In a poll conducted by the Formula TV Company, the specialists of the American company Edison Research asked their respondents - which period was better? The answer was received, and it was unambiguous:
76% of respondents assess Saakashvili's rule positively, 24% negatively. Only 58% approve of Ivanishvili, while 42% have a very negative attitude towards his rule. No one disputes that during the reign of the National Movement, many good things were done and also negative things, but I wonder why exactly did Ivanishvili mess up? Why did he deserve such a negative attitude from the respondents?
A failed, corrupt state, where criminals ruled and the interior ministers were appointed from Moscow, Saakashvili's government made the leading state in the region. The smiling, bribed policeman was replaced by a young, responsible patrol officer, corruption disappeared, thieves were jailed and the streets became safer. Young people obtained new opportunities, state institutions working efficiently like a Swiss clock were created. The army, which used to be built according to Russian templates, began to switch to NATO standards. For several years, the country, devoid of any perspective, has become one of the leaders of reforms in Europe. The course towards integration with the EU and the North Atlantic Alliance became the natural choice of the nation.
However, in this new, successful Georgia, part of the older generation was ruthlessly washed away from active life. Girgviliani, Robakidze, Vazagashvili and others were killed, the state protected the killers, the court and prosecution became weapons in the hands of the ruler. The violent authorities brutally cracked down on demonstrators, closed down television channels, seized businesses and tortured prisoners. Anyone who was not with them was their enemy and automatically branded as an "agent of Russia." The value of a person was insignificant, only the ambitious plans of the ruler and his entourage were valued.
In the 2012 elections, Georgian society resolutely rejected such a government. Saakashvili was unable to resist the verdict of the population and handed the reins of power to the Georgian Dream. Society hoped that Ivanishvili would maintain his previous achievements, carry out reforms, strengthen Georgia’s pro-western course, replace the atmosphere of fear and injustice with justice and greater freedom, invest billions in the economy and help the poor.
The result, however, turned out to be the opposite. Georgia did not continue reforms. Economic growth had slowed down, the already poor population has become even poorer, and the prosecutor's office and courts remain a punitive mechanism in the hands of the government. Corruption spread like wildfire throughout the country, and the influence of thieves and crime bosses grew by leaps and bounds.
Machalikashvili, Demur Sturua, Luka Siradze, Shakarashvili, Salaridze and others were killed. The state continues to cover up for murderers, take away business, harass the media, brutally disperse demonstrators again and again, gouge out the eyes from Mako Gomuri and others. Everyone who is not with them is declared their enemy and automatically gets branded as an "agent of the national movement" After all, it is much less embarrassing for them to be a Russian agent.
The man as a value does not exist even now. Only the ruler, his property and interests are valuable today. So, what's the difference? There is a difference, and it is that the interests of the ruler coincide with the interests of Russia and contradict the interests of the West, and most importantly, the national interests of Georgia.
Giorgi Targamadze, author’s programme “Times” on Formula TV channel • ფორმულა
