Uprising for democracy in the Caucasus

The country of Georgia, a small nation of 3.8 million people in the Caucasus, has been thrown into a profound crisis. Its people have risen up against the ruling party, Georgian Dream, over the passage of its Russa-style “foreign influence law,” homophobic anti-LGBTQ propaganda law, rigging of the recent election, and suspension of accession talks for membership in the EU.

The billionaire Bidzina Ivanishvili pulls the strings behind Georgian Dream. He is the country’s richest oligarch and possesses a fortune of $6.4 billion, which is nearly the size of the government’s entire budget and a fifth of the country’s GDP. He and his party, whatever their clashes with the West and their tilt toward Russia, collaborate with all the imperialist powers and multinational corporations in the plunder and exploitation of the country’s people, wealth, and resources.

Fed up with such authoritarianism and exploitation, the Georgian people have erupted in mass protest against their government and for democracy and equality. Georgian Dream has responded with utmost brutality, repressing protests and arresting protestors. But the movement shows no signs of backing down and as we publish, the mass protests continue, for the twenty-fourth consecutive day. The country stands on a knife edge.

Here Tempest’s Ashley Smith and Posle Media’s Ilya Budraitskis interview Georgian activists and scholars Ia Eradze, Luka Nakhutsrishvili, and Lela Rekhviashvili about the roots of the uprising, its trajectory, and Georgia’s place in global capitalism and the imperialist order.

Ilya Budraitskis & Ashley Smith: The people of Georgia have risen up in a new mass protest movement against the Government. The roots of it are, in part, a response to the results of the recent election that brought Georgian Dream back into power. What did they run on? What were the opposition parties and what were their platforms? Were people satisfied by those options? What were the official results? Were the elections rigged?

Luka Nakhutsrishvili: We are in the midst of a mass democratic uprising against the Georgian Dream government. Hundreds of thousands peacefully protest in the main square in Tbilisi and in cities and towns throughout the country. In the past two weeks, we have seen protest marches held across all of Tbilisi at all times. More and more professional groups and neighborhoods have started to self-organize. This is unprecedented in our recent history. 

The immediate root of the protests is the profound crisis of legitimacy produced by the ruling party who is following the script that Viktor Orban used in Hungary to turn its government into an authoritarian regime. But Georgian Dream has gone further than Orban-style illiberal democracy by rigging the election and cracking down on protesters in a way that is more reminiscent of Belarus and Russia. The suspension of accession talks with the European Union was only the last drop.

Over the past two years, Georgian Dream has taken a dramatic far-right turn. When it came to power in 2012, it claimed to be social democratic and was part of the socialist bloc in the European Parliament. While many worried it might tilt toward Russia, it remained in support of EU integration and accession to NATO.

But since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, it made a complete U-turn to adopt Euroscepticism, embrace right-wing nationalism, advocate reactionary gender politics, propel conspiracy theories into the political mainstream, and express open sympathies with Russia.

Georgian Dream ran on a platform of fear-mongering, deploying the slogan “choose peace, not war” paired with images of a flourishing Georgia on one side and on the other a destroyed Ukraine. Their implication was clear; if you vote for the opposition Georgia will end up invaded and occupied by Russia.

As for Georgian Dream’s base, while it lost a lot of its voters who are sympathetic to EU-integration, it has gained support among far-right nationalist voters, who approve of their anti-LGBT law, oppose Washington’s supposed plan to drag Georgia into a global war, and express hostility to EU bureaucrats they claim are violating Georgian sovereignty. The rest of their voters supported them out of fear of war, which Georgian Dream cynically manipulated.

The four main opposition parties coalesced into coalitions to challenge Georgian Dream in the election. They are parties of the technocratic establishment, most of them affiliated to the previous government, and proved unable to address the grievances of the vast majority. Most voters don’t like them and voted for them tactically to defeat Georgian Dream or at least stop them from winning an outright majority and ruling on their own.

IB & AS: In the end, Georgian Dream did win a majority amidst wide-scale allegations that it had rigged the results. Is that true?

LN: Yes. Polls indicated it would remain the largest party but without enough votes to independently form a government (like Kaczynski’s far-right party after last year’s election in Poland). No one predicted it would win with 54 percent of the vote. To ensure that result, it resorted to every authoritarian trick imaginable, basically turning the vulnerable social condition of most of the population, which it has systematically reproduced, into an instrument of power.    

The party organized what we call a voting carousel to help their supporters vote in multiple places to drive up its results. Georgian Dream also bullied people into voting for it with the threat of cutting off people’s access to our minimal social welfare system, including medical care. They intimidated workers in the public sector like schoolteachers with the threat of losing their jobs. 

The security forces told people with loved ones in jail that if they did not vote Georgian Dream they would not get fair trials. They took away the ID cards of those whom they knew supported the opposition parties to make it hard for them to vote.  

They made it very difficult for the hundreds of thousands of emigres to vote. Why? Because this group had left the country out of frustration with its politicians and poverty and are most inclined to vote for the opposition. 

Georgian Dream then overrode the lawsuit that the president had filed to declare the elections unconstitutional because of mass violations of election laws. They didn’t even wait for the decision by the court they control to convene the parliament–something that clearly violates the Constitution. Georgian Dream thus did everything to further exacerbate the crisis of legitimacy engendered by how openly and badly they rigged the election.  

IB & AS: The trigger of the uprising is Georgian Dream’s decision to suspend the process for accession to the European Union. Why did it decide to do this, especially given that a majority of Georgians support integration?

Ia Eradze: Georgian Dream likely suspended the accession talks because it faced little protests after it rigged the election. It also does not want to agree to the EU’s conditionalities for democratic reform, which would threaten its hold on power. Finally, Russia no doubt put pressure on it behind the scenes.

Their suspension of talks has transformed the situation and awakened people like me who were shocked by the election results. I felt paralyzed for about two weeks. I couldn’t do anything. There were demonstrations after the elections, organized by opposition parties, but they were not that large. 

The small turnout was a result of collective paralysis. It took weeks for people to grasp the enormity of the rigging that gave Georgian Dream such a victory. Frustration began to accumulate under the surface. Georgian Dream’s announcement of the suspension of accession talks, which violates our Constitution, broke the dam of welled-up anger and it has burst forth throughout the country. 

In many ways, their announcement is fortunate. I was really afraid that they might pretend to go along with the EU talks, faking agreements, while they instituted authoritarian rule. That would have been far worse. Luckily for us, they overreached and now we are in the midst of a mass movement against the government. 

Most people are not protesting just about EU accession. We are out in the streets to stop an authoritarian government from continuing to run roughshod over our Constitution, our rights, and our livelihoods. We are protesting to defend our democracy against Georgian Dream’s transformation of every state institution, from the schools to the courts, into tools to serve its interests and those of the oligarchs who control it. 

The government has responded to our uprising with utter brutality. They have started raiding people’s homes to find people they claim are planning a revolution. They’ve arrested some opposition leaders. The regime is becoming more autocratic by the day. Up to 500 people have been arrested and most of them were beaten up; some were tortured (even the public defender judged the treatment of many detainees to be torture). In the last few days, we have seen people being kidnapped from the streets by police. Among the prisoners are professors, university and school students, artists, and doctors. 

IB & AS: What are the protests like? What groups and classes of people are involved and why is accession to the EU important to them? Were these the same that protested the special law? What are the protesters’ main demands?

Ia E: They are huge. A large percentage of the country’s 3.8 million people have joined the demonstrations. In Tbilisi, which has a population of about a million people, every day throughout the day and into the night there are at least 100,000 people protesting and on some days over 150,000.

They are much larger than the spring protests against the foreign agent law, and they are not just in Tbilisi. They are taking place throughout the country, not only in major districts, but also in small towns in the countryside. 

And they are far more diverse than the spring protests. People of all ages have joined the movement. Young people are out in force, but also everyone else. Different classes of people from professionals to workers are in the demonstrations. It’s really beautiful to behold.

Everyone realizes the danger we face. I’m part of an initiative that organizes actions to defend education. Countless other groups in different sectors of society are doing the same. None of this is very coordinated. It’s like streams of separately organized initiatives converging into massive protests. 

When I wake up in the morning, I look at the protest schedule to figure out which one I want to join. One day I ended up at four different protests. They are so numerous because they are all self-organized.

This reality contradicts the government media that tries to portray the protest as a conspiracy, a “Maidan” instigated by foreign powers and their local agents. It’s not. It’s spontaneous and decentralized. If it was so centrally planned, you would go to the rallies and see a platform with organized speakers. Nothing of the sort is happening. In fact, in Tbilisi’s main square where the demonstrations happen, there is no stage, there are no speeches, and the opposition parties are not leading the protests. 

There is not even organized chanting during the day. Many of the protests are just silent defiance of the government. The energy, however, is amazing. But the movement is gradually finding its collective voice; it already has articulated two basic demands: new elections and the immediate release of all imprisoned protesters and activists.

LN: In the face of how decentralized the protest is, it is interesting to look at its language. The protestors shoot New Year’s fireworks and put laser shows on the parliament building which has become a symbol of everything that’s wrong with this country. They hold concerts and bang on the metal fences, which the security forces have used to pen in demonstrations and separate them from the parliament. 

Later in the night, the protests become intense partisan fights on the streets against the special forces. In a sign of the government’s fear and turn to repression, it has banned  fireworks, lasers, and face coverage. 

Ia E: I do want to stress that amidst this spontaneity, people are beginning to organize in small initiatives that come together in the demonstrations. In however decentralized fashion, planning is going on, targets are being chosen, and a movement is being organized. 

For example, protests have targeted a range of public institutions to challenge their slander against the movement or their indifference to the brutality of the regime. Among these institutions is the Public Broadcaster, the country’s main national theatre, the Ministry of Education, the Writers’ House, the National Cinema Center, the Justice Palace, and the National Center for Educational Quality Enhancement. 

In some cases, public servants have joined those demonstrating outside, which was very moving to witness. Public servants have also started signing petitions and organizing marches notwithstanding pressure from a government that aims to erase the line between party loyalty and state institutions. 

The opposition parties play next to no role right now in the movement. They have been sidelined despite what the Western media say. People have been telling a joke that these parties should at least do something like provide hot tea at the demonstrations. 

LN: The opposition media, however, overrepresents their presence for obvious reasons. They want to boost their profile. So does Georgian Dream’s media propaganda to persuade people that these protests are instigated by the “radical opposition.” But when you’re on the protests, they are actually a negligible force and are doing very little. 

Some of these politicians have become so self-conscious of their insignificant role that they are now refusing to be interviewed at the demonstrations. As a result, those now being interviewed are young people, many of them in gas masks, and what they have to say makes a lot more sense than anything you’d hear from the politicians.

IB & AS: These protests seem very similar to the Maidan uprising in Ukraine. Those began among students and then, when they faced brutal repression the movement, spread rapidly to the rest of society turning into a militant mass uprising that toppled the government. With splits in the government including resignations and opposition politicians joining the protests, do you think the Georgian uprising could follow the same trajectory? 

Ia E: It is now unimaginable how this crisis can be solved in an institutional, peaceful, and legal manner. Our country is in a full-scale confrontation between the people and the government..

LN: It’s clearly escalating. The government has turned to surveillance, raids, and brutal repression. But no one’s been scared off the streets. The movement is now demanding, not new elections, but that the government itself must go and now. The mass sentiment is it’s either us or them. It’s at a tipping point now, and we’ll see if it escalates to challenge Georgian Dream’s capacity to rule.

As for similarities with the Ukrainian Maidan, ironically, it is Georgian Dream who follows the Maidan script – from canceling EU talks like Yanukovich did to banning masks and mobilizing street thugs. They seem unable to make sense of the current uprising as anything other than an attempt by its internal and external enemies to “Maidanize” Georgia. This obsession with Maidan might be one of the reasons why the government has failed miserably to understand–and to quell–these protests.  

Lela Rekhviashvili: Also, Georgian Dream has used and abused Maidan uprising to scare people away from protesting. They’ve said if you challenge the state in that way, Russia will intervene, and we’ll end up invaded, occupied, and at war like Ukraine. They did this throughout the election. 

But Georgian Dream in their arrogance and perhaps stupidity have provoked the very mass opposition they had demonized. Their authoritarianism is the main cause of this enormous wave of demonstrations. Now we’re on a knife edge, between an increasingly autocratic government and a mass movement that shows no signs of backing down. 

IB & AS: The whole scenario you’re describing sounds like many other uprisings around the world in which the normal functions of government cannot resolve a crisis. Often in such situations, people create alternatives to the government, popular assemblies, that can pose an alternative to the state. Are there signs of all this self-organizing you’re describing coming together to form higher levels of unity and democratic decision making? 

LN: Not yet. At this point, people are mobilizing and figuring out novel ways to withstand the tear gas, evade repression, and how to avoid being raided and arrested by the authorities.

Ia E: People are starting to build organization. Several groups and several movements have converged on common projects. The best example is how many forces came together to protest the public broadcast channel for their biased coverage and demand that they live stream the protest and interview participants, ultimately forcing the channel to concede. There are examples, but people have yet to organize popular assemblies to discuss the movement and collectively plan initiatives.

LN: Even those among us who analyze and write are only just beginning to catch up with events over the last month. The whole process has taken us by storm. Since discontent with the rigged elections were unable to produce a sustained protest, we had started preparing for slow resistance organized within smaller communities. But then boom the protests exploded into a full blown movement in confrontation with the government. 

IB & AS: Georgia seems trapped between various major imperial powers—the US, EU, Russia and China—because of its role as a transit site for global trade. Explain Georgia’s role in global capitalism. Would Georgia Dream’s suspension of EU accession change its position in global capitalism? Would it become more integrated into Russian capitalism? 

LR: Georgia is a typical peripheral country, in which imperial powers have facilitated the creation of a predatory economic system masquerading as development. The EU and the U.S. have significantly shaped the country’s political economy since the early 1990s, contributing to the creation of unsustainable contradictions. On the one hand, they want Georgia to be democratic, but on the other, they and local capitalists, especially the most powerful oligarch, Ivanishvili, want to plunder the country for profit. 

Their development program is impossible to implement and sustain a democracy. Why? Because the plunder and impoverishment provoke opposition that challenges the development strategy. To contain that resistance requires repression and with that a turn to authoritarianism.

The energy sector is a good example of this contradiction, especially since Georgia’s becoming an “energy hub” and part of a “green” energy corridor is currently a common goal of the EU and the Georgian government. In the 1990s, but especially since the Rose Revolution of 2003, Western governments, aid agencies (e.g. USAID), and development banks (e.g. World Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development) have played a major role in creating state institutions that would facilitate privatization and deregulation of the energy sector. 

By 2008, Georgia had privatized all but 2 of its up to 50 Soviet-inherited hydropower plants. While Western institutions supported privatization and the creation of an FDI-dependent economy, it was predominantly Russian capital that actually bought up power plants and energy distribution facilities. 

When the opportunities to attract FDI (foreign direct investment) through privatization dried up, the government–again in cooperation with Western actors–began to promote greenfield hydropower plants as part of the EU’s green transition agenda. By 2024, the government had signed contracts for 214 new hydropower plants across the country, even if existing capacities almost cover domestic electricity demand. To attract financial capital, it offered land and water resources at nominal prices and promised that the state would protect investors from a range of financial, regulatory, and political risks. 

Given the extractive nature of the new hydropower projects, local popular movements have succeeded in opposing and sometimes canceling or obstructing such projects, especially the large ones such as Namakhvani, Nenskra, Khudoni. 

The government got a new impetus to revive all the opposed hydropower plant projects and to propose new ones in 2022, when the EU started creating a ‘green energy corridor’ across Azerbaijan, Georgia, Romania, and Hungary, and committed to finance an undersea electricity cable across the Black Sea. European institutions, most notably the European Energy Community, have participated in the planning activities through which the Georgian government declares electricity exports to be key to their development agenda and commitment to building all previously contested large hydropower plants. 

Throughout these 15 years since the new hydropower was promoted as a “green transition” agenda and developmental panacea, a range of local capitalists have learned how to benefit from the construction process, some linking new plants to cryptomining, hence creating a strong local lobby for continued expansion of the sector. 

Georgian Dream declares anti-hydropower opposition movements to be one of its main enemies. They openly declare that consolidation of power, including the adoption of the Foreign Agents Law, is important to suppress such opposition to Georgia’s economic development. 

This is what I mean when I say that the developmental agenda that the Georgian government has elaborated in collaboration with the Western powers and also to the benefit of others, including Russian and Chinese capital ( which is not featuring in energy but is prominent in transport infrastructures), is hard if not impossible to implement democratically. So Georgian Dream, much like its political predecessors, turns towards authoritarianism to be able to better serve the interests of local and international capital. 

When we insist that the breakdown of the EU integration is dangerous, this is not because we are unaware of the problematic consequences of the EU integration, or that we are unaware of how right-wing populism is shaking Europe’s core and peripheral economies alike, and how many European countries are trashing their commitment to human rights, international law, the UN, the ICC, and the ICJ in carrying out their joint war, their genocide, in Palestine. 

Instead, for us it is crystal clear that the current authoritarian consolidation serves to unroll the same problematic economic development agenda with an even more brutal face, suppressing any possibility of even protesting against it. This means being Europe’s periphery without being protected from the worst effects of this peripherality by the most basic mechanisms of protection of social and political rights. 

Now what about Russia and China? We can’t really say much about Russia because all the deals they have done have been behind the scenes, not in public. Did Russia put pressure on Georgia? It’s likely but we don’t have the details on its nature. We can clearly observe, however, that Russian officials express satisfaction with the disintegration of EU-Georgia relations. 

China has also been quiet, but its economic interests are clear. It views Georgia as a transit site that enables it access to Europe’s market. Georgia is important especially after Russia’s imperialist invasion of Ukraine cut off China’s northern route to Europe. 

One of the alternative routes, the so-called middle corridor of the BRI (Belt and Road Initiative, which passes through Georgia, has now become much more important. The last thing China wants is any kind of instability that would disrupt their trade. It doesn’t care about accession or authoritarianism, just as long as the route remains open. 

LN: Lela’s explanation of Georgian Dream is far better than that of the campists, which imply that it is some kind of anti-imperialist party. The reality, however, is much more banal: Georgia is an oligarchic regime, in which Ivanishvili assures elite loyalty by granting benefits to businessmen and politicians of lesser wealth while all relevant state institutions, most importantly the judiciary, are captured to protect their interests. Thus, there is an autonomous, domestic dynamic that reproduces the oligarchic system in Georgia. It is by no means reducible to mere interaction with global or Western capital. 

Campists don’t grasp this and end up excusing everything Georgian Dream is doing from passing the foreign agents law to rigging the election and even repressing the current movement. But, contrary to many campists’ reading, the way Georgian Dream is handling the situation is by no means simply a reaction to “Western imperialism,” which would indirectly justify their authoritarian measures as self-defense. 

The campists just denounce Europe for its colonial history, its neo-colonial present, and its complicity with genocide as if that’s the end of the matter. While much of this is true, they often present China as an alternative, despite its autocratic nature and its complicity with our exploitation and oppression. That is no alternative.

I think it’s disastrous for the Left to abandon commitments to democracy and parrot Georgian Dream’s authoritarian turn in the name of sovereignty. It is not only wrong, but politically disastrous. Anyone committed to emancipatory politics should reject it. 

If the Left adopts it, it will guarantee that it remains isolated and without influence in the biggest movement we’ve seen in generations that is fighting for democracy and equality. It will put the Left on the other side of the movement’s barricades. 

LR: This campist Left is parroting the government’s abuse of concepts like sovereignty and decolonial discourse. In doing so, they are aligning themselves with a government that serves our oligarch and international capital that is now violently repressing its own people.

Authoritarian states like Russia to Hungary and China cynically use the West’s terrible record of imperialism and colonialism to justify their own predatory rule. The leftists that go along with this are flirting dangerously with a red/brown alliance like Sara Wagenecht does in Germany.

IB & AS: So given this transit hub situation, how have all these powers that have a stake in Georgia for different reasons, how have they responded to the uprising and the crisis now for them in Georgia, China, Russia, U.S., European Union?

LN: At this point, only the Western powers have condemned the government’s repression and violence. They also did not recognize the election results; whereas China, Turkey, Iran, and Russia congratulated Georgian Dream on its victory. Russia has also stated that if Georgian Dream needs help, they would be willing to send in troops. 

Ia E: The EU governments may have condemned Georgian Dream’s brutality, but the Western development banks have not. Why? Because Georgian Dream shows every intention of continuing to pay their loans and sustaining their contracted development projects. The banks seem to be putting their economic interests before democracy. At the same time, it is clear that the Georgian Dream and its supporting economic elites have enormously profited through development projects, funded by these banks. This allows me to emphasize, once again, that the economic development trajectory that Georgia has been following was neither completely forced onto the government by the West, nor inevitable, but rather a conscious and rather profitable choice of the Georgian Dream government to accept the rules of the globally dominant development discourse.

LN: In the worst-case scenario, the EU will abandon putting normative, political pressure on Georgia to democratize and continue doing business with Georgia even under this wretched government like they do with those in Azerbaijan, Serbia, and other Central European and Central Asian countries. Serbia might be a particularly salient case as a country that seems permanently stuck in the accession process. While denouncing Serbia’s authoritarianism, the EU stipulates unpopular contracts regarding the extraction of lithium in the country.

Campists abroad or our local sovereigntists might interpret this as the West finally leaving a sovereign country alone. But in reality, this will be a problem for us, because the normative horizon of democracy, associated with the European framework, is an indispensable tool to put popular pressure on a government that is otherwise bent on crushing democracy altogether. In this sense, the EU, for protesters, is a symbol of the rule of law, civil rights, and equality. 

At this point, on a mass level, the striving towards Europe and the language of “defending Georgia’s bright, European future” seems to be the only language available for articulating demands for democracy and social justice. The question then is how the people will rearticulate these in case the European horizon actually collapses. How do we and can we fight for political democracy and economic equality isolated from the norms of democracy and human rights emanating from the “collective West”? 

IB & AS: In this dynamic situation, what do you think the Georgian Left, social movements, and unions should be advocating? Is there any possibility of forging a political alternative on the Left to challenge Georgian Dream and the pro-capitalist opposition parties?

Ia E: It’s very hard to say because in the past there have also been attempts and nothing really came out of them. I’m very hopeful now because Georgian Dream’s authoritarian turn has forced people into a kind of political awakening. 

We need to start a conversation about building a party. For now, people are beginning to talk about organizing a platform movement that unites some of the self-organized forces together to project common demands. That might start a process.

LN: Meanwhile, more and more people feel the need to unionize in mostly new trade unions that won’t be dominated by Georgian Dream party interests. This comes as an immediate response to two developments: Many have discovered the strike as the most efficient peaceful tool of protest and resistance, but since, in purely legal terms, going on a strike isn’t easy in Georgia, organizing it on the basis of a union appears as the most practical way to give it a try. Even more importantly, a lot of public servants have started looking for ways to unionize as a reaction to the new harsh amendments in the Public Service Law hastily passed by Georgian Dream which will soon make it easier for party-loyal heads in different public institutions to fire or pressure government-critical public servants. All of a sudden, strikes and unions, which would be denigrated as “leftist” or “Soviet” anachronisms some weeks ago, now come forward center-stage as an organic necessity arising from the midst of the protests.          

Thus, our first task is to build the struggle and maintain it. The government’s authoritarian response to our movement is driving people to think about strategies and tactics that the liberal opposition have tried to discredit like a general strike to preserve our democracy.  

IB & AS: What position should the international Left take in this situation? And what can we do to help Georgia’s struggle for self-determination, democracy, and equality?

LR: The international Left actually faces the same question as the Georgian Left—how to transcend the obscuring framework of a conflict between the EU and Russia. The key is to understand and explain how geopolitical rivalries are squeezing peripheral countries.

No one on the Left should expect any of the imperial powers—the US, EU, Russia, and China—to serve our interests. Whatever their rivalries, they share a predatory agenda and will support an authoritarian regime to ensure they can carry it out. Importantly, the inter-imperial competition and struggle for hegemony create new risks and vulnerabilities for the peripheral states that need to be taken seriously. 

It would be nice for the international Left to engage with more Georgian leftists and activists. At this point, there is a strong tendency for much of it to search out people who confirm its inaccurate and misleading framework that Western imperialism is the sole culprit, indict a mass popular movement as its catspaw, and exonerate the local oligarchic regime. 

If the international left follows these people’s lead it will end up supporting Georgian Dream’s rule over peripheral capitalism. Some on the Western left would benefit from stopping being so self-centered and limiting their critique to Western imperialism alone. I’m not asking them to not criticize the West, but to do it more seriously and to criticize non-Western actors as well. That’s the only way to uphold a consistent position to oppose not just the West but capitalism and imperialism without exception. 

LN: My fundamental request to the international Left is to recognize our local agency, the agency of the Georgian people in our struggle for democracy against this authoritarian regime. Stop reiterating narratives of a “second Maidan,” and “color revolution.” It may make you feel righteous, but it leads you to betray us and apologize for the regime that is oppressing us.

Ia E: It is astonishing to me that people on the Left forget that people in the periphery have agency. It is a politics of despair. Our collective agency is the basis of solidarity in our country and with others throughout the world. Please stand with our struggle against Georgian Dream. 

Opinions expressed in signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or the Tempest Collective. For more information, see “About Tempest Collective.”

Featured Image credit: Mautskebeli