‘EU External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner chided Tbilisi for a “somewhat overdone” reaction to the protests, which included the muzzling of an opposition television station, but welcomed subsequent steps to bolster democracy.’ (Source: reuters, December 6th, 2007)
Indeed: a very harsh reaction by the EU to a government’s use of truncheons, batons, tear gas and rubber bullets against a peaceful demonstration.
Furthermore, Ferrero-Waldner praised President Saakashvili for lifting the state of emergency. Shouldn’t he have not imposed it in the first place?
In addition, Ferrero-Waldner praised Saakashvili for holding early presidential elections. Shouldn’t the EU rethink whether ‘snap elections’ actually are a democratic gesture or a ploy against a poorly organised and ill prepared opposition movement?
Completely agree with the disproportionate use of force. Politicians, however, always seem to dull their toungues when it comes to criticizing their allies. Wasn’t early elections for both the presidency and parliamanet one of the protesters’ demands? Won’t early elections allow them to capitalize on Saakashvili’s fall in popularity following the protests? I agree the Georgian opposition is poorly organized, I am just not sure that would change given more time.
Actually that odd opposition coalition had initially asked for early parliamentary elections because the Saakashvili-loyal parliament had postponed those till the fall. Only later the opposition called for Saakashvili’s resignation. With parliamentary elections held first, the opposition would have had some chance to strengthen its ranks.
Having presidential elections first and so quickly, however, and access to electronic media so low, the opposition will hardly be able to promote their own presidential election candidate.
Still: even if the opposition candidate were to win, there would be no substantial changes with domestic and external policies. Its basically an intra-elite struggle….