imiМеждународная аналитикаJournal of International Analytics2587-84762541-9633MGIMO University10.46272/2587-8476-2022-13-2-59-78imi-424Research ArticleИССЛЕДОВАТЕЛЬСКИЕ СТАТЬИRESEARCH ARTICLESОт «противодействия» к «конструированию» российских угроз в Грузии при Михаиле СаакашвилиFrom “Countering” To “Constructing” Russian Threats in Mikheil Saakashvili’s GeorgiaСихарулидзеА. Т.SikharulidzeA. T.

Арчил Т. Сихарулидзе, Кандидат социологических наук, преподаватель кафедры социальных наук

улица Пекини, 21, подъезд 3, этаж 5, квартира 120, P.O. 0194, Тбилиси

Archil T. Sikharulidze, PhD candidate in Social Sciences, lecturer at the Department of Social Sciences

21 Pekini Street, entrance 3, fl oor 5, apartment 120, P.O. 0194, Tbilisi

info@archilsikharulidze.geГрузинский институт общественных отношений (GIPA)ГрузияGeorgian Institute of Public Aff airs (GIPA)Georgia2022270620221325978Copyright © Сихарулидзе А.Т., 20222022Сихарулидзе А.Т.Sikharulidze A.T.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.interanalytics.org/jour/article/view/424

В данной статье рассматривается процесс секьюритизации «российской угрозы» во время пребывания М. Саакашвили на посту президента Грузии. Основной тезис статьи заключается в том, что М. Саакашвили и его политические союзники использовали «сконструированные» российские угрозы для дискредитации и маргинализации оппонентов, чтобы обосновать недемократическую государственную политику в целом. Так, тенденция ограничения свободы слова, гражданских свобод и других демократических прав опиралась на сконструированные экзистенциальные угрозы со стороны Москвы. С точки зрения классической безопасности, Россия представляет угрозу территориальной целостности, суверенитету и устремлениям западной интеграции Грузии, но во время президентства М. Саакашвили эта тема была политизирована и использовалась как политический инструмент против оппонентов. Эта статья рассматривает научную дискуссию по этому вопросу. В заключении приводится анализ наиболее важных событий, которые объясняют механизмы и причины секьюритизации России в Грузии.

This paper looks at the securitization process that took place during M. Saakashvili’s time as President of Georgia. It argues that, in order to overshadow political misdeeds and non-democratic state-policy as a whole, M. Saakashvili and his political allies used “constructed” Russian threats to discredit and marginalize opponents. Furthermore, M Saakashvili’s regime tended to restrict freedom of speech, civil liberties and other democratic rights by referring to non-existent constructed threats from the Moscow. Through security dimension, Russia poses a menace to Georgia’s territorial integrity, sovereignty and Western aspirations. But at the time of M. Saakashvili’s presidency it has been turned into a political tool to be used against opponents. This paper off ers a scholarly debate on the issue. Finally, it gives a case-by-case analysis of the most crucial happenings that explain “how” and “why” Russia has been securitized.

cекьюритизацияГрузияРоссияпророссийские силыбезопасностьSecuritizationGeorgiaRussiapro-Russian ForcessecurityReferencesBalzacq, Thierry. “The Three Faces of Securitization: Political Agency, Audience and Context.” European Journal of International Relations 11, no. 2 (June 24, 2005): 171–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066105052960.Balzacq, Thierry. “The Three Faces of Securitization: Political Agency, Audience and Context.” European Journal of International Relations 11, no. 2 (June 24, 2005): 171–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066105052960.Balzacq, Thierry, Sarah Léonard, and Jan Ruzicka. “‘Securitization’ Revisited: Theory and Cases.” International Relations 30, no. 4 (December 27, 2016): 494–531. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047117815596590.Balzacq, Thierry, Sarah Léonard, and Jan Ruzicka. “‘Securitization’ Revisited: Theory and Cases.” International Relations 30, no. 4 (December 27, 2016): 494–531. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047117815596590.Blank, Stephen. “Threats to and from Russia: An Assessment.” The Journal of Slavic Military Studies 21, no. 3 (September 3, 2008): 491–526. https://doi.org/10.1080/13518040802313746.Blank, Stephen. “Threats to and from Russia: An Assessment.” The Journal of Slavic Military Studies 21, no. 3 (September 3, 2008): 491–526. https://doi.org/10.1080/13518040802313746.Buzan, Barry, Ole Wæver, and Jaap De Wilde. Security: A New Framework for Analysis. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers Inc, 1998.Buzan, Barry, Ole Wæver, and Jaap De Wilde. Security: A New Framework for Analysis. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers Inc, 1998.Emerson, R. Guy. “Towards a Process-Orientated Account of the Securitisation Trinity: The Speech Act, the Securitiser and the Audience.” Journal of International Relations and Development 22, no. 3 (September 22, 2019): 515–531. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-017-0110-4.Emerson, R. Guy. “Towards a Process-Orientated Account of the Securitisation Trinity: The Speech Act, the Securitiser and the Audience.” Journal of International Relations and Development 22, no. 3 (September 22, 2019): 515–531. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-017-0110-4.Eroukhmanoff , Clara. 2017. “Securitization Theory.” In International Relations Theory, edited by Stephen McGlinchey, Rosie Walters and Christian Scheinpfl ug, 104–109. Bristol, England: E-International Relations Publishing. https://www.e-ir.info/publication/international-relations-theory/.Eroukhmanoff , Clara. 2017. “Securitization Theory.” In International Relations Theory, edited by Stephen McGlinchey, Rosie Walters and Christian Scheinpfl ug, 104–109. Bristol, England: E-International Relations Publishing. https://www.e-ir.info/publication/international-relations-theory/.Fernandes, Sandra, and Daniel Correia. “(Re)Securitisation in Europe: The Baltic States and Russia.” Debater a Europa, no. 18 (January 23, 2018): 103–129. https://doi.org/10.14195/1647-6336_18_7.Fernandes, Sandra, and Daniel Correia. “(Re)Securitisation in Europe: The Baltic States and Russia.” Debater a Europa, no. 18 (January 23, 2018): 103–129. https://doi.org/10.14195/1647-6336_18_7.Fierke, Karin. Critical Approaches to International Security. Hoboken: Wiley, 2015.Fierke, Karin. Critical Approaches to International Security. Hoboken: Wiley, 2015.Kapur, Saloni, and Simon Mabon. “The Copenhagen School Goes Global: Securitisation in the Non-West.” Global Discourse 8, no. 1 (January 2018): 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1080/23269995.2018.1424686.Kapur, Saloni, and Simon Mabon. “The Copenhagen School Goes Global: Securitisation in the Non-West.” Global Discourse 8, no. 1 (January 2018): 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1080/23269995.2018.1424686.Kirchanov, Maxim. “The Caucasian and the Russian in Contemporary Georgian Nationalism.” Central Asia and Caucasus 14, no. 4 (2013): 101–107.Kirchanov, Maxim. “The Caucasian and the Russian in Contemporary Georgian Nationalism.” Central Asia and Caucasus 14, no. 4 (2013): 101–107.Koiava, Revaz, Edisher Baghaturia, and Yulia Nikitina. Georgia and Russia: Bilateral View on the Quarter Century Relations. Tbilisi, Georgia: The Centre for Cultural Relations – Caucasian House, 2017.Koiava, Revaz, Edisher Baghaturia, and Yulia Nikitina. Georgia and Russia: Bilateral View on the Quarter Century Relations. Tbilisi, Georgia: The Centre for Cultural Relations – Caucasian House, 2017.König, Marietta. “The Georgian–South Ossetian Confl ict.” In OSCE Yearbook 2004, 237–249. BadenBaden, Germany: Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg/IFSH, 2005.König, Marietta. “The Georgian–South Ossetian Confl ict.” In OSCE Yearbook 2004, 237–249. BadenBaden, Germany: Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg/IFSH, 2005.MacFarlane, Neil. Post-Revolutionary Georgia on the Edge? Chatham House, 2011.MacFarlane, Neil. Post-Revolutionary Georgia on the Edge? Chatham House, 2011.Markozashvili, Lasha. “Transition toward Democracy – Georgian Problems.” Przegląd Politologiczny, no. 3 (January 1, 2014): 185. https://doi.org/10.14746/ pp.2014.19.3.14.Markozashvili, Lasha. “Transition toward Democracy – Georgian Problems.” Przegląd Politologiczny, no. 3 (January 1, 2014): 185. https://doi.org/10.14746/ pp.2014.19.3.14.Mitchell, Lincoln. Uncertain Democracy: U.S. Foreign Policy and Georgia’s Rose Revolution. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2009.Mitchell, Lincoln. Uncertain Democracy: U.S. Foreign Policy and Georgia’s Rose Revolution. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2009.Stritzel, Holger. “Towards a Theory of Securitization: Copenhagen and Beyond.” European Journal of International Relations 13, no. 3 (September 24, 2007): 357–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066107080128.Stritzel, Holger. “Towards a Theory of Securitization: Copenhagen and Beyond.” European Journal of International Relations 13, no. 3 (September 24, 2007): 357–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066107080128.Wæver, Ole. 2015. “The Theory Act: Responsibility and Exactitude as Seen from Securitization.” International Relations 1, no. 29: 121–27.Wæver, Ole. 2015. “The Theory Act: Responsibility and Exactitude as Seen from Securitization.” International Relations 1, no. 29: 121–27.Williams, Michael C. “Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics.” International Studies Quarterly 47, no. 4 (December 2003): 511–31. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0020-8833.2003.00277.x.Williams, Michael C. “Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics.” International Studies Quarterly 47, no. 4 (December 2003): 511–31. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0020-8833.2003.00277.x.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.