Since coming to power in late 2012, the Georgian Dream coalition has encountered an extremely challenging foreign and domestic policy environment – marked, in particular, by the difficulty of balancing relationships with the West and Russia respectively 캐릭캐릭체인지 다운로드. In its first year, the government’s foreign policy was impaired by inexperience and lack of professionalism, as well as by confusion and dysfunctionality caused by the sharing of power with President Mikheil Saakashvili of the United National Movement apple itunes 다운로드.
MacFarlane S. N. (2015). Two Years of the Dream: Georgian Foreign Policy During the Transition. Chatham House: Russia And Eurasia Program.
In this paper, Archil Gegeshidze emphasizes that after two inflamed ethnic conflicts and a bitter confrontation within Georgian society in the 1990’s, the most difficult question the country is facing is whether Georgia has the vision and resources to secure peace and stability. The restoration of territorial integrity and the elimination of corruption, as well as the consolidation of the Western orientation of foreign policy, are three absolutely important elements of the much-needed vision, argues the author 불꽃의 점심시간.
Gegeshidze, A. (2002). Georgia: In Quest of a Niche Strategy. Connections: The Quarterly Journal, 1(3), 3-12.
This paper explains why democratization has obtained a central role in Georgia’s foreign policy since 2003. The paper’s main argument is that Georgia’s pursuit of integration with the Euro-Atlantic security community and building a strong relationship with the U.S 다운로드. required a strong emphasis on Georgia’s international image as a democratic reformer. The paper also argues that the outcome of Georgia’s parliamentary elections in October 2012 should be understood in this perspective 피싱마스터 다운로드. The fact that the elections were free and fair enough to allow for the opposition’s victory is attributable to the ruling party’s perceived need to maintain Georgia’s international image as a democratic reformer 다운로드.
Nilsson, N. (2013). The October 2012 Elections and the Role of Democracy in Georgia’s Foreign Policy. Swedish Institute of International Affairs, Occasional Papers No 다운로드. 15
What explains change and continuity in the foreign policy behavior of small states? The standard emphasis is made on external and international factors with the conclusion that small states are more likely to bandwagon with threatening great powers than to balance against them 다운로드. Contrary to this approach, this article suggests that state- and individual-level variables can play a greater role in explaining the foreign policy behavior of small states and that small states sometimes choose to balance rather than bandwagon, especially when elite ideology is deeply embedded in formulating foreign policy 007 스펙터.
Gvalia, G., Siroky, D., Lebanidze, B., & Iashvili, Z. (2013). Thinking Outside the Bloc: Explaining the Foreign Policies of Small States 웹페이지 파일 일괄 다운로드. Security Studies, 22(1), 98-131.
This paper is an attempt to analyze what has underpinned Georgia ’s foreign policy consensus and how likely it is to persist in the face of mounting difficulties concerning Georgia’s international standing 스마트 메이커 다운로드. The explanation for foreign policy persistence includes the Georgian president’s grip on power, the intransigence of the Russian leadership toward improving relations with Tbilisi, a lack of practical cooperative areas in Russian-Georgian relations, and the government’s motivation to stay its course under conditions of international uncertainty 다운로드. However, the broad ideological consensus regarding Georgia’s foreign policy stance may be weakening.
Khelashvili, G 마크탈출맵. (2011). Georgia’s Foreign Policy Impasse. Is Consensus Crumbling? Ponars Eurasia Policy Memo, (187).