Salome Alania
Freelance Policy Analyst
The latest developments in Georgia indicate that the ruling Georgian Dream party does not act in the best interest of its citizens. Instead, it operates with a self-centred agenda primarily aimed at safeguarding ruling elite interests. The risk of further authoritarian and anti-EU sentiment highlights the conflictual nature of Georgia’s political landscape, caught between a ruling regime focused on self-preservation, a fragmented but ambitious opposition. Squeezed between the two is a largely pro-European, reform-minded society. The threats facing Georgian democracy in the aftermath of the “Russian law” and the fraudulent parliamentary elections in 2024 are more severe than ever. The country has once again reached a turning point, caught in a recurring cycle of political crises that has persisted for decades since gaining independence: hope for reform is often followed by disillusionment and protest, rather than sustained democratic change.
Continuous protests have taken place across Georgia for more than 80 days. Hundreds of young people, journalists, and activists have been imprisoned, with waves of arrests still occurring daily. Meanwhile draconian laws are being passed by parliament, and the space for protests is shrinking with each passing moment. It is a rare phenomenon to reach a consensus in Georgia. However, according to the latest opinion polls, a large majority (82.1%) of Georgians acknowledge the existence of a political crisis. Even among supporters of Georgian Dream, the majority (64%) agrees. However, protests have not been channelled into a structured political process and its transformation into a strategic political framework remains vague. As hope and apathy alternate, shifting the energy of protesters, the once-urgent questions —Where are the politicians? What’s next? Do they know what to do? — are slowly fading from public discourse. In between careful optimism and the weariness of the Winter Rustaveli freeze, the paths to political solutions appear elusive. While support from the EU and the US is important, real and lasting change must stem from sustained domestic efforts, economic pressure (such as strikes), and grassroots mobilization. These local efforts are crucial for driving meaningful transformation. This blog explores why the protest energy is not being channelled into political strategies to create a more responsive political future.
The struggle to convert protests into electoral strategies
It is noteworthy that, compared to other groups, the opposition’s highest share of support consists of young people (ages 18-34) and Tbilisi residents. However, this group of voters does not require further persuasion and may vote not necessarily in favour of a particular opposition party, but rather against Georgian Dream. In contrast, rural residents, public sector employees, and those outside of the labour force are not reached by the opposition actors and further highlights the regional dimension of the rural-urban divide. The stakes are too high not to invest in a unified effort that actively bridges this gap.
*Caucasus Barometer 2024 Georgia, CRRC
Not reflecting on the people’s needs outside the capital
The opposition parties’ lack of addressing bread-and-butter issues, everyday economic and social concerns and crises affecting people alienates voters in Georgia’s regions even further. Neglecting these issues, in turn, allows Georgian Dream to shape rural discourses and perceptions with its own propagandist narratives. Moreover, simply “protecting a European future” is not something that resonated with the people in tangible terms outside of the urban centres. While political parties should give opportunities for participation and active citizenship to people in different regions, allowing them to make informed decisions, their actions are limited to the streets of Tbilisi and very few major cities around the country. In order to succeed, the political agenda should be reflected nationwide, reaching out to silent segments of society as well. This would ensure sustainable public engagement (through town halls, petitions, face-to-face talks in the regions of Georgia). At the moment, the protest movement is struggling to expand by fostering widespread dissent and has failed to engage currently passive social groups.
Lack of clear and sustainable messaging
While growing international support uplifts Georgians, many see urgent necessity, domestically framing protest demands into a clear, compelling political vision that creates a long-term agenda. Absence of political outlook beyond media statements undermines the opposition movement’s ability to ensure sustainability and trust. Concrete roadmaps outlining the next steps after protests—who will lead, how policies will change, and how democracy will be restored—are essential. Additionally, specific reform plans focused on key areas such as the judiciary, elections, and governance to address public concerns and build confidence in the transition could sustain the momentum.
On top of that, protest energy can be directed towards building broad unity among various groups advocating for specific changes in areas such as governance, social justice, and economic reform, while also promoting sustainable political engagement that doesn’t just end with protests but drives ongoing transformation. Stakeholders must focus on offering tangible alternatives to the current system, not just opposing the status quo. Building a vision for an accountable government requires a deliberate approach to gain public support.
Without an actionable political strategy and specific solutions, the energy of protests may fade, leaving a sense of disillusionment rather than real change.
Hurdles in promoting new leaders within parties, including those who emerged during the protests
Traditionally, the weak institutionalization of parties remains significant in Georgia, making political processes unpredictable. Moreover, a lesson not learnt from the past is that one of the most significant reasons for the weakness of political parties is a strong dependence on their leaders without establishing a sustainable party structure or institutional capacity. Even though parties are shaped by influential figures, they are often weighed down by their political background, which hampers their ability to connect with citizens from different groups and generations. While it’s true that many people primarily follow leaders, this reliance can also alienate voters if the leader falters.
To overcome this, a shift is needed towards strategies within the parties that feature local faces—individuals who are more relatable and can engage directly with the people in their own language.
Additionally, it is important to elevate leaders who have emerged from street protests—vibrant, diverse, and self-sustaining individuals with a strong mindset and civic energy.
Although they come from grassroots movements rather than traditional political systems, with a wide range of backgrounds and perspectives, their potential to foster broader support among various social groups has not been fully tapped. Thus far, political parties have forfeited the opportunity to revitalize their appeal and refresh political processes by overlooking the need to elevate them. It is crucial to reduce the over-dependence on individual leaders in Georgian politics in order to make processes more sustainable. This was clearly shown during the latest protests in Tbilisi and across the country, as it continued without an organization or leader. However, this doesn’t imply that parties should shy away from leading the political process – organized parties must steer the movement forward.
Conclusion
Continuous protests in Georgia have shown that there is widespread dissatisfaction with the current regime, yet this unrest has not been effectively transformed into a political process. This raises a critical question about the future of a coherent, long-term political strategy and possibility of transforming “protests into policy” which will shape future of the country in the next decades. Despite Georgian Dream mounting repressions, restricting freedom of assembly and expression and threatening fundamental human rights, the ruling party miscalculated the gravity of citizens’ self-organization and their ability to adapt. However, rural residents remain largely overlooked by opposition efforts, further deepening the urban-rural divide.
To sustain momentum and engage a broader electorate, various stakeholders, including opposition parties, must move beyond the streets of Tbilisi and extend their outreach to marginalized groups through localized efforts. To bridge this gap, all the engaged stakeholders must adopt clearer messaging, outline specific reforms, and promote new leaders, particularly those who have emerged from the protests—vibrant, diverse, and capable of reshaping Georgia’s political landscape.
