Spoiler or facilitator of democratization?: Russia's role in Georgia and Ukraine

Abstract

In the post-Soviet space, Georgia and Ukraine are broadly perceived as exceptions to the growing authoritarianism in the region owing to the farreaching political changes triggered by the so-called Colour Revolutions a decade ago. This article examines Russia's reaction to political changes in Georgia and Ukraine in light of the interplay between the democracypromotion policies implemented by the EU and US and domestic patterns of democratization. We argue that despite the relatively weak impact of EU and US policies vis-à-vis domestic structures, Russia has responded harshly to (what it perceives as) a Western expansionist agenda in pursuit of reasserting its own hegemonic position in the post-Soviet space. However, coercive pressure from Russia has also unintended, counterproductive effects. We argue that the pressure has actually made Georgia and Ukraine more determined to pursue their pro-Western orientation and has spawned democratization, thereby supporting the objectives of the Western democracy promoters.

The noble west and the dirty rest? Western democracy promoters and illiberal regional powers

“…In Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia, Putin's economic and security threats have had the opposite effect, empowering pro-Western political forces to sign Association Agreements with the EU as an important step to closer relations with the West. 53 Due to its natural resources, Angola is less dependent on the EU and the US than Ethiopia. 54 However, while having emerged as an equally important economic partner, China cannot compensate for EU and US aid and trade to Ethiopia.…”

Russia’s Arlington? The Federal Military Memorial Cemetery near Moscow

“…In Eastern Partnership (EaP) countries, Russia also plays a destabilizing role by hampering the advancement of democracy so as to obstruct these countries' rapprochement with Euro-Atlantic structures (Cameron and Orenstein 2012). Even though this spoiling strategy can at times backfire, as it did in Ukraine and Georgia (Delcour and Wolczuk 2015), overall it increases the risk of side-lining pro-democratic forces and discarding peaceful conflict-resolution options in the region. For that reason, there are grounds for predicting that "democratic peace" will remain absent from post-Soviet Eurasia for many years to come, while "dictatorial peace" will subsist only for as long as ideal-typical authoritarian "bosses," such as Alyaksandr Lukashenka, remain in office.…”

Möjligheter och begränsningar för EU:s aktörskap i södra Kaukasus

“…Kapacitetsbyggnadsövningar, såsom TAIEX eller Twinning, utgör därför viktiga instrument för att underlätta implementering av EU:s normer och policyer i grannskapet. EU:s stöd har bland annat visat sig vara effektivt vad gäller överförandet av EU:s energi-och migrationsregelverk i Armenien, men mindre relevant beträffande rättsstatens principer (Ademmer & Börzel, 2013;Delcour & Wolczuk, 2015).…”

“…Befintlig forskning har dock inte belagt denna företeelse i Sydkaukasien. Delcour och Wolczuk (2015) har däremot funnit att Kremls påtryckningar fick oväntade effekter i Georgien, eftersom dessa gjorde [Saakasjvili-administrationen] mer beslutsamma att fortsätta sin provästerländska orientering och istället drev på implementeringen av EU-normer i landet (Delcour & Wolczuk, 2015). Georgiens energisektor illustrerar mönstret.…”