Political Party System and Social Democracy in Georgia

Political Party System and Social Democracy in Georgia

1. Most important organizations

Leiborist (Labor) Party of Georgia

Leader and founder of the party: Shalva Natelashvili. Born 1957 year. Background: layer. In 1982-1992 years worked in prosecutors office. In 1992-1995 -Member of Parliament, heading Committee on Judicial affairs. In 1995-1999 -Member of Parliament, leader of "Labor" faction.

Leading personalities: Ioseb Shatberashvili -secretary general, Giorgi Gugava, Nestan Kirtadze, Paata Jibladze, Kakha Dzagania

SI-membership - no

ESP -membership  - no

Elections Results

1999 year parliamentary elections: 6.59% of votes for proportional list, which was less than the necessary 7%; 2 majoritarian candidates still became members of parliament.

2003 year parliamentary elections: the party managed to get 12.04% of votes according to the official data. But this success was only virtual, as the results were annulled as a result of Rose Revolution, and the new proportional elections were held in 2004, in which the party again failed to overcome 7% threshold. So it was left with the only 3 majoritarian candidates.

In local elections of 1998 party gained 7% of votes (national total), while formed majority in some big town councils.

2002 local elections - 3.17% (national total), while in Tbilisi it gained a majority of Tbilisi council.

In 2006 local elections party got 6.42% nationwide, which accounted for 42 mandates (7 majoritarian, 35 proportional) total.

2008 year parliamentary elections - 7.44%, which accounted for 6 mandates.

In 2008 year extraordinary presidential elections Shalva Natelashvili (candidate for presidency from Leiborist party) gained support of 6.49% of voters.

2. Development of the party system and middle left spectrum in Georgia

Development since World War I

Political parties in Georgia started to develop at the beginning of XX century. Before that, at the end of XIX century, three ideological standings developed and became visible within society. They acquired certain social influence and served as an ideological basis for further party structuring. Initially the social groupings that united around these ideas were amorphous and narrow. These groupings are known by names of I-st, II-nd and III-d Dasi. Being narrow circles of educated intellectuals, they run a media outlets -newspapers, magazines, which served as a pivotal instrument for their unification.

Ist Dasi was leaded by Ilia Chavchavadze, who remains one of the most popular public figures in Georgia till now. This grouping was the most influential till the middle of 80th of XIX century. Ideology of this grouping may be described as nationalistic, enlightening and humanistic. Typologically it was very similar to the same epoch (or a bit earlier) ideologies of National-Independence and Kultraeger movements of Central and Eastern Europe, as well as with the Russian liberalism. Social issues, while acknowledge as being important from humanistic and enlightment's perspective, for this grouping were less pressing compared with the issues of national revival, promotion of national self-conscience, national culture  and national development.

Members of the IInd Dasi are usually considered to be representatives of bourgeoisie (mostly petty one) social strata, while it should be mentioned, that they were substantially influences by Marxist theory. For them the pressing priority was the development of the capitalist system, and only after that they would consider important to bring forward the social issues. It is worse mentioning here, that in this regard their worldview was in more compliance with the Marxist theory than that of some revolutionary marxists, who did not consider maturation of capitalism to be necessary. For this grouping growth of national self-conscience and the development of nation were closely interdependent with the modernization. In this regard they differed from I Dasi, for which modernization constituted only one specific vector of overall development.

Third Dasi united groups of that intelligentsia, who followed social-democratic standpoint. Joint with the local proletariat they created local committees of Russian Social Democratic party. Georgian Social Democracy represented part of Russian Social Democratic Party of Workers. When this party split into Mensheviks and Bolsheviks, Georgians continued to play significant role in a leadership of both branches.

In a broad social strata of population, including both proletariat and peasantry (and to some extend intelligentsia), Social Democratic party gradually achieved role of the most influential and organized political grouping, fighting against social injustice and tsarist regime. After the split within the Russian Social Democratic party, Menshevik faction gained widespread popularity in Georgia, while Bolshevik faction marginalized. Georgian social democracy typologically established very close to the European mass leftist movements. Its ideology broadly reflected Marxism (excluding its Bolshevik variation) and in representative terms this organization was much better organized than the Bolshevik faction. At the time of 1917 year February Revolution in Russia the Social democratic party was a leading party, it played major role in social life, and at the time of declaration of Georgian independence (26 may, 1918) it played  a leading role in political and social life of Georgia. In first elections of Georgian parliament ("damphudznebeli kreba") after the independence it won majority of seats (108 seats out of 130) and formed the government.

At that time there existed several other important political parties. Despite the important ideological differences among them, these parties closely collaborated with the government on significant state building issues. Among these parties right wing was represented by the National Democratic Party, while Social Federalists represented a centrist movement, inclined more to the left. Social Federalists were significantly linked to the above mentioned II Dasi, and besides it, to the "Narodnik" (people's) leftist Russian tradition. At the same time their title, "Social Federalists", indicated that two issues were of priority for their ideology -social issues and national identity. Federalism in this regard was understood as a transformation of Russian empire into the federal state, and correspondingly as a wide autonomy for Georgia (as well as for the other nations of the empire). In reality, by defending federalist principles, Social Federalists aimed to be realistic regarding nature of Russian empire, and their orientation towards the independence of Georgia that should follow eventually, was doubtless.

After the dissolution of Russian empire declaration of the independence of Georgia was based on a unanimous consensus of all existing important political parties.

Throughout the three years of independence (1918-1921) party building by the political parties was very limited, as the challenges that Georgian state faced internally and externally demanded from all political forces to concentrate on common problems of state building. Despite that, one can say, that social democratic government started to implement significant reforms, increasing democracy and social protection. These reforms, as well as the independence of Georgia finished with the 1921 year annexing of Georgia by the Bolshevik Russia.

Soviet government abolished political parties and they stopped functioning in 1924-25 years.

 A new wave of party formation in Georgia

A new wave of party development starts with the Perestroika. During that period public life in Georgia significantly differed from the one in other parts of USSR, giving a way to the specific party formation style and shaping local political parties. In differ from Russia and Baltic States broad public as well as ruling elite (leadership of Communist party) did not recognize well the fundamental character of the ongoing transformation. They almost completely trespassed the reformist stances of this period. At the same time public enjoyed relatively high level of freedom as compared to many other Soviet republics. Because of this the leadership of public opinion formation went in the hands of narrow dissident radical groupings, who formed first significant political union "Ilia Chavchavadze" society. This society soon split into several political organizations. During the same period there were several attempts by intelligentsia representatives to form broader public movements, modeled according Baltic National Fronts example. These attempts were oriented on relatively gradualist and reformist principles of action. However these attempts were not successful. Public Front, as well as a biggest share of public, gradually followed the radicalization logics. This radicalization became overwhelming after the tragedy of 9 April 1989 year. Since that time political landscape became dominated with the radical political groupings (Helsinki Union -Zviad Gamsakhurdia, National Democratic Party - Giorgi Chanturia, National Independence Movement -Irakli Tsereteli and others).

Since that time the leading discourse in Georgia is oriented towards the independence of Georgia, while ignoring core issues of political arrangement of Georgia and the issues of its transformation. The emptified space of leading ideology is filled up with the nationalism. While it is not easy to describe political standings of that time by means of traditional European terminology, one can nevertheless say, that the leading groupings of that time were inclined to a some kind of right-wing populism.

The only declaratively leftist party among those which emerged during that period was Social Democracy party (leader - Guram Muchaidze), considering itself as being successor of the Social Democratic party of the beginning of XX century. This party, however, failed to play any significant role in Georgian politics.

Georgian Communist party revealed complete inability to reform itself according to the present day requirements. From 1991 year it disappeared form the political landscape of Georgia (being prohibited as a party by the government of Zviad Gamsakhurdia). Its former leaders also gradually left politics, giving way to a new generation of politicians. The only communist party, which was established later by Panteleimon Giorgadze, has been marginal and extremely narrow, playing no role in public affairs.

Contemporary party system

Political party system is not yet well established, political parties are relatively new, and there is little tradition of political life; global trends, undermining role of political parties worldwide are also relevant for party weakness in Georgia.

Creation and functioning of political parties is regulated by the Law on Political Unions of 1997 year. The law is not restrictive, so there are almost 200 political parties officially registered in Georgia now. Nevertheless, number of really functioning parties is not that impressive: actually, number of parties, participating in elections, has been declining since 1999 when there were about 50 parties participating in a parliamentary elections of 1999, in 2003-2008 number of parties, registered for parliamentary elections was about 20-25  (in 2003 - 21, in 2004 - 20, in 2008 - 23 parties).

Internal resources and structure of functioning political parties in most cases are weak and underdeveloped. Parties experience legacies of the old-styled Democratic centralizm in their functioning. Ordinary party members have no real instrument to influence party decisions either to be adequately informed about party policies. Most of parties are established around the leaders who stay the same during the whole history of party. In differ from the democratic tradition, in which party members sustain, while leaders change, in Georgian parties it happens vice versa - leaders sustain, while party members may float from party to party according to their preferences concerning party leadership. Formally, in most cases, leaders are to be elected by party congress. In reality, this is only formal procedure, as the party congress, because of floating of party members, is always pro-leadership at any moment of time.

Independent financing of political parties is also problematic. Businesses are cautious when dealing with the opposition, and prefer to donate to the ruling party, which is important for their business sustainability. Membership fees are sometimes important source of basic money, but these fees never are enough, as the fees may be a heavy burden for the most numerous social strata - the poorest one.

Electoral system has little or even negative influence over representative capacity of political parties. Clientelistic trends play important role in a selection of candidates in both proportional and majoritarian parts of the mixed electoral system. Proportional list is one for the whole country, considered as one constituency for it. Thus, being decided by the narrow circle of party leaders, it is not influences by local party. Phenomenon of so called "known figures" - politicians, who regularly appear at TV - thus plays a major role in this selection process. Majoritarian candidates are even more difficult, as there is not independent public life in the regions; population there is quite dependent on regional government.

Weakening of mass participation in political parties is also somehow linked to the general trends of the global crises of party institutional role worldwide. Even in Western democracies political parties become less and less participatory and often loose their ties with the specific social groups. In Georgia such social links in most cases never developed, and are difficult to institutionalize. Certain homogeneity of political electorate in general may also account for it.

Bulk of population in Georgia in socio-economic aspects is quite homogeneous, and may be represented as a "new poor" underclass, rather than specific class. Their voting preferences are mostly explained by "protesting" feelings, rather than by any ideological or class standings. Income stratification plays relatively insignificant role in shaping party preferences. On the contrary, employment in public structures divides society into employees, who vote for the ruling party and others, among whom unemployment is widespread. Such voters may be easily bribed by the ruling party, while the differences in program orientations among the oppositional parties do not play significant role. As a result, oppositional parties are forced to compete with each other in becoming more and more radical opponents of the ruling regime, rather than proposing any positive alternatives to its policies. Such rules of the game create sharp polarization, populist rhetoric's and decline of strategically sound and plural political discourse.

Weakness of strategic discourses and sharp polarization of political spectrum make political parties an institution, which has only one important function - participation in elections. Political activities in the periods between elections become senseless, as there is no positive-sum political dialogue about policies. Both sides of the opposition:  the government, on one side, and the opposition, on the other, tend to represent the whole of society rather than specific groups of society, and try to de-legitimate each other, rather than to compete on an equal basis for any specific programs and policies.

In such a situation, parties tend to become opportunistic, combining leftist and right wing rhetoric's when necessary, exchanging these rhetoric's according to the political momentum and thus making right-left divisions less important and visible in political life. To describe a political spectrum it is much more convenient, instead of dividing parties according to their ideological standings, to distinguish them by their relation to the state -the power party, and the oppositional ones.

Existence of "The party of power" (ruling party) is a typical arrangement of the post-Soviet party system. The ruling party is an important institution to achieve power concentration and its centralization in the hands of party leader, the president. This party helps to achieve control over the state resources, thus continuing the soviet legacy of "party-state" institutional arrangements. In many decision-making processes informal party instruments still play more important role than the formal governmental institutional arrangements. Being involved also in state bureaucracy recruiting and merged with the state in public propaganda, the power party, after coming to power, soon becomes an important part of the state. After loosing power such parties tend to dissolve, either to marginalize, without any chances of returning to normal political competitive process. In the recent history of Georgia there were three power parties: "Round Table", "Citizens Union of Georgia", and now it is the "National movement", leaded by Mikhail Saakashvili. Locally-based power party was Adjarian Democratic Revival. Being merged with the state, ruling parties tend to avoid having any ideological standing, except nationalistic ones.

Leftist ideas in Georgian politics

Most of oppositional parties tend to be, at least declaratively, the right-wing ones (today -Republicans, New Rights, Conservatives, Way of Georgia). Leftist ideas are not very popular among political parties, and there are several explanations for this.

First, bulk of political leadership, as well as parties, originate from perestroika. For them the leading ideas were nationalistic and pro-independence ones. Independence at the same time pre-supposed anti-soviet orientations, which, in its turn, bread anti-leftist and pro-capitalist feelings. Leftism became associated with the Soviet past. Such notions as Marxism, socialism, equality, collective values, responcible state and so on went out of fashion and became delegitimated as something, associated with the past. The same way, right-wing orientation implicitly denoted pro-western external priorities, while leftism was understood as being more oriented toward Russia, and thus unpopular.

Unfortunately, little was done to restore adequate image of Georgian social democracy, as well as of the Georgian history of XIX-XX centuries. Soviet Bolshevik myth, according to which Georgian Social Democratic party was "not enough pro-Georgian", combined with the nationalistic stances, prevailed in the public attitudes towards it.

Under Shevardnadze leadership, however, nationalistic rhetoric weakened, giving way to the pro-western, pro-democracy trends in party development and their attempts to integrate into the western context. In 1995-1996 years and later, when main political reforms are finished and economic development becomes a top priority for society, the government, fearing of increasing poverty and unemployment in society, combined with the still existing nostalgic feeling, manipulate somehow with the leftist appeals, while applying liberal economic reforms. Attempts of CUG to integrate in Socialist International, pre-electoral promises of million working places and poverty reduction programs did not reflect real policy trends, which were market oriented and fundamentally neoliberal. Dominant public discourse, oriented towards such liberal values as democracy, freedom of speech and human rights, also trespasses more leftist values, such as solidarity and equity.

Since that time American influences in Georgia was far more influential as compared with the European ones. Institutional development in state and civil society building was modeled according to the American patterns. Many pro-democracy leaders seemed to believe, that the soviet tradition fostered too much a collectivist values in society, and that individualistic and competitive arrangements may be of a remedy for this. Little or no attention on the empirical evidence makes this believe a kind of ideology, failing to mention that patterns of social solidarity and equality were equally missing in social institutions.

Party development is also more oriented towards the America example of electoral parties. Promoted organizational and strategies are mostly stressing electoral activities. Such elements of electoral campaigning as PR and general mass orientation are taught to them by NDI, later, by IRI.

3. Social democracy today, structure and characteristics

In a post-Soviet Georgia there were three more or less important political parties, which declared themselves as centre-leftist ones. These were: Social Democratic party, Socialist party and Leiborist (labor) party of Georgia. Additionally there is one still functioning party, which considers itself as a left centrist, the Greens party (leader - Giorgi Gachechiladze). Despite the long history of functioning, the party is marginal, and its public activities are restricted solely to the issues of environmental protection.

Social-democratic party of Georgia was essentially only political party in Georgia in time of Perestroika, which confessed the leftist ideas. The party considered itself as a continuation of Social Democratic political party of the beginning of XX century. Formal basis for this was provides by the group of Georgian emigrants, living if France, who belonged to the social-democratic tradition. The party officially registered in 1990, under the leadership of G.Muchaidze. The party participated in 1990 year elections of Georgian Supreme Soviet but could not get any mandates. In 1992 year parliamentary elections the party has got 2 seats in the parliament. This modest success did not help the party to develop and in following elections of 1995 it failed to get any seats. In presidential elections of 1995 the party supported Panteleimon Giorgadze, leader of also marginal Communist party. Party had a little visibility and support in society and gradually marginalized and disappeared from political landscape

Georgian Socialist party established in 1995. It was founded by Vakhtang Rcheulishvili, Vice-speaker of Georgian parliament of 1992-1995 years. Before creating his own party, in 1994-1995 years Rcheulishvili was one of the leaders of Citizens Union of Georgia -political organization, created and leaded by Shevardnadze. Thus this new party did not oppose itself to the president (Shevardnadze became a president of Georgia in 1995 presidential elections), but created a parliamentary faction in the 1995-1999 parliament, where it commanded 6 mandates. In elections of 1999 year the party joint block of several political organizations, which was leaded by Aslan Abashidze, leader of Adjara Autonomous Republic, and his party (Revival of Georgia). In this parliament, in 1999-2003 years the party had an independent faction "Socialists". In 2003 parliamentary elections Socialist party was closely associated with president Shevardnadze. The Rose Revolution canceled political careers of not only Shevardnadze, but also for many of his close allies, among them for Rcheulishvili, who became extremely unpopular at that time. Since 2003 year the party disappeared from active political life.

Despite that the party has got some voters support in various elections of 1995-2003 years (local, as well as parliamentary) one can definitely insist that this support was not linked to its policies or ideological standings. The party did not provide any independent political discourse and rather existed as an additional branch of power, with the opportunistic appeal on manipulation with the administrative and financial resources.

Leiborist (labor) party of Georgia is the only active political party today, which is openly leftist, and at the same time has stable electoral support from the part of society. The party itself describes its ideology as left-centrist one. The party was established in 1995.

The party is oriented towards protection of social and economic interests of low income strata of population and lower middle class citizens. The electoral platform of the party of 2004, says, that "party priorities are social protection of population and social state control over market economy; health care, education, culture, sciences and modern technologies development; development of "national-social" economy; support to small and medium businesses; protection of healthy investment environment and of investments; fighting against financial oligarchies and corruption; protection of Georgia's strategic resources and fields from privatization; struggle against poverty and unemployment; defending human rights and liberties; formation of free, democratic electoral institutions; ecology protection; reform of judiciary system and struggle against crime; balances international relations". Solidarity is considered to be one of the most fundamental principles of the party.

Main issues, which party stress in its program documents, as well as publicly are: free health care and education; low tariffs for electricity, gas and some other communal expenses; pensions and working rights for former public employees; revealing facts of corruption and unlawful actions among officials; promotion of various local issues on community level. Party strongly supports democratic principles of government, freedom of speech, human rights, rule of law and judicial reform. At the same time party is strongly oriented on a promotion of national and religious identities and traditions.

Leiborist party during its history attempted to achieve distinguished position, radically opposing the government of the day, attracting the most protesting feelings in society. It always participated in elections separately from other political parties. During the events of 2007-2008 years the party actively cooperated with other oppositional parties on democracy promotion issues. Typical party supporter has low education and low income. Despite its leftist orientation, the party is not associated with such values as social progress and development.

Territorial organizational structure of Leiborist party is arranged in compliance with the electoral and administrative divisions of the country. It has branches in almost all electoral districts, which, in its turn, are sub-divided in zonal branches. Each zonal branch in its turn unites about 10 grassroots organizations, created according to the precinct stations. Grassroots organizations should have at least three members. Such organizations may be too much to function in between the elections, but in the period of elections one can say, that at least 10 000 party members are involved actively.

Party supreme ruling body is party congress, which takes strategic decisions, party program and elects the leadership.  Party strategic decisions between the congresses are taken by party committee, which consist of 25 members, elected by party congress. Executive body of party, the bureau, directs day-to day party activities. Party leader, Shalva Natelashvili, is an ultimate and charismatic leader, his role and his function within the party is completely unchallenged.

Leiborist party failed to overcome 7% threshold in parliamentary elections of 1999 and 2004 and considers these elections as fraud. After the 2008 year parliamentary elections Leiborist party formally has 6 parliamentary mandates, but this mandates are not used. Party members boycott the parliament, which they consider illegitimate because the elections were not free and fair.

4. Affiliated organizations and youth organizations

Georgian Trade Unions Confederation(GTUC). Leader - Irakli Petriashvili

Georgian Trade Unions' Confederation (GTUC) is a legal and organizational ancestor of the former Soviet establishment. It was significantly renewed and reorganized since 2006 year. It embraces 25 organizations (two regional and 23 sect oral organizations). It has 259172 members (~ 45% of all hired workforce of the country), 204532 of which are regularly paying membership fees to Trade Unions. Members are paying 1% of their salaries to primary organizations set up in their workplaces, in average 49% (~ 0.49% of salary in average) of this amount goes to sectoral/regional organizations, and 5% of the latter (~ 0.03% of salary in average) goes to GTUC monthly budget. In average, this is 0.01 GEL (~ 0.005 USD) per member, i.e. nearly 2000 GEL (~ 1100 USD) per month.

GTUC directs its activities on the promotion on workers rights, with the special emphasize on labor legislation. It played a significant role in opposing neoliberal reform by the government in this direction. During last years GTUC has significantly improved its standing in society, and established links with the international and foreign partner organizations. GTUC has no immediate links with any political parties, preferring to lobby for working rights independently, rather than by means of collaboration with the political partners.

Union of Socialist Youth of Georgia

Union of Socialist Youth of Georgia was established in 1996 under the umbrella of the Socialist party of Georgia. Establishing conference totally shared main principles of SPG and set an objective to create such a movement of the Georgian Youth which would take an active part in defining future of Georgian Youth and would serve as an avant-garde playing a role of bridge between Socialist ideology and youth. Its first leader was Zakaria Kutsnashvili. In 2002 the first chairman of USYG retired because of age limit. Now it is leaded by Dimitri Tskitishvili.

With the initiatives of USYG in December 1997 was created new regional organization titled Black-Sea Union of Socialist Youth (BSUSY) combining 9 organizations from 6 countries of Black Sea area.

On February 14, 1999 by the decision of ECOSY (Young European Socialist) Congress, USYG was recognized as its observer member. 2001 USYG also became observer member of IUSY (International Union of Socialist Youth). In 2006 USYG became full member of International Union of Socialist Youth. In 2008, the President of USYG was elected in a position of IUSY vice president, responsible for Black Sea area.

In 2004, the socialist party of Georgia participated in the parliamentary election and after the significant loose of election party collapsed. The USYG remained without political party support. And found itself in a very difficult situation during the next 2 years.

In 2006, the cooperation agreement was sign with sister organization from Norway – AUF, Norwegian labor youth and cooperation program was launched. The activates in frame of the cooperation were oriented on rebuilding the organizational structure and organizational capacity.  At the moment USYG is in process or reorganization and preparation for the Congress were the new political platform and priorities will be adopted. Also the 5^th congress will elect new leadership of the organization.

Other nongovernmental organizations

Nongovernmental organizations in Georgia are not based on a numerous membership and should not be considered as social movements, but they play a significant role in shaping public political discourses and values. Most of these organizations are oriented on a liberal values promotion, defending fair elections, human rights, freedom of speech and other democratic values. Among the nongovernmental organizations there are some, which are openly neoliberal, especially those which deal with the socio-economic reform issues. While several organizations promote explicitly leftist agenda and discourses, among them Centre for Solidarity (leader Kakha Kokhreidze, Youth Alternative (leader- Lasha Bliadze) and European Choice of Georgia (leader - Gia Jorjoliani).

Gia Jorjoliani

Marina Muskhelishvili

01.12.2008