Burjanadze Says Next Georgian Parliament Must Establish Rule of Law

Georgia's Parliament Speaker Nino Burjanadze has emerged as one of the most prominent opposition leaders in Georgia. As the November 2 parliamentary election approaches, the Burjanadze-United Democrats opposition bloc appears set to be a leading vote-getter. Thus, in the event of a free and fair vote, the bloc could play an influential role in forging a viable governing coalition in the next parliament. In recent weeks, Burjanadze has tangled with President Eduard Shevardnadze and his political allies. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. EurasiaNet contributor Grigol Chikhladze recently interviewed Burjanadze, who offered a variety of opinions about Georgia's domestic and foreign political affairs. The text of the interview follows:

EurasiaNet: Leading opposition parties have not managed to set aside differences and forge a unified electoral bloc for the November 2 parliamentary elections. What hinders opposition unity?
Burjanadze: The unification of opposition parties could have played an important role in the final phase of the election. ... If this unification had occurred, it would have made it much easier to compete with the ruling party, and we would have undoubtedly taken control of parliament. However, there existed a serious risk that, after the elections, this alliance would have disintegrated, incurring a negative reaction among those who cast their ballots for unification, for the unified opposition. ... There were serious difficulties of both a political and theoretical nature during the unification process. With left-wing and right-wing parties in a bloc, it was not easy to develop a unified platform. In addition, there were undoubtedly certain factors of personal character. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive].

EurasiaNet: How did the pro-government [For a New Georgia] bloc recently rallied so many former opposition parties to its side?
Burjanadze: I wouldn't say pro-government bloc managed to rally a lot of [opposition] parties. In fact, I can see only two former opposition parties in it. One is the Irina Sarishvili-Chanturia's National Democratic Party. ... In fact, not much is left of this once serious, traditional and important party. The other is the Socialist Party, which has gone from one side to another and back again, looking for the better chances to enter the parliament.

EurasiaNet: Why did you decide to join the United Democrats?
Burjanadze: The first reason was that, originally, I was advocating the unification of all opposition forces. I held a series of vigorous and important talks with the New Rights, the National Movement, the United Democrats and Traditionalists. Unfortunately, only the United Democrats and Traditionalists responded to the platform "For One and Strong State" that I published. In fact, I am glad that the alliance took this very shape, though I would have no objection if other opposition parties decided to join us. Anyway, I think the United Democrats and Traditionalists have a clear understanding of the future state structure, and they have skilled personnel at their disposal – people who know how to run the country and what exactly is necessary to do in Georgia

EurasiaNet: Some Georgian media outlets call you the speaker who destroyed the parliament. What do you think about that?
Burjanadze: Yes, some mass media outlets, mostly state-controlled newspapers, call me the speaker who destroyed the parliament. The government finds every possibility to blame the parliament and its speaker. I do not think that I have destroyed the parliament. On the contrary, I was able to unite the parliament exactly at the moment when parliament was facing collapse, and the country was on the verge of instability. When I was elected the parliament speaker in [November] 2001, there were thousands people [demonstrating] outside parliament, and demanding the resignation of the president and dismissal of the cabinet. The parliament majority was destroyed. The parliament passed more than 400 bills and important resolutions, it made significant statements and responded to virtually all vital issues in Georgia, beginning with the Abkhazia problem, and the issues of the Pankisi and Kodori Gorges, as well as some questions of international relations. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Yes, indeed, we passed laws and resolutions that often incurred displeasure of the administration, but I am only glad we did. Moreover, I am sure that if the government implemented the laws that we passed, the situation in the country would be quite different.

EurasiaNet: You maintain a pro-Western orientation, yet at the same time you advocate cooperation with Russia. Can you clarify this position?
Burjanadze: When we are talking about the pro-Western course, we mean that we adhere to the principles of the Western civilization, and to the values established in the modern world thanks to the European and American democracies. To my mind, this is the only course possible for our country. As for cooperation with Russia, yes, we would like to maintain good relations with all our neighbors, especially with Russia. However, this cooperation should have a bilateral character. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

EurasiaNet: What do you think about the recent takeover by Russian firms of Georgia's energy sector? Will Georgia become dependent on Russian businesses?
Burjanadze: If Russia really wished to cooperate with us, it would build somewhat different relations, and would not base them on the total control of the strategically important energy sector. I remember very well meeting Mr. [Anatoly] Chubais [head of the Russian energy firm UES], who said that he has no political interests, and that he pursues purely economic interests in Georgia. However, a week ago during a Russian TV talk show named "Basic Instinct," Chubais talked about a Russian