Georgia stands on the threshold of gaining candidate status for membership of the EU. Paradoxically, however, this is precisely the moment when Georgia seems to be drifting away from the Union. A few months after applying for candidate status, the parliament sought to adopt the so-called 'foreign agents' law, which would have restricted Georgia's democratic space and jeopardised its European future. After intense popular pressure, the law has been repealed, but the underlying problem has not gone away. The government seeks to de-legitimise domestic and external critics in the run up to elections next year, while taking an ambivalent position concerning Russia's aggression of Ukraine. These developments are symptoms of deeper flaws in Georgia's political culture, marked by stark polarisation and illiberal narratives. Domestic and external pressure needs to be sustained for the government to take determined action to achieve EU candidate status. The EU has invested deeply in Georgia's democracy and should not give up on it. Overwhelming public support for Georgia's European integration gives the EU leverage to ensure that the government recommits to a path of substantial reform. Progress on this path will be decisive for the future of Georgia and for peace and stability in the EU's Eastern neighbourhood. It will also provide a critical test of the EU's capacity to support partner countries in accomplishing their European goal.

For many the Russian Revolution of 1917 was a symbol of hope. In the eyes of its critics, however, Soviet authoritarianism and the horrors of the gulags have led to the revolution becoming synonymous with oppression, threatening to forever taint the very idea of socialism. The experience of Georgia, which declared its independence from Russia in 1918, tells a different story. In this riveting history, Eric Lee explores the little-known saga of the country’s experiment in democratic socialism, detailing the epic, turbulent events of this forgotten chapter in revolutionary history. Along the way, we are introduced to a remarkable cast of characters – among them the men and women who strove for a more inclusive vision of socialism that featured multi-party elections, freedom of speech and assembly, a free press and a civil society grounded in trade unions and cooperatives. Though the Georgian Democratic Republic lasted for just three years before it was brutally crushed on the orders of Stalin, it was able to offer, however briefly, a glimpse of a more humane alternative to the Soviet reality that was to come.

In November of 2003, a stolen election in the former Soviet republic of Georgia led to protests and the eventual resignation of President Eduard Shevardnadze. Shevardnadze was replaced by a democratically elected government led by President Mikheil Saakashvili, who pledged to rebuild Georgia, orient it toward the West, and develop a European-style democracy. Known as the Rose Revolution, this early twenty-first-century democratic movement was only one of the so-called color revolutions (Orange in Ukraine, Tulip in Kyrgyzstan, and Cedar in Lebanon). What made democratic revolution in Georgia thrive when so many similar movements in the early part of the decade dissolved? Lincoln A. Mitchell witnessed the Rose Revolution firsthand, even playing a role in its manifestation by working closely with key Georgian actors who brought about change. In Uncertain Democracy, Mitchell recounts the events that led to the overthrow of Shevardnadze and analyzes the factors that contributed to the staying power of the new regime. The book also explores the modest but indispensable role of the United States in contributing to the Rose Revolution and Georgia's failure to live up to its democratic promise. Uncertain Democracy is the first scholarly examination of Georgia's recent political past. Drawing upon primary sources, secondary documents, and his own NGO experience, Mitchell presents a compelling case study of the effect of U.S. policy of promoting democracy abroad.

Argues for an original, unorthodox conception about the relationship between globalization and contemporary nationalism. While the prevailing view holds that nationalism and globalization are forces of clashing opposition, Sabanadze establishes that these tend to become allied forces. Acknowledges that nationalism does react against the rising globalization and represents a form of resistance against globalizing influences, but the Basque and Georgian cases prove that globalization and nationalism can be complementary rather than contradictory tendencies. Nationalists have often served as promoters of globalization, seeking out globalizing influences and engaging with global actors out of their very nationalist interests. In the case of both Georgia and the Basque Country, there is little evidence suggesting the existence of strong, politically organized nationalist opposition to globalization. Discusses why, on a broader scale, different forms of nationalism develop differing attitudes towards globalization and engage in different relationships.Conventional wisdom suggests that sub-state nationalism in the post-Cold War era is a product of globalization. Sabanadze?s work encourages a rethinking of this proposition. Through careful analysis of the Georgian and Basque cases, she shows that the principal dynamics have little, if anything, to do with globalization and much to do with the political context and historical framework of these cases. This book is a useful corrective to facile thinking about the relationship between the ?global? and the ?local? in the explanation of civil conflict. Neil MacFarlane, Lester B. Pearson Professor of International Relations and fellow at St. Anne?s College, Oxford University and chair of the Oxford Politics and International Relations Department.

A study of party competition in Europe since 2008 aids understanding of the recent, often dramatic, changes taking place in European politics.

The European Union's foreign policy is full of paradoxes. The Union aspires to be a powerful international actor without becoming a super-state. It hopes to prevent and manage conflicts, but refrains from acquiring the military means to do so. It embarks on the project of widening its borders, but continues its deepening project which makes the entrance hurdles for applicant countries ever higher. It wishes to maintain strong transatlantic links, but continues to build institutions that make the EU more independent from - if not competitive with - the United States. In this stimulating book, distinguished European and American intellectuals offer solutions to imperative but unanswered questions: How can the Union's enormous normative `power of attraction' combined with its operational weakness be explained? Can the Union remain a `civilian power' when coping with an `uncivilized' world? Can a European foreign policy get off the ground without prior emergence of a European demos? Are national policies within the Union increasingly convergent or divergent? And how can the Union's international performance be assessed?

The Land of Too Much presents a simple but powerful hypothesis that addresses three questions: Why does the United States have more poverty than any other developed country? Why did it experience an attack on state intervention starting in the 1980s, known today as the neoliberal revolution? And why did it recently suffer the greatest economic meltdown in seventy-five years? Although the United States is often considered a liberal, laissez-faire state, Monica Prasad marshals convincing evidence to the contrary. Indeed, she argues that a strong tradition of government intervention undermined the development of a European-style welfare state. The demand-side theory of comparative political economy she develops here explains how and why this happened. Her argument begins in the late nineteenth century, when America’s explosive economic growth overwhelmed world markets, causing price declines everywhere. While European countries adopted protectionist policies in response, in the United States lower prices spurred an agrarian movement that rearranged the political landscape. The federal government instituted progressive taxation and a series of strict financial regulations that ironically resulted in more freely available credit. As European countries developed growth models focused on investment and exports, the United States developed a growth model based on consumption. These large-scale interventions led to economic growth that met citizen needs through private credit rather than through social welfare policies. Among the outcomes have been higher poverty, a backlash against taxation and regulation, and a housing bubble fueled by “mortgage Keynesianism.” This book will launch a thousand debates.