Christopher Walker: Georgia in a Period of Stagnation

Generally, excluding 3 Baltic States, from the rest 12 post-Soviet states, 8 belong to the “consolidated authoritarianism” category, two – Armenia and Moldavia - “partly consolidated authoritarianism”; two more – Georgia and Ukraine – have a better index: Freedom House considers them “transitional-hybrid” systems.

To talk about the report, the head of the research department of Freedom House and the co-author of the report, Christopher Walker visited the Prague headquarter of radio Liberty. We used this chance and recorded an interview with him. The first question, obviously, referred the general index of Georgia:

Christopher Walker: Our impression regarding Georgia is that over the last years this country is in a period of stagnation. It’s really sad considering that Georgia has a big potential for the development of democratic institutions. It should be noted though that this stagnation has been fostered by several factors – 2008 war, 2007 political disturbance. This and other circumstances caused the frustration of those expectations that existed towards Georgia in the middle of the decade.

Radio Liberty: Freedom House was especially critical towards the degree of media freedom. The press remains in the “partly free” category – only two places afar from “not free” category. Is media really the most problematic segment?

Christopher Walker: I think several factors should be considered here. If we talk relatively, excluding Baltic States, among the former Soviet countries, Georgia is among those who have the best index regarding the freedom of media. Freedom is very rare in this region – out of 12 former Soviet countries, only 2 didn’t fall in the category of “not free” in our report concerning the media freedom. We called Georgia’s index “an average.” While analyzing the freedom of press, we analyzed the legal, economic and political factors. For last 2 years, considering the political disturbance, state of emergency and the war, Georgia’s position worsened. This was fostered by several concrete facts – Imedi break-in, for example. Though, considering all these problems, it should be noted, that Georgia, together with Ukraine, is ahead of the rest 10 countries. The media freedom, partly, but still exists – and the index in our report indicates exactly this. But, of course, there are problems. Often, the case of media owners is obscure that, in our opinion, is the biggest problem. There are unanswered questions regarding license procedures and the public broadcaster. Because of all this, media in Georgia can’t even come close to the category of “free.”

Radio Liberty: When talking about the relative picture, we mean the comparison of Georgia’s index to other states, for example, middle Asian countries and Russia. Isn’t it so? In your report which studied the transitional states, the index of Georgia is better compared to these authoritarian countries, right?

Christopher Walker: yes, that’s right.

Radio Liberty: when you talk about “stagnation,” what do you mean – in which sphere could Georgia do more and what did it not do?

Christopher Walker: I think Georgian society had important aspirations and in 2004-2005 years – basically, in the sphere of state building – impressive steps have been taken. Our reports have indicated, for example, the progress in the fight against corruption. I think, it’s possible to assert that considering these aspirations and the general level of pluralism in the public, more progress could be reached in many spheres – including, the freedom of media. More, I would say that freedom of media is very easily reachable, for the nearest future, if the measures are taken based on the right political will.

Radio Freedom: So, in your opinion, is the main problem the absence of political will from the government?

Christopher Walker: It’s an important factor, but not the only one. Around all these complex matters, there are many external factors – especially in the situation, when there’s a harsh political conflict, which overpasses the democratic frames. This complicates the case, but ultimately, of course, it’s very important to have clear, explicit political will both from the government and other political elites operating in the country.

Radio Liberty:  Your organization publishes many reports – “transitional states” and report on the freedom of press are just two examples from the long list. You also publish report “worst among worst,” which evaluates those countries and territories where there’s the hardest situation concerning democracy. In the current year, South Ossetia fell in this list. Can u tell us what was this caused by – and also, very briefly, what’s the situation like in Abkhazia?

Christopher Walker: Yes, we study the existing situation in the disputed territories in one of our analytical reports. The index of South Ossetia was really bad in several directions – and exactly this caused its inclusion in the list of the worst situation regarding the political rights and civil freedoms. I think this circumstance is the reflection of the fact that nowadays, nothing can control the authoritative figures in these disputed territories. In the conditions of Kokoit government, the corruption degree reached unimaginable scale. The report reflected exactly these factors. As for Abkhazia, things are not going good there either. In the global list with more than 190 places, it fell among those with the weak index. But, compared to South Ossetia, the situation regarding political rights and civil freedoms are apparently better in Abkhazia.

Radio Liberty: and still, to make sure: The data of Abkhazia and South Ossetia doesn’t influence the general index of Georgia, right? These two separatist regions are going to be studied in the separate report.

Christopher Walker: yes, that’s right. Now, we’re talking about the global list, which differs from the report on “transitional states.”

Radio Liberty: in your speeches you emphasize on one interesting matter – that so-called “colored revolution” generally caused contradictions and retroactive reaction and negatively affected the democratic development of the whole region. Why do you think so?

Christopher Walker:  this case is rather hard. I think that one of the most important factors revealed now, after certain time’s passed, is the big expectations that existed in the beginning towards all three so-called “colored revolutions.” Today’s perspectives naturally show that institutional reforms have been extremely hard. This is concerning the internal political processes and expectations of Georgia, Ukraine and Kirgizstan.

On the second hand, these processes themselves and the impulse connected to it to create better governments and institutions, were perceived to be a big threat by some authoritarian regimes of the region. The representatives of these regimes considered that these threats should have been addressed. But, here we should recall that in some countries, - including Russia – the pressure on democratic institutions intensified before the revolutions. Mass media is the clear example of this: even in 2000-2001, and apparently, in 2002 – talking about Vladimir Putin’s presidency term – the subordination process of media by Kremlin had already started. So, we can say that the processes developed in Georgia, Ukraine and Kirgizstan played a role of certain catalyst – the authoritarian governments put more pressure on opponents and the restriction of media freedom, created censorship and new forms of prohibitions.
Radio Liberty: Besides, they demonized these revolutions – displayed them as extremely negative events.

Christopher Walker: yes, exactly.

Radio Liberty: At the end of the conversation, I want to ask you about Russia. Some experts state that authoritarian countries are trying to find some contra-ideological formulas against democracy – China is often used as an example. How possible is it to consider Russia “managed democracy” concept such a contra formula? What kinds of processes are emphasized in these countries generally?

Christopher Walker: In my opinion, the concept of “managed democracy” is wrong in its basis since there’s almost no democracy in Russia today. This is testified by the reports published by Freedom House and other important organizations – the ones that study the most important indicators of democratic or institutional accountability and the degree of transparency. According to these reports, Russia doesn’t meet these conditions.

Radio Liberty: So, after Medvedev became president, not much has changed?

Christopher Walker: I think certain discussion started after that – for example, the aspiration of fighting against corruption, but the President Medvedev admitted several days ago, that despite all these initiatives, important progress has not been achieved yet in this direction. This fact testifies that the fight against corruption is effective when it’s being implemented in the conditions of accountable institutions, transparency and the rule of law. Until these conditions are met, the corruption will prevail in Russia.