Suchergebnisse

1991 წლის საქართველოს დამოუკიდებლობის აღიარების და 2000 წლის მარტში რუსეთის პრეზიდენტად ვლადიმერპუტინის არჩევის შემდეგ ქვეყნის საგარეო პოლიტიკა რეგიონში მნიშვნელოვანწილად იმართებოდა რუსული ინტერესებიდან გამომდინარე და მისი როლი აღიქმებოდა, როგორც მედიატორის როლი ეთნიკურ დისკუსიებში. რუსეთისთვის კავკასიის როგორც "სასიცოცხლო მნიშვნელობის მქონე ზონად" დასახელება ხსნის რუსეთის მიერ საქართველოს საშინაო საქმეებში ჩარევას. მეორეს მხრივ, ეთნო-პოლიტიკურმა კონფლიქტებმა, პოლიტიკურმა არასტაბილურობამ, ჯერ კიდევ არამყარმა პოლიტიკურმა სტრუქტურებმა და რუსეთზე ეკონომიკურმა დამოკიდებულებამ განაპირობა, რომ საქართველო ჯერ კიდევ დაუცველია რუსეთის მხრიდან ზეწოლისა და მანიპულირებისაგან. 2000 წელს, როდესაც რუსეთის პრეზიდენტად ვლადიმერ პუტინი აირჩიეს, კრემლმა კიდევ უფრო გააძლიერა საქართველოს კონტროლი. მთავარი მიზანი იყო თბილისს აეღო პრორუსული საგარეო პოლიტიკის ხაზი. აღნიშნული სტატია იკვლევს იმ მეთოდებს, რომელსაც კრემლი იყენებდა საქართველოს დასამორჩილებლად 2000-დან 2003 წლამდე, როდესაც საქართველოს პრეზიდენტად მიხეილ სააკაშვილი აირჩიეს.

Salome Zourabichvili's story is extraordinary. This French diplomat of Georgian origin enjoyed a long, brilliant career in the diplomatic corps, culminating in her appointment as French ambassador to Tbilisi in November 2003. A few weeks later came the "rose revolution": the corrupt regime of Eduard Shevardnadze was toppled by a popular movement which brought to power the young -- & very pro-Western -- Mikhail Saakashvili. The new leader quickly made an exceptional decision: he appointed Salome Zourabichvili as his minister of foreign affairs! Alas, the rest of the story is not so rosy. Under fire from local political insiders, the former French ambassador was dismissed eighteen months later. But this reversal of fortunes has in no way altered her desire to work for the good of her country. Salome Zourabichvili has created her own political party & is determined to play a front-line role in Georgia's future, as she explains in this wide-ranging interview with Galia Ackerman. Adapted from the source document.

One of the long-standing criticisms of cross-sectional survey data is that they provide only a contextually driven "snapshot" of attitudes. These attitudes are, the "snapshot critique" contends, highly fragile—subject to significant fluctuation based on events that arise domestically and globally. Although it makes sense that a major event can alter the percentage of people who respond to a given survey question in a particular way, it is less obvious that such an event jeopardizes the validity of multivariate analyses of survey data collected prior to the event. Given the prevalent use of cross-sectional survey data in quantitative political research, this question has significant implications for comparative politics. This study employs survey data from Ukraine before and after the "Orange Revolution" and from Georgia before and after the "Rose Revolution." Its findings challenge the snapshot critique and support the idea that, even in the wake of a dramatic political event, the underlying relationships among variables measured by survey data can remain quite stable.

'A map on which you cannot find the land Utopia is not even worth looking at.' Ernst Bloch In the following article, I analyze sociopolitical and economic developments in post-Rose Revolution Georgia in the context of two theories: The first originates from the German school of memory studies and the other represents the most recent breakthrough in the Georgian school of social studies. The analysis of the transformations that followed the Revolution of Roses transgresses sociopolitical and economical dimensions and stretches into much larger extent that is time and historical age; that being the case, I will be also examining the altering understanding of time and history against the backdrop of Aleida Assmann's theory of the Time Regimes and Emzar Khvichia's theory of Relativistic-Quantum Noology.

In the days of the Soviet Union, Georgia was one of the most flourishing Soviet republics due to its protected tea and wine market and its attractive Black Sea resorts. The breakup of the U.S.S.R., the opening by the FSU republics of their borders to broad imports following the "parade of sovereignties," and wars within the country led to a sharp decline in Georgia's economic indicators, but in recent years the situation has begun to improve Nevertheless, living standards in Georgia remain low. Official unemployment is around 13% of the working age population. But independent experts believe that from 2003 to the beginning of 2005 unemployment rose by 20% to around 47% of the working age population. Most large industrial enterprises remain at a standstill or operate at less than full capacity. During the years of independence, over 1 million people -the most employable and active part of the population-have left the country. A significant proportion of Georgia's population subsists, for the most part, on remittances from relatives working abroad. Experts estimate the annual amount of remittances from Georgian "guest workers" living in Russia alone at $1-2 billion. According to an IMF analytical report on the economic prospects of the Middle East and Central Asia, remittances from abroad in 2005 accounted for over 5% of Georgian GDP. The country's Minister of State Kakha Bendukidze estimates this amount at 4% of GDP. In the opinion of analysts, the business environment in Georgia is not conducive to a reduction or elimination of existing investment risks, while the political situation impedes socioeconomic development. Thus, although small and medium enterprises make up 97% of all active companies, their share of Georgia's GNP is only around 10% (compared to 60% in EU countries). The government has taken some steps to improve the country's regulation and auditing systems: health inspectors no longer "cruise" around cafes and restaurants, and it is possible to start a business even without prior registration. Nevertheless, international standards are still a long way off, which is why small business is mostly concentrated in trade.