Georgia

If you have a fortune of $5 billion-plus in a country with a GDP of £$24.6 billion you will be a whale in a puddle. Such is the fate of Georgia Dream Party founder and chief backer Bidzina Ivanishvili.

And, if you are willing to part with some of your fortune, you can bend the political structure and electoral systems to your will. Ivanishvili is accused of doing just that in the recent Georgian parliamentary elections which the Dream Party won with 53 percent of the vote,

Bidshina Ivanishvili was born into humble beginnings in 1958 but when the Soviet Union collapsed he moved to Russia to grab what he could in the great Russian carve-up. He ended up with a multinational conglomerate encompassing banking, real estate and heavy industry. He returned to Georgia and in 2011 decided to try his hand at politics by forming the centrist, pro-EU Georgia Dream Party.

Backed with Ivanishvili’s fortune, the Georgia Dream Party won a landslide victory in 2012 elections and Ivanishvili became prime minister. He stepped down a year later saying that he had achieved all his goals and wanted to private life.

But Ivanishvili’s money insured that he remained the power behind the throne. And from that position he subtly tilted the Dream Party towards Russia. At the same time he sought membership with the EU. His behind the scenes influence led critics to brand Ivanishvili the “shadow leader.”

As the years passed it became increasingly difficult to walk the political tightrope between the goal of EU membership and the looming shadow of the bear. To keep Russia happy Georgia Dream introduced anti LGBTQ laws and a Foreign Agents Act. Both laws closely mirrored Russia’s laws on both issues. They also breached EU human rights provisions. As a result the EU broke off negotiations with Georgia.

Georgia Dream’s tilt to Russia was unpopular. Polls showed that 80 percent of Georgians wanted to move closer to the EU as protection from Moscow. All the indications. All the opinion polls, were that after three terms in office, Georgia Dream Party, would lose last week’s election, especially when they campaigned on a promise to ban opposition parties.

They won with 54 percent of the vote. The Opposition, EU election observers, President Biden, and even Georgian President Salome Zourabichvili, called foul. They claimed that Ivanishvili’s Dream Party was guilty of “bribery, intimidation and ballot-stuffing.”

The allegations were rejected by Ivanishvili and Dream Party Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze. They were welcomed by Hungary’s Vilktor Orban who hopes that eventually Georgia will become another “illiberal democratic” member of the EU. And the Russian bear? It stopped being silent and cheered.

Japan

Japan is a different democratic country. That is the reason for the lack of excitement in the wake of the long-ruling Liberal Democratic Party’s failure to win a majority in the recent election.

The Japanese political system did not evolve over centuries like its Western counterparts. It was imposed on a socially conservative society with a strong respect for traditions, authority and seniority.

The result is a deeply Japanese political foundation with a democratic veneer, but a veneer which Japanese have come to treasure as much as their traditions.

The big word in Japanese politics is “wan” which is defined as being focused on consensus building and group harmony. It contrasts with the adversarial nature of Western politics

The electoral system reflects this consensus building nature. It is a mixed first past the post constituency-based system and proportional representation. The result is that quite often elections lead to a disparity between percentage of votes received and the percentage of seats in the Diet (the Japanese parliament).

Finally, there is little public involvement in Japanese politics. There exists a sort of social compact whereby the political elite is allowed to rule as they see fit as long they keep their peccadilloes discreet and their rule rule benefits—or at least does not damage—the lives of the general population.

The system has insured political stability and helped produce the world’s third largest economy from the ashes of war. But it also meant effective one party rule—the Liberal Democratic Party. The LDP has been out of office only three years in the post-war period.

But there are signs that the LDP edifice is cracking. Its Diet members have been in a number of scandals recently, especially involving the Christian-based Unification Church which has been accused of financing campaigns and bribing LDP politicians. On top of that, Japanese economic growth has been stagnant for the past 30 years with annual growth of only 1.4 percent.

The result is that the implied social contract is wearing thin, especially with younger voters. In the most recent election voter turnout was only 29.4 percent— a sure sign of political apathy which could lead to political passions which would undermine the consensus politics that keep the Liberal Democratic Party in power.

Western Sahara

The Western Sahara was big news when I was a young diplomatic correspondent 50 years ago. You would think that the Algerian-backed Polisario Front would have by now reached an agreement with the Moroccan government. No such luck, and now the Western Sahara has become a bargaining chip for the major powers.

Problems started in 1973 with a colonial war between the independence-minded Polisario Front and Spain—the colonial power. The Polisario Front won and Spain recognised the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR), the political creation of Polisario.

Enter Morocco, who also claimed the territory. Mauritania also demanded a slice and France sent troops to back the Moroccan claim. The result was a second war which lasted until 1991. It ended with a ceasefire that left the Polisario in control of roughly 20 percent of the Western Sahara. The rest, including the only major city Layyone, was controlled by Morocco.

The uneasy peace continued until 2005 when pro-independence riots broke out in the only city–Layyone. These lasted until 2011 when the riots died down and the two sides returned to their uneasy peace with roughly the same division of territory.

Then came the Abraham Accords. The US and Israel wanted to secure diplomatic recognition for Israel. King Mohammed VI wanted American and Israeli recognition of the Moroccan claim to the Western Sahara. The deal was made.

The reasons for French recognition—which came this week—are more complicated. Yes, they want to curry favour with a super power, but they also have major investments in Morocco. More importantly they are worried about stability in Western Africa. They have been forced to withdraw from Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso where they were helping to fight Islamic insurgents. They have been replaced in all three countries by the Russian Wagner Group.

Why does Morocco want 105,000 square miles of desert. There are potash reserves and phosphate reserves among the sand dunes, but Of greater importance is the 685-mile long coastline. This gives Morocco a fish-rich 200-mile exclusive economic zone into the Atlantic. It also transforms Morocco from a North African power to a country straddling North and West Africa.

* Tom Arms is foreign editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and author of “The Encyclopaedia of the Cold War” and “America Made in Britain".