Portraying ex-Pres Saakashvili as wholly negative, unethical, distorts reality, political analyst Gamzardia

Georgian political analyst Archil Gamzardia has criticised the portrayal of convicted former president Mikheil Saakashvili as an entirely negative political figure, describing such narratives as unethical, politically unbalanced and detached from reality.

In a social media post on Wednesday, Gamzardia argued that the tone of discourse surrounding Saakashvili reflected a broader problem within Georgia’s political environment. He said that both the ruling party and parts of the opposition contributed to what he characterised as an “unhealthy” dynamic, in which criticism of the former president was often one-dimensional.

Gamzardia stressed that presenting Saakashvili as the sole source of political problems not only oversimplified the past but also inadvertently reinforced his continued political relevance. He noted that frequent public attacks by various actors served to underline, rather than diminish, the former leader’s significance.

Gamzardia, who said he had consistently been a critic of Saakashvili and never supported him electorally, stressed that political evaluation should be based on a balanced assessment of outcomes. He argued that public debate has become polarised, with one side focusing on achievements and the other solely on failures.

“Reality is neither entirely positive nor entirely negative,” he wrote, adding that Saakashvili’s presidency included both significant reforms and decisions that many consider unacceptable.

He also suggested that certain political strategies - such as messaging discipline or coordination among political actors - should be handled privately, rather than through public pressure. In this context, he said that expecting a former president, particularly one currently in detention, to remain silent or be framed as the root cause of political challenges was not fully justified.

Gamzardia further noted that the lack of a nuanced assessment of Saakashvili’s presidency continued to fuel what he described as a “Saakashvili complex” in Georgian politics, where opposing camps remained locked in extreme and opposing narratives.