 |
| Saakashvili addresses celebrating protesters as Shevardnadze quits. |
Defiant, flamboyant and bursting with energy, he fits well on the barricades. But only couple of weeks after he would turn 36 on December 21 in 2003, Mikheil Saakashvili is likely to step into the presidential office. Would he manage to adjust? There is no simple answer.
One can not claim Saakashvili was born into the street rallies. Indeed, the Columbia University law degree prepared him best for the quiet offices of the legal firm. After his return to Georgia in 1995 Saakashvili joined the governing party, already after the stormy rallies of the independence movement were things of the past.
His opponents claim he is a dangerous radical. But the story of radicalization of Saakashvili’s rhetoric is a sad reflection of country’s political life in the last years. Born amidst the bloodshed of civil war, Shevardnadze’s Citizen Union relied on young politicians like Saakashvili to forge the first institutions of democracy and return the war-torn country to stability.
But, President Shevardnadze’s style of achieving stability through balance of rivaling political forces led to decay of the institutions and corrupted the political and social life to its core. By the time Saakashvili left the post of the Justice Minister in 2001 conservative backlash was in full swing.
Saakashvili started to alienate moderate intelligentsia and even some of his foreign partners as from the very first days of a final break-up with Shevardnadze he called for President’s resignation, for jailing the corrupt officials and for root-and-branch overhaul of the administrative system.
But it seemed he has really felt that way. And this determination won him the hearts, if not the minds of the electorate. “This is the style that mobilizes here,” he told the Washington Post recently, referring to his radical streak. And he proved right.
 |
| Saakashvili and his supporters broke into the Parliament chamber on November 23. |
On November 23, Saakashvili charged into the parliament where Shevardnadze was addressing the newly convened parliament, elected as a result of a rigged vote. Sure, Saakashvili was backed by tens, if not hundreds of thousands of supporters when doing so. Still, it took some courage and, positively, some blind confidence in own powers.
But the gamble has played out. Now, he is a winner, ready to accept the laurels of the presidency.
Would his talents of unbalancing the equation serve Saakashvili well as the president? Some people doubt. Akaki Asatiani, leader of the Traditionalists Union and speaker of the parliament in Zviad Gamsakhurdia’s time says the time is up for the emotional leaders. He knows too well that the emotional drive led Gamsakhurdia to alienation, bloodshed and death in exile.
But others argue the experience is a bad advisor, at least this time.
If one glances through the set of tasks the new government is undertaking, and does it pragmatically, the task is so complex, so daunting, that it is not even worth trying to remedy the situation.
Country’s economy is in tatters. Its territorial integrity is breached. Population is impoverished and the protest vote has been growing year by year. Education system, starting with elementary level up to the highest education, is ineffective at best and corrupt to the core at worst. Corruption is a driving force for the police and many other state institutions. Foreign debt is skyrocketing.
One wrong move and all of this goes up in flames. Maybe this is how President Shevardnadze has felt, when advocating for stability at any cost. Saakashvili would try being the antipode, using the credit of public confidence to generate a momentum for the reform. His energy, ability to be personally present when it is needed and be uncompromising may help to inspire the people and turn the tide.
Of course, such a pattern of action means he would create many enemies. Promisingly, the tone of Saakashvili after November 23 “Revolution of the Roses” became far more level than before. Ability to control himself – this is the trait many greeted with hope.
Another question is whether he would become a team player. The regime change has linked his fate together the fates of two other politicians – Zurab Zhvania and Nino Burjanadze. The three differ. Zhvania is known as behind-the-scenes operator, master of compromise. Burjanadze is seen as principled, but moderate politician, a consensus-builder. The three have good chances to complement each other, but also good possibilities for ending up in bickering.
But the stage is set and the roles distributed for now. At least for the coming year the status quo is expected to hold. Saakashvili is poised to be the President, Zhvania – the head of executive, Burjanadze – the head of legislature. Their differences should reinforce the checks and balances vested in the three top offices. This would be a crucial year, when the time is high to best utilize the credit of popular support for pushing through most of the painful reforms.
When asked what he would advise the future president, Eduard Shevardnadze said: “Use your brain!” Once in a lifetime, Saakashvili may win by listening to his advice.
Saakashvili has been driven by powerful emotions to achieve decisive changes. It is time for him to show his wisdom. He showed his determination. Now there is time when he may be required to exercise restraint. He proved capable to act quickly. Now he may have to wait for the right moment.
This is a trial not only for him, but also for his colleagues. It would be sad to see one more visionary turn into cynic.