“We will do everything necessary to completely eradicate liberal fascism in Georgia,” the prime minister told reporters on Thursday.
“This process has already begun. These recent events mark the end of liberal fascism in Georgia,” Kobahidze said, using a term reminiscent of the Kremlin’s preferred lexicon.
The United States is among countries that have condemned Georgia’s violent crackdown on the protest movement, threatening new sanctions against the country’s leaders.
“The United States strongly condemns the Georgian Dream party’s brutal and unjustified violence against Georgian citizens,protesters,the media,and members of the opposition,” US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said in a statement.
Kobahidze rejected blinken’s accusations on Thursday and said Tbilisi hoped for better relations with Washington after Donald Trump came to power in January.
What are the key factors contributing to the shift in Georgia’s political climate under Prime Minister Irakli Kobahidze?
Interview: Understanding the Current Political Climate in Georgia
Editor of time.news: Thank you for joining us today, Dr.Elena Gardashvili, a political analyst specialized in Eastern European politics. With recent comments from Prime Minister Irakli Kobahidze about eradicating what he terms “liberal fascism” in Georgia,it seems the political landscape is rapidly shifting. Can you explain what “liberal fascism” means in this context?
Dr. elena Gardashvili: Thank you for having me.The term “liberal fascism” is quite loaded and reflects a particular rhetoric that aligns with authoritarian narratives. It suggests a strong backlash against liberal democratic values, implying that proponents of these values are infringing upon national sovereignty and traditional ideals. Kobahidze’s usage of this language is reminiscent of Kremlin-speaking tactics to delegitimize dissent and justify repression.
Editor: so, it seems that this rhetoric is a tool for the ruling party in Georgia. What are the implications of such a narrative for the future of democracy in the country?
Dr. Gardashvili: Absolutely. By labeling the opposition and protesters as “liberal fascists,” the government could catalyze a nationalistic sentiment while simultaneously stifling any form of dissent. This could lead to critically important erosion of democratic norms in Georgia. Historically, when governments use such rhetoric, we often witness increased crackdowns on civil liberties, opposition movements, and media freedoms.
Editor: Speaking of media, the U.S. has condemned the violent crackdown on protests and accused the government of unjustified violence against its citizens. How does this external response impact Georgia?
Dr. Gardashvili: The U.S. condemnation, with threats of sanctions, puts Georgia in a complex position.On one hand, it may rally nationalist sentiments among some segments of the population, as they often view external criticism as interference. On the other hand,ongoing pressures from the U.S. and the broader international community may push the government to adjust its strategies or seek improved relations, especially as they navigate changing political dynamics with the incoming Trump management.
Editor: Given the current events, what practical advice would you offer to citizens engaged in activism and media work in Georgia?
Dr. Gardashvili: Activists and journalists must prioritize their safety and adapt to the evolving political climate. Forming coalitions with international organizations can amplify their voices and offer protection. Awareness of legal rights is crucial as well; they should be prepared for both online and offline mobilization strategies. Maintaining global connections can provide a lifeline when domestic avenues are being shut down.
Editor: what should we expect in the coming months regarding Georgia’s political trajectory?
Dr. Gardashvili: We are likely to see continued efforts from the Georgian government to solidify its narrative and suppress dissent under the guise of national security. If external criticism intensifies—especially with looming sanctions—there may be a dual pressure point where the government is forced to choose between nationalistic rhetoric and practical governance. This tension will define Georgia’s political landscape going forward.
Editor: Thank you, Dr. Gardashvili, for your insights into these pressing issues in georgia. It’s crucial for our readers to stay informed about these developments as they unfold.
Dr. Gardashvili: Thank you for covering this important matter. It’s vital for local and international audiences to understand the implications of these actions on democracy in Georgia.