Georgia election crisis: What’s behind pro-Western, pro-Russian narrative?

The aftermath of Georgia’s recent parliamentary elections has spiralled into a deepening political crisis.

President Salome Zourabichvili, a former French national, and opposition parties have refused to accept the election results that gave the ruling Georgian Dream (GD) party a thumping majority.

The opposition alleges Russian interference in the vote and has called for nationwide protests.

While Western media and observers have largely framed GD as a pro-Russian, anti-Western force, a closer look reveals a far more complex situation.

Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze of Georgian Dream dismissed claims of electoral fraud, describing any “irregularities” as typical for elections elsewhere in the world.

“Irregularities happen everywhere, in every country,” he told BBC.

Despite preliminary results giving GD a decisive 54.8 percent majority, opposition-backed exit polls suggested a lower share, fueling the claims of vote-rigging.

However, the outcry surrounding this election raises questions about selective standards and a narrative that perhaps oversimplifies Georgia’s political reality.

While GD’s critics argue the party leans too heavily toward Russia, the opposition’s leaders, including President Salome Zourabichvili, project a clear alignment with the West.

As a former French national and France’s ambassador to Georgia from October 2003 to March 2004, Zourabichvili has actively leveraged her European ties, positioning herself as a self-proclaimed defender of “democratic values” against alleged pro-Russian threats.

She also served as Georgia’s foreign minister as a dual citizen from March 2004 to October 2005. It was only in August 2018—just two months before the presidential election—that Zourabichvili relinquished her French citizenship to run for office.

Georgian constitution - like in several countries - bars dual citizens from holding the offices of president, prime minister, or speaker of the parliament. She assumed the presidency of Georgia in December 2018.

Zourabichvili, speaking alongside opposition leaders at the presidential palace on Sunday, denounced the parliamentary election results as a “total falsification” and called for public protests.

The European Union and the United States have supported her call for an investigation into election “irregularities”—intensifying their accusations against GD as compromised by Russian influence.

Zourabichvili's disregard of the voters’ choice follows weeks of European media reports expressing concern that the incumbent GD government, viewed as neutral on the Russia-Ukraine war, could secure victory.

The geopolitical complexities were amplified by Hungary’s Viktor Orban, who congratulated GD on its victory and is due to visit Tbilisi.

Known for his conservative policies and clashes with the EU, Orban’s endorsement has been interpreted as validation of GD’s policies, but it has also attracted scepticism from Brussels.

European lawmakers, wary of any perceived authoritarianism, worry that GD may be shifting Georgia further from Europe’s sphere of influence.

The Hungarian leader is regarded as Russia’s closest ally within the EU, and his government has been branded by the European Parliament as a “hybrid regime of electoral autocracy.”

Yet, if GD’s association with figures like Orban is branded as pro-Russian, one might question whether Zourabichvili’s Western ties should likewise be subject to scrutiny.

National sovereignty or foreign allegiance?

The question of foreign alignment is further complicated by Georgia’s long-standing geopolitical position between Russia and the West.

The GD government argues that its conservative policies reflect values of “national sovereignty” rather than foreign allegiance.

Maka Bochorishvili, head of GD’s EU integration committee, contends that the party’s social conservatism aligns with many European values, pointing to a nuanced vision of Western integration.

“Family values are part of European values as well,” Bochorishvili said, challenging the simplistic view of GD as purely pro-Russian.

The response from Western institutions, however, has been swift and sharp. Following Georgia’s “democratic backsliding,” as the EU described it, the bloc froze Georgia’s bid for EU membership—a major setback for GD’s stated goal of integration.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has called on Georgia’s leaders to “respect the rule of law,” signalling a conditional approach to US-Georgian relations that hinges on political alignment.

The narrative pushed by much of the opposition depicts the Georgian Dream as an outlier from the West, yet GD supporters argue that these perceptions are skewed.

They point out that Georgia remains the only country in the region without diplomatic relations with Russia since the 2008 war, in which Russian forces occupied 20 percent of Georgian territory.

GD leaders argue that this unresolved conflict underscores their commitment to independence from Russian influence, despite accusations to the contrary.

Georgia’s struggle for identity

As Georgia attempts to assert itself in an international order polarised by Western and Russian interests, GD’s critics argue that its policies, which include laws that echo Russian regulatory frameworks, align it too closely with Moscow.

The opposition has been vocal about alleged Russian interference, though with hardly any evidence to back this claim.

Meanwhile, Russian commentators have hailed GD’s victory, seeing it as a potential pivot away from Western influence.

However, many Georgians question whether the pro-Western stance of Zourabichvili and the opposition truly represents their interests.

GD’s message resonates with these concerns, arguing that conservative policies do not equate to anti-Western ones.

The rivalry between GD and the opposition, led by Zourabichvili, underscores the challenges of balancing national interests in an environment charged with international pressure.

In this polarised climate, the labels of “pro-Russian” and “pro-Western” fail to capture the full scope of Georgia’s ambitions or the diversity of public opinion.

For now, the Georgian Dream party retains control, but the pressure from opposition groups, along with Western scrutiny, means Georgia’s political direction is far from settled.

As the dust settles, what remains clear is that Georgia’s fate lies not just in choosing sides but in defining its identity on its own terms, a challenge that reflects the struggles of many countries caught between larger geopolitical powers.