The overarching sentiment, in both primary and secondary research, has been that the most important legacy of the Rose Revolution was the strengthening of civil society – particularly in light of the contestation around the effectiveness of the anti-corruption reforms. While the post-revolutionary government and Western observers were quick to hail the triumph of the anti-corruption agenda, the actual results are more nuanced than one might think. In addition, more attention and resources have been allocated to combating corruption than promoting transparency. The civil society emphasis is important when one considers why the sentiment and values of the Rose Revolution integrated so well into Georgian society.
VVTo better analyze these factors, an overview of the post-Soviet legacy and a suggestion around how to define the region will begin the discussion.
I. SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL CONTEXT
VVGeorgia and two of its neighbours, Armenia and Azerbaijan, are often grouped together into a region called the South Caucasus. This identity is argued to be a convenient label constructed by the West to refer to a region that, although all former members of the Soviet Union, does not see itself as homogeneous. However, Thomas de Waal’s argument, which I will also adopt, is that although the region has a multitude of identities between and within each of its constituent states, there is some merit to refer to the South Caucasus as a region – and perhaps to simultaneously encourage regional integration in this way. Although the component states of the South Caucasus are quick to point out their dissimilarities from each other, all three were members of the Soviet Union. The Soviet legacy has left an imprint on each of these societies more significant than simply a lingua franca.
183