following are the most notable implications:
Deepening Internal Divisions and the Return of Protests to the Streets:
Opposition parties have organized numerous protest activities and events over the past year and a half in objection to some policies of the ruling Georgian Dream Party, but it appears that Georgia is moving towards increased political instability in the post-election phase. Immediately after the polls closed on October 26, opposition coalitions announced their victory in securing a parliamentary majority, which was the same claim made by the ruling party.
Following the announcement of the preliminary results revealing the Georgian Dream Party’s superiority, the four opposition coalitions rushed to issue statements and remarks questioning the validity of the results, rejecting their acceptance or recognition, and accusing Russian intelligence of being involved in manipulating the results.
For example, the Coalition for Change deemed the election results as “fraudulent and illegitimate,” with the United National Movement leader, Tina Bokuchava, stating that the elections had been “stolen,” adding, “We will fight like never before to reclaim our European future.”
Nika Gvaramia urged the opposition to initiate a “full insurrection” against the results, labeling them a “constitutional coup.”
Similarly, Mamuka Khazaradze, the leader of the Coalition for Georgia, stated that the Georgian Dream Party “stole the election in collusion with Russian intelligence from the people.”
In the same vein, President Zourabichvili asserted that the parliamentary elections were “victims of a Russian operation that distorted the features of Georgian democracy,” calling for citizens to organize a large protest on October 28 along Rustaveli Street near the parliament to demonstrate the scale of public dissent against the election results.
Thus, Georgia may witness a critical and murky phase of political upheaval, particularly after the four opposition coalitions announced their decision not to enter the next parliament and opted to organize protest activities to pressure the ruling party. This situation could escalate if these activities devolve into mutual violence with security forces, especially given the absence of a strategic vision for the protests or reasonable objectives for which the opposition can negotiate thus far.
Strained Relations Between Georgia and Western Countries and Setbacks in Joining the European Union:
Despite Tbilisi receiving candidate status for EU membership in December 2023, negotiations with Brussels have stalled since July due to the Georgian Dream Party’s insistence on passing the “Foreign Influence Transparency” law, borrowed from Russian law. This law requires non-governmental organizations relying on 20% or more of their revenues from foreign support to be listed as “entities that serve foreign interests.”
This law has faced criticism from several Western countries, accusing the Georgian Dream Party of favoring Russia over Europe, claiming that the law is designed to suppress opposition under the guise of “foreign agents,” restrict press freedom, and cut funding channels for civil society organizations. Consequently, negotiations for Georgia’s EU accession have halted, the United States imposed sanctions on several officials and politicians associated with the ruling party, and the European Commission decided to freeze financial aid packages to Tbilisi.
With the Georgian Dream Party continuing in power for the next four years, it is likely that a state of political stagnation will prevail in the relationship between Tbilisi and Brussels, not only due to the former’s strong ties with the Kremlin, but also given that the ruling party adheres to less liberal values and is more inclined toward traditional values based on Orthodox religious teachings.
This situation led to the passing of a law that restricts LGBTQ rights last September, which also angered EU leaders, while the current Georgian Prime Minister, Irakli Kobakhidze, asserted that this was rooted in the “decision” and “national identity” of his country, as he stated on October 25.
Undoubtedly, the Western reactions to the preliminary election results in Georgia reveal a more strained future relationship between the ruling party and the West, especially if the former’s policies remain unchanged. Accordingly, numerous foreign ministers from European countries condemned what they termed as the “unequal context” within which the elections were conducted, highlighting numerous violations that undermined their integrity, such as result manipulation, ballot stuffing, vote buying, and intimidating opponents at polling stations.
In this context, the EU foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, in collaboration with the European Commission, issued a joint statement criticizing the “unfavorable” conditions for conducting the Georgian elections, referencing reports from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe’s election monitoring mission, and called on the Tbilisi government to undertake several political and legislative reforms consistent with the principles of European integration on the night of the election itself.
The following day, a statement from the U.S. State Department condemned infringements in the electoral process in Georgia and called for a prompt investigation. Washington also reiterated its call for the Georgian Dream Party to “repeal legislation that undermines freedoms.”
Sustained Russian Influence in Georgia:
The Georgian Dream Party’s success is expected to perpetuate Russian control over Georgian political orientations as part of the Kremlin’s strategy to maintain its influence in the Caucasus region. Although there are no diplomatic relations between the two countries and the volume of mutual trade barely exceeds 0.3%, Georgia’s strategic importance and its geographical proximity to Moscow make the existence of a pro-Kremlin authority an essential necessity.
The Russian dominance over Georgia is further accentuated by the ties of the party’s founder and former Prime Minister, Ivanishvili, who is the most influential figure in Georgian politics and has close relations with Moscow. He amassed a significant fortune while working as one of Gazprom’s executives, a state-owned Russian enterprise.
Furthermore, it seems that Ivanishvili views close cooperation with the Russians as a means to protect his country from becoming a “new Kyiv” and as an opportunity to restore Georgia’s influence in Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
In contrast to the numerous negative comments from Western politicians regarding the results of Georgia’s elections, several European officials with good relations with the Kremlin congratulated the Georgian Dream Party for its electoral victory, including Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev.
Likewise, Grigory Karasin, head of the Russian Federation Council’s International Affairs Committee, expressed his immense satisfaction with the Georgian election results, which, according to him, unfolded “in a calm atmosphere.” Russian Senator Alexey Pushkov added that despite the West’s efforts to incite disturbances in Georgia in hopes of a “West-friendly revolution,” the majority of citizens rejected the Western approach to “regime change.”
An Uncertain Future:
The political future of Tbilisi appears more uncertain than ever. On one hand, the experience of the “Rose Revolution,” which replaced the Soviet foreign minister and former Georgian President Eduard Shevardnadze with a pro-Western regime in 2003, ignites hope among opposition parties for a reversal of the Georgian Dream Party’s twelve-year-long dominance. This sentiment is bolstered by the opposition leaders’ adherence to the narrative that the parliamentary elections were stolen from them through fraud, alongside statements from several Western leaders refusing to acknowledge the opposition’s defeat.
Conversely, the ruling Georgian Dream Party, backed by Russia, is unlikely to concede any electoral gains or allow political chaos in the Georgian streets, a situation that could lead to violence against calls for demonstrations and public disobedience.
Despite everything stated, the possibilities for understanding and internal coordination between the ruling party and opposition parties in Georgia are still feasible, given that although the ruling party has attained the parliamentary majority necessary to form a government, it has not succeeded in securing a two-thirds majority crucial for any amendments to the country’s constitution.