Sergey Markedonov: The Third Symbol

Sergey Markedonov

A new intrigue was born in the parliamentary election campaign in Georgia (the elections will be held on the eve of Independence Day, May 21, 2008). One of the symbols of the Georgian “Rose Revolution” of 2003 and the long -term speaker of the Nino Nino Burdzhanadze said her readiness to resign. And not only about leaving the official state post, but also about the termination of political activity. After the tragic death of the Prime Minister of Georgia Zurab Zrabi, in February 2005, Nino Burjanadze secretly became the second number of Georgian politics. To date, politicians of such a caliber and experience (except President Mikhail Saakashvili) in the highest echelons of the Georgian authorities are simply not there.

On July 16, 2008, Burdzhanadze marks 44 years. Behind her shoulders are a successful academic career. In 1986, she entered the graduate school of the Department of International Law of the Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov. It was there (and not in her homeland, known in Soviet times with her “informal” approaches to obtaining a scientific title), she prepared a dissertation on the topic “Problems of international organizations and international marine law”. The parliamentary career of Nino Burjanadze began in 1995. Then she was first elected to the highest legislative institution of Georgia. In 1999, she will be elected a deputy again, and in 2004 - for the third time. For three years, Burjanadze worked as the first deputy chairman of the committee on constitutional and legal issues, and in 1998-1999. She headed this structure. In 2000, Burjanadze switched to foreign policy questions. She headed the Committee on External Relations of the Georgian Parliament.

Burjanadze played a role in the process of taking Georgia in the Council of Europe. In 1999-2002 She was the co -chair of the Committee on Parliamentary Cooperation between Georgia and the EU. Meanwhile, the decision to receive Georgia in the Council of Europe was far from simple. In 1999, Georgia presented such requirements as ensuring the repatriation of the Meskhetian Turks (were deported in 1944 from Samskhe-Javakheti and from Adjara), as well as the adoption of the laws of laws to restore property of the victims in the Georgian-Ossetian conflict. Many of these requirements for 8 years were implemented.

Finally, in November 2001, Burjanadze was first elected the speaker of the national parliament. She came to this position, replacing the future head of the Georgian government and the second number in the revolutionary triumvirates of the 2003 Zrab -Zhgaliy sample (Zhivani was elected by the speaker of the Georgian parliament after the 1999 elections, but left his post after two years). After the “Rose Revolution” and before the presidential election in January 2004, as well as at the end of 2007 - early 2008. Nino Burjanadze performed the functions of the head of the Georgian state. That is, she stood at the head of Georgia during the periods of two presidential election campaigns, which brought the victory to Mikhail Saakashvili. Both successes of the current president of Georgia (January 2004 and January 2008) are not least the result of the effective work of Burjanadze.

Today, many in Georgia are trying to compare the current resignation of Nino Burjanadze and the resignation of the 2001 sample. Someone wants to see in this a kind of omen for Mikhail Saakashvili. Before the “Rose Revolution”, many in Georgia called the Zhvani almost the main contender for the role of the successor of Eduard Shevardnadze, but his resignation brought the ex-speaker to the ranks of the opponents of the then head of the Georgian state, made a moderate and cautious policy to the revolutionary involuntarily.

In November 2004, three months before the tragic death of the “second number” in the revolutionary triumvirate, the author of these lines had a chance to personally meet with the Zuraz -Zhgami in his premiere office. I then caught myself thinking that against the backdrop of President Mikhail Saakashvili (and all the more new leaders in Georgia, and in those days I also had a chance to communicate with George Bararamidze and Gela Geliashvili) Zhivani looks like a wise old man. Although at that time the prime minister was only 42 years old. But in comparison with the emotional president and members of his chewing team, he looked too reasonable and rational. In 2004, they looked at him with hope even in South Ossetia (it was with his activities that the suspension of the cavalry attack on Tskhinvali was associated, which was undertaken by the Hawks in the Saakashvili team in the spring and summer of 2004).

After the departure of the Zurab, Nino Burjanadze remained, perhaps, the most rational person of Georgian policy. Although her statements to the Russian authorities were not always politically correct, it is still necessary to take into account various contexts that made the emotional style of the behavior of Georgia leaders in demand. In addition, after the death of the Burn, the plank of rationalism and pragmatism in Georgian politics was significantly reduced.

In November 2001, Zhivani criticized much less than today Burjanadze is criticized. Then the main opponent of the speaker was the Minister of the Interior (this post held in 2001 by Kakha Targamadze). Today, Burjanadze is an object of strict criticism from the part of not the executive branch, but the opposition. In March 2008, during the protest of the opposition (and, above all, hunger strikes in the parliament building), opponents of the current government criticized Burjanadze even tougher than President Saakashvili. According to the participants of the March hunger strike, the speaker of the national parliament did not show attention to the requirements of the protesters, trying only to “smoke” them from the building of the highest legislative institution in Georgia. “They expected elementary human responsiveness from Burjanadze, but the opposite turned out. This is another demonstration of how the authorities relate to the people, ”said George Haindrava, one of the leaders of the opposition, in the recent past, the Minister of Conflict Settlement. Some opposition leaders have already called Burjanadze’s decision “cynical”. According to the number of the first in the list of “United opposition” (we put this phrase in quotation marks because it includes far from all parties opposing the authorities) Levan Gachechiladze Burjanazde is guilty of disrupting negotiations between the current leaders of the state and their opponents. “In exchange for his resignation, Nino Burjanadze offers unfair, falsified elections,” the National Democratic Party of Georgia said in a statement.

However, one cannot but see the contradictions within the power elite of today's Georgia. Nino Burjanazde was going to run for the first on the lists of the Georgian “Party of Power” of the “Unified National Movement”. At the same time, she, of course, strove to ensure that when forming the party lists, her opinion (as one of the symbols of the “revolution of roses” and the unspoken “second number” of Georgian politics) would be taken into account in the most serious way. In general, it is worth recalling that at one time Mikhail Saakashvili and Nino Burjanadze came to the same team from different political camps, although each of them (like Zhivani) managed to visit Eduard Shevardnadze’s favorites and experience the bitterness of disappointments in the White Fox. The Rose Revolution united these politicians into a situational union, but each of them had their own ideas about their own role in politics and in the history of Georgia.

Over time, Mikhail Saakashvili began to consider his role as the mission of the “collector of lands”, “the father of all the Georgians”, “the Savior of the Fatherland”. He was much more prone to populism. What are only his promises, given in December 2007 forced immigrants from Abkhazia, to return to their homes in a month and a half. Next to such a politician, a much more moderate Nino Burjanadze did not look too natural.

I repeat again. The speaker of the Georgian parliament often harshly criticized Russia for manifestations of "imperial thinking." However, she tried not to give advance promises in advance. In fact, she demonstrated the populist style of behavior only once. In early July 2006, some Georgian refugees from Abkhazia made an unexpected initiative. They people announced their intention to return to Abkhazia and ask for political asylum from the authorities of an unrecognized republic, considered enemies of the official Tbilisi. This is an unexpected (if not sensational) decision of the Georgian refugees (who still did not experience special sympathy for power in Sukhumi) after they were forcibly evicted from the Batumi hotels sold to Kazakh investors. In recent years, businessmen from Kazakhstan are extremely actively working in the Georgian market (unlike Russians restrained by the Kremlin for political reasons). This eviction, started for the sake of economic benefit to the detriment of traditional "patriotic" feelings, was made using law enforcement agencies. But this did not end. Nino Burjanadze then told reporters that she shares all the feelings of these people, but "does not justify their current intentions." According to her, due to social problems, one cannot leave their homeland. It is necessary to resolve them within Georgia. And all this, instead of initiating a parliamentary investigation of the causes and mechanisms of hotel transactions, as well as the legitimacy of the actions of Batumi police officers.

According to Vitaly Portnikov, “the situation for Burdjanadze only worsened when Saakashvili began the struggle with his own associates trying to strengthen their influence in power. In a situation where the pie is not enough for their own, other people are not needed. ” Thus, Nino Burjanadze turned out to be a stranger among her. In the event of the victory of the “Unified National Movement” with Burjanadze at the head of the list, the President of Georgia would help strengthen his own personnel positions in parliament, leaving the speaker a purely technological role (an attractive electoral symbol, etc.).

She has not yet become her among oppositionists. Probably, many will not forgive her with certain rigidity in relation to the participants of the March hunger strike, as well as a firm position in negotiations on constitutional amendments and on the opposition memorandum (it was prepared on January 29, 2008). However, to get into their ranks a policy of this level would be a profitable business for any party. Burjanadze has such an important quality for any politician as recognition. Unlike opposition to each other (and not just with the authorities), Burjanadze is not just a well -known politician. She has serious merits to the Georgian state and society, no matter what today it is expressed at her.

Already in the near future we will see how much the departure of Burjanazde from politics was her final choice. One way or another, the party in power has already lost a large -caliber figure, one of the symbols of the new era. Whether the opposition will acquire a new leader is unknown. The Georgian opposition is a typically post -Soviet political phenomenon. The unification for the sake of solving strategic tasks becomes an overwhelming task for her. Personal ambitions and overstated requirements for colleagues have long become the distinguishing features of the activities of the authorities (many of which themselves only recently left ministerial seats). Until now, in Georgia there were no precedents of successful return to power. And the ex-Minister of Foreign Affairs “Frenchwoman” Saloma Zurabishvili, and the eccentric ex-Minister for Settlement of Conflicts George Haindrava, and “hawk”, military minister Irakli Okanavili invariably lost political battles after resignations. None of those who moved from the highest echelons of Georgian power to the ranks of the opposition were returning back to the "White Horse". Nino Burjanadze may have such a chance. The failure of the election campaign in May 2008 (inadequate actions and the authorities and the opposition) can make the idea of “third power” in demand. And then the future ex-speaker of the parliament will be able to try to return ...

Sergey Markedonov: The Third Symbol

See also: