• Citer

Between democratization and autocratization: Georgian civil society responses to shifting (geo)political contexts in 2012-2024

par Andguladze, Ana
Président du jury Jeandesboz, Julien
Promoteur Coman, Ramona
Publication Non publié, 2025-12-15

Thèse de doctorat

• Accès en ligne
• Détails
• Contenu
• Statistiques

Résumé :

The thesis examines how civil society actors express their dissent against the gradual shift from democratization to autocratization. For this purpose it focuses on Georgian case, which has been recognized as a “Bell-turn” case of autocratization (Nord et al., 2025), “in which democratization is closely followed by and inherently linked to subsequent autocratization” (Angiolillo et al., 2024, p. 1598). The thesis puts forward a conceptual framework that argues that different forms of dissent emerge depending on the context within which civil society actors operate. They may include prevention of façade democratization and can transform into opposition and/or resistance to autocratization at a later stage. Furthermore, various strategies might be used by civil society actors to translate their dissent into specific actions. These involve direct and indirect strategies of actions, depending on whether civil society actors engage in open confrontation through direct interaction with the government, or more covert and subtler forms of dissent that involve indirect engagement or even disengagement. By adopting an actor-centric and issue-specific focus, combining it with a relational approach, this thesis systematically studies the mobilization of Georgian civil society actors across three key fields that are integral to both processes of democratization and autocratization and arguably the ones that are commonly targeted by autocratizers. These are (1) judicial independence (and its erosion), (2) LGBT+ rights (and anti-gender campaigns against them) and (3) (shrinking) civic space. Three empirical case studies provide insights into early discussions and struggles among civil society actors in responding to ambiguous stages of initial signs of backsliding from the democratization agenda, as well as to the overt phase of autocratization. All three individual case studies demonstrate how initially flawed reforms have shaped façade democratization and laid the groundwork for subsequent autocratization. They document how the ruling Georgian Dream party has backslided from the judicial reform agenda, engaged in anti-gender campaigns and attacked civil society. Going beyond the sole focus of autocratization episodes, this analysis traces early signs of subversion of democratization agenda by the incumbent in Georgia, revealing that the trajectory of shifting contexts has been somewhat different and depended on the specificity of the issue.Empirically, the thesis builds on qualitative content analysis of public statements published by civil society actors from 2012 to 2024, as well as semi-structured interviews conducted in Tbilisi and online throughout 2021-2025. The analysis demonstrates that in reaction to above-mentioned changes, civil society responses in Georgia have varied over time and across cases. However, empirical case studies show that civil society dissent is evolving, dynamic, and multi-layered. In the case of the emergence of judicial oligarchy, civil society actors were vocal about the problem as early as 2017 and tried to prevent legislative shortcomings of the reform prior to that. Some LGBT+ community organizations have been trying to prevent façade democracy by refusing to engage in visibility politics and instead opting for social advocacy, aiming to meaningfully impact the everyday life of the community. First signs of pressure on civil society through discreditation messages against them have not gone unnoticed, and alarms were raised by dozens of CSOs as early as 2015. However, the empirical findings also demonstrate that despite common goals, disagreements within and across movements regarding strategies lead to differentiated responses, as well as important self-reflections regarding localizing the responses and coming up with alternative strategies. The thesis shows the shift from prevention to opposition and later to resistance in civil society responses. Individual case studies point to a change from policy-oriented dissent to a polity-focused one, but more importantly, they highlight the multi-layered nature of dissent. The struggle over the country’s geopolitical positioning has been an important dimension of this multi-layered dissent. The analysis reveals that in some cases, European integration became a central pillar of civil society dissent, in others (while still present), it has not been the key driver. It is the case of dissent against shrinking civic space, where European integration becomes central, alongside resistance against Russian influences. Empirical analysis presented in this thesis also shows that dissent may not always be public and outspoken, and silences are as important to be taken into consideration. This thesis demonstrates that repertoire of action of civil society actors has been diverse and at various stage has included both direct and indirect strategies, involving advocacy and consultations with the authorities within institutional settings, raising public awareness about problems, communicating with international actors such as the EU, employing discourses focused on the significance of democracy, the rule of law and European integration, engaging in direct actions such as protests, opting for social advocacy, building networks and alliances, strategically choosing silent opposition, organizing boycotts, declaring disobedience, mobilizing legally and others. Such an overview of strategies has shown that while new tactics may emerge when engaging in various forms of dissent, old methods can still be used by civil society actors. However, depending on the contexts in which they are employed, these actions gain new meanings and bring new risks for civil society actors. Finally, this thesis shows that various instances of dissent prior to 2023 prepared solid ground for the expansion of dissent to broader segments of society, as manifested by large-scale protests of 2023-2024. While these mobilizations did not stop advancing autocratization in Georgia, they should be put into the larger context of the last twelve years, which show long-term expression of dissent in various fields. Dissent in its various forms and strategies is a constantly evolving and non-linear phenomenon. Focusing solely on its outcome might not lead to an accurate depiction of this phenomenon. The Georgian case, therefore, indicates potential, continuity and persistence of efforts to stand up against autocratization.The findings of this thesis deepen our understanding of not just dissent against autocratization, but also contribute to various fields of literature, such as the volatility of democratization, social movements and civil society, dynamics of hybrid regimes in post-Soviet space and more specifically, to studies on Georgia.