Selling the Georgian Dream

Eight years ago, an  enthusiastic crowd gathered in  front of  the Tbilisi parliament for  Mikheil Saakashvili’s presidential inauguration. “We must create the  Georgia that our ancestors dreamed of,” he told them, “the Georgia that we dream of.” His dream was that of  a democratic, NATO member country with a  growing liberalized economy, low corruption and  high living standards. Since then, President Saakashvili turned the  economy around from  one with perpetually contracting GDP to  a forecasted 6 percent growth rate in  2012, pursuing what became his trademark aggressive privatization and  liberalization programs. The  Heritage Foundation and  The Wall Street Journal’s Economic Freedom Index ranked Georgia ninth out of  184 countries in  2012 (up from  113th in  2003). But voters believed that reform spiked unemployment to  16 percent and  picked another dream catcher: Bidzina Ivanishvili and  his Georgian Dream party.

In  his election strategy, newly elected Prime Minister Ivanishvili addressed popular grievances and  promised dramatic change but conspicuously left out details about his economic plans. However, Ivanishvili’s initiatives as prime minister and  his personal past offer some insight into  his plans for  the country’s economic future and  its privatization program.

Bidzina Ivanishvili carefully molded his public image as a  self-made businessman who returned to  lead Georgia to  progress and  wealth. With a  net worth Forbes estimated at  $6.4 billion, Ivanishvili is perceived as a  man who got into  politics to  share rather than gain wealth. Ivanishvili earned his initial wealth in  the early ’90s privatizations in  Russia. His largest investments were in  banking, mining and  metal production assets. After selling his companies, he invested the  proceeds in  the Russian stock market and  across Georgia.

Ivanishvili’s views on  privatization and  the extent of  the state’s role in  the economy are largely unknown. Given the  country’s ambivalence on  these subjects that is understandable, but the  lack of  clarity is causing consternation among analysts and  investors.

Kakha Bendukidze, the  author of  Saakashvili’s aggressive privatization program, also earned his wealth in  Russia’s privatizations. However, Ivanishvili might not share Bendukidze’s views on  the potential of  privatization, which made them both very wealthy. When asked about his plans to  further deregulate the  economy, Ivanishvili responded by  accusing Saakashvili of  rigging the  Doing Business rankings but left out his own position on  liberalization.

Ivanishvili’s campaign rhetoric was broadly focused on  mass unemployment, labor laws and  direct foreign investment. Privatization remains a  controversial topic in  Georgia, where it often implies crony capitalism and  nepotism. On  the other hand, statism will hardly prove the

much-needed engine of  economic growth necessary for  the increased social spending that Ivanishvili promised. Ivanishvili’s economic policy will become clearer once he decides whether Saakashvili’s deficit-liming Economic Liberty Law will come into  effect in  early 2013.

Ivanishvili’s economy minister appointee, Giorgi Kvirikashvili, was a  board member of  Ivanishvili’s Cartu Bank and  a longtime member of  parliament. Only weeks into  his term, Kvirikashvili resolved the  Poti port workers’ strike by  promising them a  20 percent wage increase and  announced a  Labor Code revision in  favor of  wage workers. One of  Saakshvili’s biggest reforms was the  deregulation of  the labor market.

Kvirikashvili has said that he is committed to  promoting minimal economic interventionism and  effective legal protection of  business. The  first is rather hard to  believe with Saakashvili’s government as a  benchmark. But the  Ivanishvili government’s more conservative economic policy might be more productive than some critics expect.

Recently, Kvirikashvili said that low tariffs on  the extraction of  natural resources like gold, copper and  mineral water should be reconsidered. In  anticipation of  increased social spending, tariff increases might be necessary but will prove disadvantageous in  attracting foreign investors. Shares in  the London-listed Bank of  Georgia are on  a falling trajectory, while the  Georgian lari has weakened against the  dollar. Attracting investors is essential for  any privatization program, as domestic capital markets are no match for  any substantial share-issue privatizations. In  this, Ivanishvili’s speculated openness to  economic cooperation with Russia might prove a  benefit if, with increased exports to  Russia, he also opens Georgia to  Russian investors  — something Saakashvili often opposed. Kvirikashvili recently denounced government meddling in  tariffs on  Azeri-dominated gas imports and  reiterated his commitment to  improving the  business environment. Such an  explicit commitment makes it likely that Ivanishvili’s government will eventually pursue some form of  privatization program.

Shortly before the  elections, the  Georgian parliament was moved from  Tbilisi to  a costly new building in  Kutaisi as part of  Saakashvili’s decentralization effort. After the  elections, Ivanishvili halted the  privatization of  the historical parliament building in  Tbilisi and  is considering the  feasibility of  moving the  parliament to  Kutaisi. While echoing a  note of  populism, reconsidering the  old parliament’s privatization and  the move to  Kutaisi might indicate a  sense of  reason on  Ivanishvili’s behalf. He may yet prove to  be the  much-needed moderate pragmatist that can lead the  privatization of  non-core assets while maintaining control of  strategic ones, stabilizing the  Georgian economy and  increasing social equality. Progress necessitates hard choices, but Ivanishvili might strike just the  right balance between reducing burdens on  Georgia’s future development and  preserving things that mark its past, like the  old parliament building he refuses to  sell.

Carin Knoop, executive director of  the Global Research Group at  Harvard Business School and  co-founder of  the Strategic Asset Stewardship Initiative, contributed to  this article.

Currently studying history and economics at Harvard, Luka Oreskovic is the co-founder of the Strategic Asset Stewardship Initiative, which focuses on global trends in privatization, nationalization and economic reform.
Read more:http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/selling-the-georgian-dream/471822.html#ixzz2DpWCTmh1

The Moscow Times

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *