Summary: Georgia’s recent designation as an EU candidate was a milestone, but its path to membership faces a new obstacle: a controversial law targeting foreign-funded NGOs. Critics, including the EU and US, fear the law stifles civil society and aligns Georgia more closely with Russia. The Georgian government, however, maintains it’s necessary for national security. Will this law derail Georgia’s EU dream, or can a compromise be found?
Georgia’s EU dreams hit a snag with a new law. Just months after becoming an EU candidate in December, Georgia’s parliament passed a law targeting organizations with foreign funding. This law, nicknamed the “Russian law” by opponents, requires groups receiving more than 20% of their funds from abroad to register as foreign agents. It also imposes hefty fines for non-compliance. The move has sparked concerns that Georgia’s path to EU membership could be jeopardized, with some even fearing it might be entirely blocked.
Georgia’s Parliament Defies Critics, Pushes Through “Foreign Influence” Law
In a move sparking international concern, Georgia’s Parliament yesterday overrode a presidential veto on the controversial “foreign influence” law. The 84-4 vote came despite protests outside the building and strong criticism from the EU and US. Opposition MPs boycotted the vote to join the demonstrations.
This law requires NGOs with significant foreign funding to register as foreign agents, facing potential fines for non-compliance. Critics, including the EU and US, fear it stifles civil society and aligns Georgia more closely with Russia, which has similar legislation.
The ruling Georgian Dream party has largely ignored calls for reforms necessary for EU accession talks. Many see this law, attributed to party leader Bidzina Ivanishvili, as a step back from Western integration and a return to Russia’s influence. Ivanishvili, despite initial promises of EU membership, appears to be shifting Georgia’s foreign policy. With this law, questions loom large: Has Georgia forfeited its chance at joining the EU? Will the country choose Europe or a closer relationship with Moscow? This vote serves as a crucial test of Georgia’s future geopolitical direction.
The ruling Georgian Dream party’s actions cast doubt on Georgia’s commitment to EU membership. Despite overwhelming public support for EU integration (over 80%), the party has largely neglected reforms required to begin accession talks. Critics, including many newspapers, believe this law, championed by party leader Bidzina Ivanishvili, signals a shift away from Western ideals and a potential return to Russia’s sphere of influence. This contradicts Ivanishvili’s previous promises of EU membership.
The sight of protestors waving both Georgian and EU flags underscores the public’s strong desire for a European future. This law presents a pivotal test: will Georgia prioritize its people’s aspirations for EU membership, or will it pursue a closer relationship with Moscow?
President Vows Action as Parliament Overrides Veto
President Salome Zourabichvili, a vocal critic of the “foreign influence” law, called it “unconstitutional” and a violation of “European standards” before vetoing the bill. Following Parliament’s override vote on Tuesday, she addressed protestors, urging them to mobilize for the October elections. “Let’s make the elections our response,” she declared, while the crowd chanted “Russia’s slaves” towards the ruling party.
Clock ticking for President’s signature on controversial law. With only five days left, a rejection seems likely. In that case, Parliament President Shalva Papuashvili, a vocal supporter of the legislation, would sign it instead. This fast-tracks implementation before October’s elections, raising concerns of a “Russian-style crackdown” on civil society, as reported by Politico. Journalists and activists fear the law’s true aim is to silence dissent and limit debate ahead of the vote.
EU and Member States Condemn Passage of “Foreign Influence” Law
In response to Georgia’s Parliament passing the controversial “foreign influence” law, the EU issued a statement expressing deep regret and hinting at potential consequences for relations. Media across the EU and Georgia widely reported the statement, which noted the law’s incompatibility with EU values.
EU member states echoed these concerns. Leaders from France, Lithuania, Slovakia, Denmark, the Netherlands, Estonia, and Latvia all condemned the law’s adoption. They highlighted Georgia’s disregard for calls to withdraw the legislation, emphasizing how it distances the country from the EU. German Foreign Minister Baerbock, quoted in Interpress.ge, stressed the growing disconnect between the Georgian government and its people’s desire for a European future. She urged Georgia to reconsider its course.
US Takes Action, EU Walks a Tightrope
While the US has already imposed travel sanctions on individuals seen as undermining Georgian democracy, the EU faces a more complex situation. Sanctions, some argue, would primarily hurt pro-European Georgians rather than the ruling party. This view suggests the EU should prioritize ongoing accession talks and pin hopes on the October elections, where the Georgian people can voice their concerns.
Georgian Government Defends Law
The Georgian government insists the “foreign influence” law is essential to combat harmful foreign interference destabilizing the country. Prime Minister Kobakhidze sparked controversy last week with claims of “abusive blackmail” from the West and threats from an EU Commissioner.
However, Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi denied these accusations. He clarified that his words were “misinterpreted” and emphasized his attempts to warn Kobakhidze about the potential negative consequences of the law. Várhelyi, as reported by Politico, reiterated the EU’s call to withdraw the bill and expressed concerns about rising tensions in Tbilisi.
Following Parliament’s passage of the “foreign influence” law, Prime Minister Kobakhidze held a press conference. He asserted the law would “better protect” Georgia’s sovereignty from foreign interference.” When questioned about potential sanctions or consequences related to EU candidacy, visa liberalization, or negotiations, Kobakhidze dismissed the concerns. He called such threats “frivolous” and questioned the motives of those making them, and the PM responded: “To remind you, there were other threats, there were direct threats of physical destruction […] When they directly threaten you with physical destruction, it indicates that something is not right within specific structures and bureaucracy.” [1]
Georgia’s PM Claims Law Strengthens EU Bid
Despite international criticism, Prime Minister Kobakhidze defended the “foreign influence” law, arguing it would strengthen Georgia’s path to EU membership. He claimed, as reported by Interpress.ge, that the law fulfils a key EU recommendation: depolarization. Furthermore, Kobakhidze expressed confidence that by 2030, Georgia would be the most prepared candidate country and would join the EU “with dignity, independence, freedom, and sovereignty.”
Georgia’s EU Path: Rethinking Enlargement?
Georgia’s recent designation as an EU candidate presents a complex path forward. Both the EU’s internal reforms and the intricate geopolitical landscape will significantly impact Georgia’s integration. While a mutually beneficial relationship is undeniable, a fundamental question arises: Does the EU enlargement process need a revision?
Some EU Countries might prioritize strengthening EU cohesion before further enlargement, creating a potential roadblock for Georgia’s aspirations. Some might argue that Georgia faces distinct territorial challenges. A significant portion remains outside its control, governed by Russia-backed breakaway regions like South Ossetia and Abkhazia. While some might view the situation in Ukraine, facing similar territorial disputes, as a potential precedent for future membership, it remains a significant challenge for Georgia in the current climate.
The road ahead for Georgia’s EU integration will depend on the EU’s ability to address internal reforms and its willingness to navigate complex geopolitical realities. Ultimately, Georgia needs the EU, and the EU needs Georgia.
Veronica Anghel and Erik Jones, in their April 2024 article “We Need to Talk About EU Enlargement,” [2] call for a paradigm shift in the EU’s enlargement process. Georgia’s candidacy serves as a case study, highlighting the potential need for a revised approach.
Anghel and Jones propose five key reasons for rethinking enlargement. Let’s briefly explore how some of these arguments for rethinking EU enlargement resonate with Georgia’s situation:
Beyond Institutions: Citizen Engagement in Georgia’s EU Path
While the EU traditionally prioritizes institutional design during enlargement, Georgia’s case highlights the importance of democratic values and citizen engagement. Sustainable democratic development hinges on an active citizenry committed to democratic principles.
Georgia possesses a key strength in this regard: a robust civil society actively advocating for its vision of the country’s future. Recent protests exemplify this vibrant civic engagement, a crucial factor often overlooked in the EU’s enlargement process.
Enlargement for Stability: Georgia and the EU’s Eastern Flank
The evolving geopolitical landscape demands a re-evaluation of the EU’s enlargement policy. Security concerns have become paramount, and enlargement can be a strategic tool for promoting regional stability.
For Georgia, facing direct threats from Russia, EU membership could offer a critical security buffer, akin to the stabilizing role NATO plays for Turkey. By integrating Georgia, the EU would actively contribute to securing its eastern borders against destabilizing actors like Russia.
Georgia’s EU Bid: A Catalyst for Mutual Transformation
Georgia’s potential EU membership presents a unique opportunity for both sides. The bloc can expect to adapt and evolve institutionally as it integrates new populations and businesses. Historical enlargements have demonstrated this pattern.
However, the benefits are not one-sided. By pursuing institutional reforms alongside enlargement, the EU can not only accommodate Georgia but also enhance its own resilience and functionality. This creates a dynamic of mutual transformation, strengthening both Georgia and the EU.
Georgia’s EU Tightrope: Challenges vs. Strategic Benefits
Georgia’s journey towards EU membership presents a complex tightrope walk. While integrating Georgia poses significant challenges, rejecting its candidacy could have far more dire consequences.
Denial of membership could leave Georgia vulnerable to external pressure, potentially hindering its democratic progress. This, in turn, risks destabilizing the region and creating a security threat for the EU itself.
However, integrating Georgia offers a path towards a more stable and prosperous future for the entire region. By embracing Georgia, the EU would actively pursue its goal of fostering a stable, democratic, and secure neighbourhood. While demanding, Georgia’s EU integration aligns with the EU’s strategic interests in the region.
In conclusion,Georgia’s path to EU membership demands a collaborative effort centred on democratic values, citizen engagement, and institutional reforms. This approach, if pursued by both Georgia and the EU, can unlock the strategic benefits of integration for the entire region – stability, prosperity, and a stronger Europe.
The recent mass protests in Georgia serve as a powerful testament to the public’s unwavering commitment to a European future. While the 2030 target for Georgia’s accession may seem distant, a demonstrably committed Georgia, coupled with a supportive EU, could probably pave the way for a swifter integration process.
[1] The Press conference is available at: https://www.facebook.com/tvimedi/videos/765760209001101
[2] “We need to talk about EU enlargement” by Veronica Anghel and Erik Jones /Apr 2024, available at https://encompass-europe.com/comment/we-need-to-talk-about-eu-enlargement
