West stunned as Georgia announces ‘foreign influence’ law to mirror US FARA

For months, Georgia’s ruling Georgian Dream party faced relentless criticism from Western powers for its ‘foreign influence’ law. The European Union, the United States, and domestic pro-Western opposition denounced the legislation as a “Russian-style” attempt to stifle civil society, accusing the government of veering towards Moscow’s authoritarian tactics.

However, in a diplomatic masterstroke, Georgian Dream announced earlier this month that it would replace the controversial law with a “word-for-word copy of the US Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA)”.

This unexpected dramatic move has stumped Western critics who relentlessly accuse the ruling party of authoritarianism and aligning with Russia. If the new law mirrors US’s own “foreign agents” law, how can the West continue to denounce it without exposing its own double standards?

The law that sparked the controversy

In May 2024, Georgia's Parliament enacted the "Law on Transparency of Foreign Influence," requiring non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and media outlets receiving over 20 percent of their funding from foreign sources to register as "organisations pursuing the interests of a foreign power."

This legislation drew significant criticism from Western nations, which likened it to Russia's 2012 "foreign agent" law, expressing concerns over potential suppression of civil society and media freedom.

Critics claimed that the law was aimed at silencing opposition and controlling narratives unfavourable to the Georgian government.

Dubbing it as Georgia’s “Russian law”, critics in the West warned that it could jeopardise Tbilisi’s path to EU membership, while the US condemned it as “Kremlin-inspired”. Ironically, Washington also imposed visa restrictions against Georgian officials over the law.

How does the US apply FARA?

FARA, first enacted in 1938, requires individuals and organisations engaging in political activities on behalf of foreign entities to register with the US Department of Justice.

Though initially targeting Nazi propaganda efforts, over the years, FARA has been selectively enforced, often targeting foreign media organisations, lobbying firms, and political consultants.

In recent years, FARA has been used to scrutinise individuals and organisations with ties to adversarial states such as Russia, China, and Middle Eastern nations.

While the West has routinely criticised Georgia’s “foreign agents” law for allegedly targeting media, it is notable that the US has also applied FARA to foreign media organisations, particularly those from Russia and China.

This selective targeting of foreign media critical of the Western political narrative raises concerns about potential double standards in the enforcement of FARA in the US.

How will the law play out in Georgia?

The Georgian Dream party argues that the intent behind its “foreign influence” law is to ensure transparency, just as FARA ostensibly does in the US – arguably the world’s first democracy.

Given the precedent set in the US, Georgia’s FARA-based law could impose similar disclosure requirements on foreign-funded NGOs, lobbying groups, and certain media organisations.

Likely targets include:

Western-funded NGOs: Groups receiving significant funding from the US and EU may face heightened scrutiny.

Foreign-backed opposition media: Pro-Western media outlets that receive foreign financial support could be classified as foreign agents.

Political consultancies with foreign ties: Foreign-funded entities advising political groups on elections and governance with international backing may have to register.

However, by adopting FARA’s exact language, Georgia effectively places the burden back on its Western critics—if they accept FARA as a legitimate law, why should a verbatim version be unacceptable in Georgia?

Western countries with ‘foreign influence’ laws

It is worth noting that several other Western countries, including the EU, Canada, Australia, Germany, France, and Belgium, have similar laws requiring the disclosure of foreign influence on domestic political processes, though their scope and implementation vary. In the UK, a FARA-styled "foreign influence" law is currently being considered.

European Union: The EU Transparency Register, established in 2011, aims to increase transparency by tracking individuals and organisations, including foreign governments, lobbyists and NGOs seeking to influence EU decision-making. While voluntary, the EU is working to make it mandatory, providing insights into who is influencing policies, their purposes, and financial resources.

Australia: The Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme (FITS), enacted in 2018, requires individuals and entities engaged in certain political or governmental activities on behalf of foreign governments or entities to register.

Canada: In May 2024, the Canadian government proposed the Foreign Influence Transparency and Accountability Act (FITAA), which would require individuals and entities engaged with foreign principals to register their arrangements and disclose any activities influencing government or political processes. This proposal builds on Canada's existing Lobbying Act, in place since 2008, which mandates the registration of lobbyists, including those lobbying on behalf of foreign governments, though it differs from FARA in its scope and application.

Germany: The Lobbying Register (established in 2022) requires lobbyists, including those representing foreign interests, to register and disclose their activities.

France: The Transparency, the Fight Against Corruption, and the Modernisation of Economic Life Law (2016) includes provisions for disclosing foreign influence on political processes, though it is more focused on lobbying and conflicts of interest.

Belgium: The Belgian Lobbying Law requires the registration of lobbyists, including those acting on behalf of foreign entities, to enhance transparency in the political sphere.

United Kingdom: The Foreign Influence Registration Scheme (proposed, not fully implemented) aims to require the registration of foreign agents, similar to FARA.

The West’s dilemma

Western governments now find themselves in an awkward position. If they continue to criticise Georgia’s “foreign influence” law, they risk exposing the double standards of their own legal systems. If they accept Georgia’s move, they lose a key pressure point against the ruling Georgian Dream party.

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas has already condemned the measure, warning that it “undermines freedom of expression and civil society.”

However, her statement sidestepped the fact that similar regulations exist in the US and other Western democracies.

As tensions rise, Georgia’s political future and its aspirations for EU membership remain uncertain. However, one thing is clear: The Georgian Dream party has turned the tables on its Western critics, and the coming months will test the consistency of their democratic principles.