
Following Georgia’s 2024 parliamentary elections and the Georgian Dream party’s U-turn on EU membership, the EU finds itself in a position where it is only left with bad choices and little influence. Its past policies did not prevent the country’s democratic backsliding and arguably helped Georgian Dream to maintain and even expand its grip on the state. However, this paper argues that the EU had rather few alternative options in dealing with Georgia, and that none of them were without major disadvantages and risks. The benefit of hindsight might tempt us to overlook the various challenges that EU democracy promotion faces in a country like Georgia. The EU may not have done a “great job”. However, it needs to be acknowledged that doing a “great job” was not exactly easy.
Georgia, EU, Georgian Dream, EU democracy promotion, democratic backsliding
Georgia, EU, Georgian Dream, EU democracy promotion, democratic backsliding
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
