From Direct Financing to Secularization: Rethinking State Policy towards Religious Institutions in Georgia

This policy paper aims at critically evaluating current policies of state funding for religious organizations in Georgia, arguing that the existing approach needs reassessment and reform. The paper argues that the current policies go beyond the frames of compensation of damage caused during the Soviet era, described in the 2002 Constitutional Agreement between State of Georgia and the Orthodox Autocephaly Church of Georgia. Regardless of the Agreement, the amounts of damage and compensation have not been calculated and yearly funding depends on the political will of the government, leaving ample room for arbitrary decisions. Moreover, the current policies are discriminatory, privileging the Orthodox Church, discriminating against religious minorities, and therefore jeopardizing the principles of secularism, religious freedom, and religious neutrality. This policy paper advances the argument that, considering the principle of secularism and religious neutrality, as well as the Constitution of Georgia, Georgian policymakers must rethink the existing policies of state funding to religious organizations and elaborate medium- and long-term strategies to refine the existing approach. Rather than maintaining the existing funding policies or eliminating state funding for religious organizations altogether, the state should take specific steps towards reforming the current legislation and practices. Specifically, the paper argues that, in the medium term, the state can ensure damage compensation for injustices experienced in the Soviet era after calculating the total amount of monetary or other support, as in the case of Hungary. In the longer term, support to religious institutions can be made voluntary, based on one’s belief (or non-belief), rather than political will of the authorities, as in the cases of Spain, Iceland, Finland, and Denmark.

Occupy Rustaveli: Overreliance on Space and the “Protest Fatigue" during the 2009 Cell Protests in Tbilisi

The paper aims to offer a spatial analysis of the 2009 protest movements in Tbilisi, the capital of Georgia, where the opposition activists occupied public space in an innovative manner, by placing prison cells on the main thoroughfare of the city. Rustaveli Avenue thus became the central space of contestation between the dominant powers and their opponents. Similar occupations of public space (the so-called “Occupy Movements”) have been widely researched; however, the case of the 2009 Tbilisi protests remain largely unstudied. Using Lefebvre’s ideas, the paper describes how political actors constantly produce the physical, conceptual, and social aspects of space. The paper studies the spatiality of political events that contributed to the Avenue’s meaning and function. After establishing the theoretical and historical background, the paper elaborates on the 2009 protests and discusses them from a spatial lens. The paper stresses the opposition activists’ overreliance on space, the absence of methodological, strategic planning, and the resulting protest fatigue. Finally, comparing the 2009 events to the 2011-2012 protests, the paper argues that overreliance on the significance of space can, in fact, decrease protest visibility and fervor, instead of increasing it.

Neo-Orientalist Framing of the 2011 and 2013 Egyptian Uprisings: A Case Study of The New York Times and The Washington Post

This thesis critically examines the US media framing of the Egyptian Uprisings in 2011 and 2013 to examine whether the coverage was relatively value-neutral or had a value-laden (Neo-Orientalist) perspective. The thesis aims to examine whether the Neo-Orientalist tendency among the Western societies to view religion as the key driving force behind political processesis manifest in the US media as well, or whether the two newspapers try to represent the above mentioned political and economic processes and grievances. To this end, the thesis looks at the articles published in The New York Times and The Washington Post during and after two major events: Mubarak‟s resignation in 2011 and Morsi‟s removal in 2013. A combination of quantitative (content analysis) and qualitative (critical discourse analysis) research demonstrates that news articles and editorials about the 2011 and 2013 uprisings include Neo-Orientalist frames. These articles consider liberal democracy as a universal normative model and contrast it with Islam, portrayed as a fundamentally different, homogeneous and antidemocratic phenomenon linked with instability and violence and singlehandedly influencing democratization process. Compared to 2011, Neo-Orientalist frames become more frequent in 2013; if in 2011, most units adhere to Fukuyama‟s view that Egypt would join the teleological march to liberal democracy, in 2013, the trend reverses and most units, like Huntington, exclude any possibility of democratization. The textual practices of naming, sourcing, presupposition, fore- and backgrounding, used to construct Neo-Orientalist frames, can be related to discursive practices, or the production of text, and larger social practices. As critical discourse analysis shows, the units show pro-Israeli bias and align with the US foreign policy priorities: both the general policy of liberal democracy promotion and the specific strategic interests in Egypt.

Political Opportunities for the Extreme Right in Georgia

Over the past several years, right-wing extremists have begun to proliferate in Georgia and their visibility has noticeably increased. More recently, far right groups even announced plans to form a joint party, the National Front, which will “take part in absolutely all political processes.” This policy brief discusses whether there are favorable political opportunities for right-wing extremist actors in Georgia to mobilize. The legal system of the country includes laws that restrict extreme right rhetoric and action. However, an analysis of Georgia’s political space shows that right-wing extremist groups are indirectly supported, or at least not openly condemned, by the ruling party and other political actors. In addition, extreme right opinions largely coincide with general public attitudes, meaning that there are significant discursive opportunities for mobilization. After discussing the factors that contribute to potential mobilization opportunities for right-wing extremism, the brief presents policy options to counter this process.

Georgia's Emerging Far Right

Ethnonationalism has been as common in Georgia as in other post-Soviet countries, but the far-right social movement has especially been gaining traction for the past five years, gradually becoming larger, more diverse, and more violent. The parliamentary elections approaching in 2020 create a window of opportunity for far-right actors to gain access to mainstream politics. ​

The “Right” Side of Facebook: Online Mobilization of the Georgian Extreme Right

In recent years, extreme-right groups have become increasingly visible in the republic of Georgia. In several cases they have managed to bring exclusion-oriented issues to the agenda, occupying public space and restricting opportunities for liberal groups and human rights activists. Although this has led to growing concern in political circles and civil society, there has been little in-depth research. Drawing on social movement theory, I investigate the role of digital media, specifically, Facebook, in mobilization. The analysis rests on 8,069 Facebook posts of four publicly active extreme-right groups, as well as 18 in-depth interviews with activists and experts. Frame analysis shows that extreme right groups try to align their narratives with public opinion, especially, homo- and transphobic and anti-immigration attitudes, as well as public distrust in political institutions, NGOs, and the media. Social network analysis, in turn, shows that the online network of the Georgian extreme right is decentralized, marked with a battle for influences in the emerging movement. In this loose network, actors with less radical and more populist ideology seem more central, whereas those with more extreme ideologies are more peripheral. Overall, the paper suggests that, given the lack of access to political institutions and mainstream media channels, extreme right groups in Georgia largely rely on Facebook to spread their narrative, garner support and mobilize for action.

Georgian Pride World Wide:” Extreme Right Mobilization in Georgia

Gender, Parenthood and Feelings of Safety in Greek Refugee Centres

Forced migration and displacement are often associated with increased exposure to various risks that negatively affect personal safety. While experiences of displaced populations are heterogeneous, women have been shown to be exposed to intersecting factors, such as vulnerability to gender-based violence, restricting cultural norms and discrimination. Being a mother—or at least responsible for the care of a child—while en route stands as another marginalizing factor. This article’s point of departure is the so-called European ‘refugee crisis’ that peaked in 2015 and examines the effects of gender and family on the experience of safety among refugees in six refugee centres in Greece. We explore how intersecting issues such as gender roles and being responsible for children impact individuals’ feelings of safety. Using descriptive statistics and regression analyses of survey data on 367 migrants in six Greek refugee centres, we find that female migrants are more likely to feel unsafe compared to males. However, our results indicate that gender differences in feelings of safety are minimal for those without children. While having children affects both genders’ feeling of safety, the effect is much greater for women than for men. Our conclusion is that dissimilar experiences of safety along gender dimension are conditioned by norms and obligations inscribed in social roles of parents and care-givers.