Rose Revolution
The Rose Revolution or Revolution of Roses was a nonviolent change of power that occurred in Georgia in November 2003. The event was brought about by widespread protests over the disputed parliamentary elections and culminated in the resignation of President Eduard Shevardnadze, which marked the end of Soviet-era leadership in the country. The revolution derives its name from the climactic moment, when demonstrators led by Mikheil Saakashvili stormed the Parliament session with red roses in hand.
The revolution was led by Shevardnadze's former political allies, Mikheil Saakashvili, Nino Burjanadze and Zurab Zhvania. Consisting of twenty days of protests from 3 to 23 November 2003, the Revolution triggered new presidential and parliamentary elections in Georgia, which brought the National Movement–Democrats coalition to the power. The death of Zurab Zhvania in uncertain circumstances and the withdrawal of Nino Burjanadze into opposition eventually established the United National Movement as the single ruling party.
According to the United States Department of State, with the sweeping reforms brought by the Rose Revolution, Georgia moved "from a near-failed state in 2003 to a relatively well-functioning market economy in 2014". The Rose Revolution is considered one of the early examples of colour revolutions. It was marked by strong role of non-governmental organizations and student activism.
Precipitating factors
Fragmentation of the political elite
had been the ruling party for most of Eduard Shevardnadze's Presidency, and represented the interests of Shevardnadze loyalists. The ineffectiveness of the government and the decreasing popularity of the regime led to the defection of numerous parliamentary deputies from the ruling party in 2000. The first group to leave the CUG represented the business community and would go on to form the New Rights Party in 2001. This began the collapse of the party, as numerous party officials and deputies defected to join or form other parties. Eduard Shevardnadze himself resigned from the chairmanship of the CUG in September 2001. Fatefully, Mikheil Saakashvili left the ruling party in September and would form the National Movement opposition party one month later. The defections continued for the next two years, and left the Citizens' Union of Georgia as a far weaker party with support clustered in a few regions, and a leadership notorious for accumulating wealth illegally through their positions in government. The disintegration of the party highlighted the weakness of the Shevardnadze regime and dispersed the political elite amongst a number of new parties and independent platforms.The collapse of the Citizens' Union of Georgia and more apparent public discontent with Shevardnadze allowed for the formation of numerous new parties after 2000. The ruling party showed its vulnerability in the 2002 local elections, losing decisively to independents and new parties. The local elections saw independents secure 2754 seats, with the New Rights Party being the most successful political party, obtaining 558 parliamentary seats. The Citizens' Union of Georgia won only 70 out of approximately 4,850 local parliamentary seats.
Following the disastrous 2002 local elections, Shevardnadze made a concerted attempt to rebuild a political coalition that could support him. The CUG was rebuilt before the 2003 parliamentary election, which was understood to be a key trial before the 2005 presidential election. However, President Shevardnadze's popularity rating had plummeted to around 5%, undermining any attempt to revive the CUG under his leadership. The new CUG further found itself divided over internal disputes, and lacking effective leadership to replace those that had defected.
Rise of non-governmental organizations
played a significant role in the Rose Revolution. By the end of 2000, the number of NGOs estimated to be in Georgia numbered around four thousand. The 1997 Civil Code made the registration of an NGO relatively easy, and they operated in Georgia with few restrictions. Though only a small portion of those likely had influence on the government or were successful in lobbying, several had leverage in parliament. While public participation in these NGOs was relatively low, they were ultimately successful in mobilizing the population to play a more active role in government. Two of the most important were the Georgian Young Lawyers' Association and the Liberty Institute, both of which were active in the promotion of human rights and freedom of information legislation before the Rose Revolution.Shevardnadze had allowed the development of NGOs before the Rose Revolution, and numerous large and relatively uninhibited NGOs were able to operate in Georgia prior to the 2003 parliamentary elections. Georgia's weak economy allowed these NGOs, who were often partially foreign funded, to pay decent salaries that would not have been available in working for the Georgian state. As early as the summer of 2002, there was great concern amongst the leaders of Georgia's most influential NGOs that Shevardnadze was not prepared to relinquish power voluntarily, and that other ways to remove him from power might be necessary. Some of these leaders hoped to make the 'Serbian scenario' a reality in Georgia, in the sense that they wanted to promote non-violent protests to force the resignation of an authoritarian leader. Before the Rose Revolution, a large network of NGOs with foreign financial support already existed in the country that could later coordinate protest.
Foreign support
Foreign support for the Shevardnadze regime declined from 2000 to 2003, with notable figures outwardly calling for a more democratic transition. These included Richard Miles, and allies of the Bush administration, including a visit from James Baker who pressured Shevardnadze to accept parallel vote tabulation and pushed for free election standards.In the three years before the Rose Revolution, foreign financial support for the regime began to become severely limited. Instead, foreign states and organizations gave financial assistance to NGOs and opposition parties within Georgia, worsening the desperate budget situation of the Shevardnadze government. The United States announced a reduction in aid, coinciding with a decision by the International Monetary Fund to suspend aid to Georgia. As international support for the regime deteriorated, public perceptions of Shevardnadze's political weakness increased. A significant source of funding for NGOs and election monitoring organizations came from foreign governments and individuals. The U.S. and European governments gave the OSCE the funds to support foreign election observers. The U.S. Agency for International Development § spent $1.5 million to computerize Georgia's voter rolls. The Open Society Institute, funded by George Soros, supported Mikheil Saakashvili and a network of pro-democratic organizations. Western democracy promoters also circulated public opinion polls and scrutinized election data throughout Georgia.
Role of the media
An important factor in the Rose Revolution was the independent television channel Rustavi-2, which served as an ally for the opposition movement for years. It was highly critical of the regime, and openly supported the opposition. Georgia's broad Freedom of Information law gave media outlets the legal protection to criticize the government, making it a leader amongst the former Eastern Bloc. Nonetheless, the government tried repeatedly to shut Rustavi-2 down. The station operated out of Tbilisi and managed to survive the regime's harassment and intimidation techniques. Rustavi-2 was partially financially supported, trained, and sometimes protected by USAID and the Eurasia Foundation, which often mobilized public and international support to prevent government interference in the station's reporting. The broadcasts of Rustavi-2 ended up being instrumental in building the opposition and encouraging protest.Two events in 2001 caused an outcry of public opinion against the government. In July, a popular anchor for the Rustavi-2 network, Giorgi Sanaia, was murdered. The consensus among Georgian journalists and the public was that he was killed because of his anti-government work on the Chechen conflict and corruption investigations. In October, agents from the National Security Ministry raided the headquarters of Rustavi-2. The tax-raid was broadcast on television from outside the building. Upwards of seven thousand student-led protestors, many mobilized by the Liberty Institute NGO, amassed outside the headquarters and demanded the resignation of the Shevardnadze government. Shevardnadze responded by sacking his cabinet and his minister of security. Importantly, this event triggered the defection of Mikheil Saakashvili and the abdication of Zurab Zhvania from their positions in the Citizens' Union of Georgia, eventually leading to the formation of the National Movement and United Democrats opposition parties.
While still the target of government harassment, Rustavi-2 continued to air anti-Shevardnadze material until 2003. This included the repeated airing of Bringing Down a Dictator, a film portraying the fall of Slobodan Milošević in the nonviolent Serbian revolution. Other networks, such as Imedi television and Mze began to report on the political process more objectively, possibly influenced by Rustavi-2's defiance. Rustavi-2 would eventually be the network to commission and broadcast the exit poll results of the 2003 parliamentary election, which found Saakashvili's National Movement party victorious over the pro-Shevardnadze bloc.
Economic factors
The susceptibility of Shevardnadze's government and his plummeting popularity between 2000 and 2003 can partially be traced to economic problems and mismanagement. Beginning in 1998, actual national budget revenues began to fall far short of projections. In 1999, the Georgian state collected only 70% of its projected revenue, a state of affairs that would continue through 2003. To address this problem, the government began to use deceptive accounting techniques to mask budget deficiencies. Shevardnadze's government found itself both starved of funds and unable to meet IMF standards for international loans. The IMF finally suspended its own funding for Georgia in 2002. Without access to international loans, Georgia would not be able to restructure or repay its significant debts.In the period before 2003, the growth rate of the Georgian economy fell. The 1998 economic crisis in Russia, Georgia's main energy provider and trade partner, put an end to Georgia's modest recovery. While there was some economic growth in 2003, a budgetary crisis weakened the state. The Georgian government's meager program of public goods and basic services had been chronically underfunded for years. By the end of 2003, debt in the form of unpaid salaries and pensions reached $120 million. Deterioration of public infrastructure was also poorly addressed by Shevardnadze's government. Georgian businesses lost an average of 110 business days per year because of failures in infrastructure. The state was unable to repair the crumbling infrastructure or consistently enforce the law. Social conditions also further deteriorated, with over half of the population finding itself under the poverty line, creating even greater dissatisfaction with the Shevardnadze administration.
Corruption among state officials and police, while not new, was certainly exacerbated by Georgia's lack of budget revenue. The official salary of a Georgian state minister was around 150 Lari in 1998. Low pay forced many state employees to turn to alternative sources of income, often involving corrupt activities. President Shevardnadze came to be seen as a man who was unwilling to break the Soviet patterns of personal power, political corruption, and authoritarian rule embedded in traditional Soviet cadre politics. Corruption had become so rampant, that off-the-record deals may have accounted for 60-70% of Georgia's total economic activity. The Shevardnadze regime was not seen as being capable of addressing corruption. Opposition candidates, such as Saakashvili, could successfully gain much support with an anti-corruption political platform.