In Ukraine and Georgia, people should come to power without “soviet bacillus” – Vashadze

Kyiv: For the normal functioning of the state, the work of the government alone is not enough. Sooner or later, the lack of competition will have a detrimental effect on officials in power and will give them the opportunity to deal not with what citizens demanded from them, putting a tick in the ballot. A necessary component is also a quality opposition with its alternative view, with its strategy, which really stimulates the government to work hard to remain in power.

 

Giorgi Vashadze is only 36 years old, and he represents, in his own words, a new generation of politicians. In his young years as officials, he already held significant innovative reforms in Georgia during the presidency of Mikheil Saakashvili, while serving as deputy minister of justice. Among his achievements are the introduction of biometric passports and ID-cards, the creation of universal houses of justice, the creation of an electronic healthcare system and local government. Then he went into opposition to the current government in Georgia.

 

Now he is preparing for local elections in 2017, but he spends most of his time in Ukraine, where he manages the Foundation for Innovation and Development. Front News International talked to Giorgi Vashadze about his achievements in Ukraine, about the plans for the elections and about some points of his formed strategy.

 

– You are primarily known in Ukraine as a founder of the Foundation for Innovation and Development. Also, many people remember your innovations in Georgia, which you conducted during this reform period. For the time you are in Ukraine, how would you rate our innovative microclimate? How much are Ukrainians ready for something new compared to Georgians?

 

– The first is that, unlike Georgia, Ukraine has a much larger market, much more opportunities, including Ukraine’s intellectual potential is much greater. As for how the innovations are perceived, then when I do some innovative presentations, the first question that is always asked is “Where is it done, in which country?” And my answer has always been that Ukraine is not a xerox machine, in order to simply copy the reforms, because it is simply impossible and impossible. Therefore, Ukraine must create its own reforms and its innovative approaches in different directions. I think that in Ukraine there was a fear of doing something that no one did, whether we can or not. In Georgia, we managed to break this stereotype, that we can simply copy already done in Germany or the US. We have broken through this, and the houses of justice, the various reforms that I have been involved in, are a new generation of reforms that have no analogues to this day. Therefore, Georgia is associated with changes.

 

 – Well, but from the reforms announced three years ago, did you see at least one that the Ukrainian government managed to bring to the end?

 

– I think there are results, but we want them to be much faster and I myself would be glad about it. Nevertheless, although this is not a revolutionary change, there are some shifts. More specifically, I can give examples of where our team worked: I think that the creation of NABU is a good achievement, which showed that this institution is really independent; I would also mention ProZorro, where we actually participated in the development of the formula, the mechanics, because it is also based on the Georgian example. I also asked about roads, that is, the economy did not grow, and money for road construction appeared. I think that the characteristic of corruption itself has changed a bit, it is no longer the one that took this money into a black hole, into a black hole. Now this money goes to local governments in the framework of decentralization, and they spend on roads, on different things. Yes, the corruption component always exists to this day, but if earlier this money just went somewhere and dissolved in the pockets of officials, now it’s not so and I think that this is also a fact and this is also an achievement. As for today’s problem: people need to feel more that the country is moving forward, that there is a change. Unfortunately, this feeling is not there, and I can say that this is the main problem for the state.

 

– At the same time, we have a problem that everyone wants changes, but do not understand that for democracy it is first of all necessary to change by ourselves. And how much do you think the Ukrainians are ready for?

 

– I’ll tell you straight out if people were not ready to change something, they would not stand on Maidan. On the other hand, now a conditional taxi driver can think that he can not do anything, can not affect in any way, that he does not have any levers. But they must understand the difference between developed and developing countries – the citizens of the first understand that their voice decides, but here on the contrary. That is, I can say for sure that there is a willingness, but if someone says “we are not ready, we can not and corruption in our roots” is an illusion. In 2003, we in Georgia were also told that we are corrupt, that it is our genetics, that we can not change. And now if in Georgia a police patrol money is asked or in the house of justice for a passport they will ask, then a revolution can begin. And all because the Georgians have lost their habit and do not understand anymore, how can a customs officer or someone else do this. People quickly adapt to the good. It is just necessary to be able to do this good. I think that the main problem in Ukraine after Maidan is that in 2014 everyone seemed to understand what reforms should be done. And when the time came, the power was in hand and it was necessary to conduct them, suddenly it turned out that all their superficial ideas were simply nothing. These are not reforms. I often heard structural reforms, systemic reforms and unfortunately we did not see anything, we should understand that every government has six, maximum nine months, for which they must show the result. If it does not work out for such a period, then you have a problem.

 

– I would like to return to the draft Anti-Corruption Bureau. You say that it justifies itself, justifies the invested funds. Literally, the director of the NABU, Artem Sytnik, said that no matter how the Bureau worked, no matter how the Prosecutor General’s Office worked, all their efforts will be in vain until we have normal ships. That is, how in this plan to evaluate the actions of the NABU?

 

– If the judicial system is working poorly, this does not mean bad performance of the NABU. See what happened, the Bureau became a small structure that began to force all other structures to adopt new standards and the judicial system would also have to do it. Even when we were working on the NABU, we still said that it was necessary to create an Anticorruption Court at once. I think that now it is absolutely possible that NABU will be able to work well and we should be ready for the fact that as soon as the government changes and new things come, that all the reforms are clearly registered at once, so that the new parliament immediately had, for example, ten Laws that they need to accept. And those conversations that we hear are nothing, this is the air with which people come to parliament and then it remains the same air. This is the problem.

 

– Have you ever visited the idea of ​​becoming a Ukrainian politician?

 

– No. There were proposals, but for politics I have Georgia, but here I am engaged in reforms. I think, a very good role, I can proceed from the reforms to play in the development of Ukraine, because it is my second home for me. I no longer distinguish which country I like best, to be honest.

 

– Just turning to your Georgian political career. You are heading the opposition party and on the eve of local elections you could not comment on how well the announced association with other opposition parties is going. And what results do you expect most of all?

 

– Today’s problem in Georgia is that 99% of political parties have remained in the old paradigm of the Communist Party, when there is a strict vertical when three people make a decision, and everyone else says that the party knows everything. Just Stalinist-Communist parties, but not ideologically, but in terms of infrastructure, although this all has an effect on ideology too. What did we do? For the first time in the history of Georgia, they publicly invited all opposition parties to unite. But not just on the sidelines, but through an open mechanism, like the primaries. And we will arrange inter-party primaries and then support the one who will win them. It was a shock to everyone, they even called and said why you did not say. I answered that I consider myself to be a politician of a new generation, so I am being killed by negotiations on the sidelines, communist negotiations. We are starting this initiative to build a new platform: not on the old site to play against the wolves of the couloirs, but on the new one, where the most important thing is openness and transparency. Four parties have already united, 12 more different kinds of initiative groups have joined. Very much interest from the civil sector, the media and even the government. They still think that this is so, for a week or two. But we have a plan, exactly how we should beat the old mentality. My task is to create a new generation of the team that is already prepared by 2020 and will already take the government into its own hands in order to realize a new generation of reforms in Georgia.

 

– You are only 36 years old, you have a whole political career ahead of you, but most importantly, that great experience is behind us. In Ukraine, there is such a tendency that we are trusted by young politicians. That is, there are statements before each election that you need to rejuvenate parliament as much as possible. How do you think about this in Georgia?

 

– You see, everyone in Georgia knows everything. Georgia is a small country and you can not mold someone out of nowhere. This does not happen. Everyone must build themselves. In Georgia, too, there is a demand for rejuvenation of power, because people are fed up with the same people for 25 years, the same people who can sign for everything in contract negotiations, in negotiations. I think that both in Ukraine and in Georgia, task number 1 is to bring to power people who were born in independent countries, because those who studied in the Soviet Union still had a scoop bacillus in their heads that always moves them back . We are 25 years old, we are adults, we are not small. This is already the age when a new standard in terms of development should start.

 

– Now, one might even call it a tragic period, because nine years ago the Russian-Georgian war. Now this is a lot of talk, including in the media. There were even fears over Putin’s arrival in Abkhazia that an escalation of the conflict could begin. You as a politician who, according to your words, are going to qualify for the highest positions, do you have any strategic vision of solving the problem with South Ossetia and Abkhazia?

 

– Yes, I have the following vision. The first is the unification within the country around a single strategy. The second – it will unite with Ukraine and Moldova – these are also those countries that suffer from occupation and annexation of their territories and create a common de-occupation strategy, so that every day, step by step, peacefully work to resolve this problem. If Georgia remains alone, then Georgia will lose this war, but if Georgia has such strong allies as Ukraine, Moldova, the EU and the US, then we will win. Similarly, for Ukraine: if it is alone, it will lose, if it wins with partners. This is not a short process, but I think I’m using new mechanisms, if I think about new technologies, I think it’s much faster to do this.

 

– Does this depend only on Putin’s regime in Russia or is it the systematic thinking of any Russian power that would not have become the head of the Russian Federation?

 

– First and foremost, it depends on us how well we are building this strategy. Because if we are disjointed, it will not work. This should be a kit with full-scale actions in this direction. Including the audience inside Russia. We have social networks, we have new technologies, but do we use it? Do we send our message inside Russia? After all, Putin is playing on patriotism, on this one’s power chauvinism. At the international level, he already lost when the French president essentially slaps him at the first meeting, when the American Congress decided that even the president could not cancel sanctions when nobody in Brussels already meets with Putin. Putin became an outcast of world politics, because no one trusts him. I signed the agreement with Georgia in 2008 – does not fulfill, signed the Minsk agreements – does not fulfill, signed for the accords on Syria – does not comply. After the war with Georgia, they began to think about the doctrine of international security, and after the war against Ukraine, Russia became one of the main threats in all such doctrines. And the policy of world security is now being built on this logic.

 

– You said about the unification of Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova with the support of the European Union. Given that the first step towards this has already been done, in view of the signing of the Association with the EU and the visa-free regime with the countries of Europe, do you think the EU is really ready to accept these three countries in the future or is it a local temporary support action?

 

– No, this is a turn-based strategy. The EU needs to expand, it needs strong allies in the environment. They have the psychology and philosophy of normal countries, and not like Russia. It comes out of the fact that I need you to live well, so that I also live well. After all, if we live in the same street and I have beggars with big problems or criminals near my house, then I have to put the cages on the windows so that they do not climb and steal something from my house every day. Therefore, I always want to live where normal people live, who do not steal and do not take anything away. The same, a very logical policy for the European Union. They help us step by step and to some extent are forced to be progressive. This is the idea. We will definitely become part of the EU.

 

– Where is the view of the present government of Georgia turned – to Europe or more to Russia?

 

 – Maybe they are looking in the middle, but any politician who went to Moscow to meet with Russian politicians canceled his rating. What does it mean? This is not a decision of any Georgian government, it is a decision of citizens. No government can not oppose it. Not only in Georgia, look at the example of Ukraine. In Ukraine there have always been many more pro-Russian citizens than in Georgia. In Georgia, the Communist Party has not existed since 1991, they did not get a single vote, they do not even vote for themselves. Nobody expected that this will happen in Ukraine, but the citizens made a decision and everything, back it will not return.

 

– How do you assess the recent visit of Peter Poroshenko to Georgia in the context of improving relations between the two countries?

 

– Firstly, it was a very important visit. Secondly, I hope that the Georgian side received this message that Poroshenko has arrived and that it is necessary to create a common strategy. There are three components in which we need to cooperate: de-occupation, Euro- and Euro-Atlantic integration, as well as the economy, because both countries have economic problems. So these three directions help in the sense that our people love each other. You see, this should be used in a positive way. I feel that the Georgians are also hurt by Ukrainian problems, as well as their own: Donbass – like Abkhazia, Crimea – like South Ossetia, for example, I say, not literally. Our governments should establish this cooperation.

 

– And finally I can not help asking about the deprivation of Saakashvili’s citizenship. Poroshenko, who usually acts very cunningly and cautiously, for no reason signs such a decree that it is unlike him. What is the reason for this, and how do you assess this move by Poroshenko?

 

– I will not evaluate this issue, because I think that there are many problems in this decision. While I’m just watching this process. I do not think that this is due to Poroshenko’s visit to Georgia. Do not comment on your decision – this is also the president’s strategy, maybe even correct from the expert community. He does not go into these details and discussions, referring to the technical and legal components, why it happened.

 

– Does not it remind authoritarianism?