Civic IDEA responds to the arrest of our friend and colleague, Mr. Gubad Ibadoghlu, which took place on July 23 in Baku, Azerbaijan. He is allegedly being held in the Main Directorate for Combating Organized Crime (MDCOC) in Baku, a department infamous for its record of mistreatment and torture of political prisoners.
Unfortunately, Mr. Ibadoghlu is not the first prisoner in Baku whose arrest and charges raise serious questions. The circumstances of his treatment, as reported by various credible sources, are even more worrisome, as Mr.Ibadoghlu already has a disturbing health condition, and depriving medical care will worsen it even more. It is in complete violation of basic human rights standards.
We strongly condemn the arbitrary arrest of Mr. Ibadoghlu based on groundless accusations and call on the Azerbaijani authorities to show compassion and provide him with instant medical treatment as needed. We also join the calls of international human rights organizations and activists in demanding his immediate release and respect for the rights and freedoms of the civil society members in the country.
Within the framework of the project “Georgia as a Multi-ethnic and Multi-faceted Country”, we present the second consecutive monitoring report on the Georgian languageand literature textbooks. When examining Georgian language and literature textbooks, our main task was to evaluate:
To what extent and how frequently are representatives of national or religious minorities living/active in Georgia found in literature textbooks;
To what extent do the creators of school textbooks realize that for a diverse Georgia, a Georgian does not exclusively refer to “Georgian Orthodox man” and the Georgian literature encompasses all those authors and figures who have contributed to making literature texts in our country;
To what extent the idea is implemented that the literary heritage of Georgia means everything created by writers living in Georgia, regardless of the language of the original text – considered and accommodated.
The main aim of the project is to promote the formation of the population of Georgia (regardless of people’s ethnic and religious backgrounds) into a unified civic nation. We believe this task is difficult to accomplish without integrating relevant views and philosophies into school education. Therefore, our project also serves to fundamentally analyze problems and find ways to eliminate them. To this end, we consider a thorough audit of school textbooks at the initial stage to be the most important task in order to find out to what extent school education helps people of different ethnicities and nations living in Georgia to feel a part of history, development, and statehood of Georgia.
On June 15, three organizations – Civic IDEA’s, Democracy Research Institute’s (DRI) and Democracy Index- Georgia’s jointly organized the conference – New Security Architecture in Europe and its impact on Georgia – one year since European Perspective.
The main aim of the conference has been supporting the dialogue and emboldening discussion over the upcoming 2 cornerstone events:
assessment from the European Union for Georgia in the fall to be followed by Council’s decision on the Candidate Status and
the upcoming NATO summit in Vilnius and expectations for Georgia.
The Conference was attended by various distinguished individuals, including the representatives of the diplomatic corps accredited in Georgia, heads of international organizations, representatives of political parties, as well as civil society representatives and members of academia.
The opening speech at the conference was delivered by Ms. Tinatin Khidasheli, the chairperson of Civic IDEA, which was followed by the keynote speech of Mr. Pawel Herczynski – Ambassador of the EU to Georgia.
As part of the conference, two panel discussions took place, providing a framework for in-depth discussions on important topics:
The Challenges of Georgia’s European Integration – Are the implemented reforms sufficient?
The panelists:
Marcos Granados Gomez – Charge’ d’Affaires at the Embassy of the Kingdom of Spain to Georgia, Presidency of Spain – 1 July – 31 December 2023;
David Usupashvili – Chairman of the Parliament of Georgia (2012-2016);
Tamar Khulordava – Chair of the EU Integration Committee of the Parliament of Georgia (2016-2019);
Sergi Kapanadze – former Deputy Chairperson of the Parliament of Georgia (2016-2020);
Vano Chkhikvadze – EU Integration Program Manager at the Open Society Georgia Foundation.
Moderator – Tamar Khidasheli Director, Democracy Research Institute (DRI)
Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic Aspirations and what to expect from the upcoming NATO Summit in Vilnius?
The panelists:
Andrius Kalindra – Ambassador of Lithuania to Georgia;
Riina Kaljurand – Ambassador of Estonia to Georgia;
Teona Akubardia – Deputy Chair of the Security Committee of the Parliament of Georgia;
Levan Dolidze – Ambassador of Georgia to NATO (2013-2014).
Moderator – Ekaterine Tsimakuridze, Democracy Index – Georgia.
Civic IDEA’s report “China’s “Wolf Warrior” Policy in the Media – the Case of Georgia”
Civic IDEA is happy to share with you a new report on the CCP’s influence activities in the Georgian media. The objective of the research is to analyze the degree of Chinese influence on the Georgian media, both traditional and so-called new media, in the context of the strategy of the Chinese Communist Party through both content and systemic analysis. The media report portrays how China is covered in the Georgian media and how the strategic mission of the Chinese Communist Party is fulfilled – with propaganda and tactical approaches on the “cultural front” to achieve the formation of public opinion in the form desired by the Chinese Communist Party and later, to use it for leverage over various stakeholders or establish control. At the same time, the systematic media analysis aimed to examine the share of the People’s Republic of China and its affiliated business actors in both media ownership and the advertising market.
The report was created in cooperation with the Journalism Resource Center.
For more information, you can download the report here ?
On April 24, Civic IDEA, in cooperation with the Kazakh partner organization “Zertteu Research Institute” organized a workshop, “Why China Matters? The Case of Georgia”, gathering 16 journalists, experts and researchers, and activists from CSOs in Almaty, Kazakhstan. The event covered the following topics:
Why China matters? – general context
Chinese leverage on Georgia’s economic, political, and academic sectors
Chinese Influence on Media (including fake news, methods to cope with Disinformation)
The main goal of the workshop was to encourage an active discussion and productive exchange of opinions and experiences between Georgian and Kazakhstani colleagues.
On April 13, Civic IDEA contributed to the National Endowment for Democracy’s roundtable on Georgia, current challenges, foreign policy trajectories and the role of civil society in a captured state: CSO as a Remnant of Democracy in a Captured State: The Case of Georgia
Georgia has struggled to create a modern, European sovereign state for 30 years. The journey was rough, full of well-crafted obstructions built by Russia through violent interference or by fueling domestic conflicts. Since Russia’s brutal aggression in Ukraine started, politics in Georgia have become even uglier. The government in Tbilisi proved to be absolutely unable to operate under pressure and gave up the fight. There is a general agreement that there is a Georgia blueprint modeled after the Kremlin used by the government in Tbilisi in dealing with media, NGOs, expert community, and, more generally, all active citizens aimed at discrediting them, thus neutralizing from vibrant public life. It is all happening parallel to unprecedented opportunities for EU integration. It looks as if the Georgian government does all for not allowing progress on the European path. Over the last year and a half, we have forced the government to change or withdraw multiple outrageous decisions due to the resilience of civil society and massive peaceful protests.
It is also essential to notice that Russia is not the only player in Georgia anymore, causing worries for civil society. Year after another, China emerged as a core partner and model friend of the Georgian government. All the warning signs are enshrined in dozens of MoU, decisions, and friendly exchanges. While Georgian civil society tried its best to navigate the rather tricky and frequently dangerous environment, we constantly seek expertise, advice, and discussion with our partners and friends in search of better choices and alternatives. Abandoned by the government for the third time, we search for an answer to whether Georgian civil society can change the course of developments in Georgia once again.
On April 11, “Hoover Institution On War, Revolution And Peace”, together with “Freemen Spogli Institute”, hosted a Roundtable at Stanford University, California, US, where the Civic IDEA team discussed the relevant topics related to the PRC’s influence strategies in Georgia: “PRC as an alternative to Russia in Georgia – Leverage on Investments and Academia”
China’s global influence has been increasing over the past few decades, driven by its rapidly growing economy, expanding diplomatic and cultural outreach, and ambitious Belt and Road Initiative. Georgia is among those countries that see the PRC as an alternative to Russia, especially amid the war in Ukraine. It has been actively engaged in BRI, signed FTA with China and considers the further expansion of its role as a transit hub in the Middle Corridor initiative, which supposedly will attract more Chinese money to the country. Although Georgia is not yet the victim of PRC’s “debt trap diplomacy”, almost all the state’s critical infrastructure projects are led by notorious and internationally blacklisted companies, winning the state’s procurement bids. Thus, no ground is left for Western companies to firmly establish themselves in Georgia’s economic sector and attract further Western investments. This occasion limits the diversification of financial partners and puts the PRC state-operated and dubious companies in a priority position, hence making Georgia less attractive to the European market. The domination of Chinese companies within the BRI in Georgia’s infrastructure market has caused indignation among some EU member states’ ambassadors in Georgia. We remember Polish Ambassador in Georgia complaining about Georgia prioritizing Chinese companies over European ones. But in the end, everybody from the government again turns a blind eye to European criticism and stays ignorant about the Chinese firms continuously winning state procurements.
PRC has also been actively promoting cultural and educational exchanges between the two countries, establishing multiple Confucius institutes and classrooms in almost every university and higher education institution in Georgia, strengthening the role of the Georgia-China Friendship Association, providing generous scholarships to Georgian students, actively encouraging exchanges and funding in the fields of research and science and promoting dual partnerships between academic institutions. Within the framework of these academic exchanges, several shady characteristics have been identified, threatening Georgia’s national security in a broader context. Firstly, some of the Chinese universities that are involved in various international and dual partnerships with their Georgian counterparts are suspected of carrying very high, high and medium security risks due to their involvement with the PLA, cyber espionage, military research activities and engagement with other PRC’s defense entities. Secondly, the National Center for Educational Quality Enhancement (legal entity of the Ministry of Education and Science of Georgia) has no control over the study program and legal status of the Confucius Institutes mistrusted and shut by the Western societies. Thirdly, Georgian alumni with Chinese university degrees usually promote the PRC endeavors and vision of the world locally affecting the mindset and perception of Georgian society largely. At last, the National Academy of Sciences is blindly exchanging information and staff with Chinese entities on the basis of contracts that are regulated by the laws of the PRC and may be easily exploited by the Chinese authorities.
From April 5-8, 2023, world’s media focused on Beijing, where French President Emmanuel Macron and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen met with senior officials from the People’s Republic of China, including President Xi Jinping and Premier Li Qiang. Given the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine and rising tensions in Sino-American relations, this state visit was thought-provoking. What were the main goals, issues, and outcomes of the visit? I will try to answer these and other questions in this blog.
Emmanuel Macron’s state visit to China started on April 5 with a large delegation including some ministers, lawmakers and nearly 60 CEOs of top French companies. Before leaving France, President Macron also asked the President of the European Commission for a joint visit to show China and the world that the European Union holds the same position on various topics. Ursula von der Leyen accepted the invitation and joined Macron’s state visit to China.
According to the Foreign affairs website of People’s Republic of China President Xi first met with Macron, then held trilateral talks with Macron and Ursula von der Leyen, before meeting with her bilaterally to discuss China-EU relations. Finally, the French president and Mr. Xi held an informal meeting in Guangzhou, focusing on Sino-French relations. In addition, the main topics discussed at the meetings were China-EU economic relations, the war between Russia and Ukraine and China’s role in resolving the conflict.
EU-China Relations and Europe’s Strategic autonomy
The visit was marked by very important and interesting messages from three leaders regarding EU-China relations. First of all, the messages of the Chinese president were not very different. He reiterated the need that “China-EU relations should not be aligned with, dependent on, or dictated by a third party.” It is clear, of course, that when Xi speaks of a third party, he means the United States and wants to strengthen the idea of “dividing” the West. He also criticized the “democracy versus authoritarianism” and the new Cold War era narratives, mentioning that “these only bring division and confrontation to the world.” He goes even further and calls on Europe to stand together with China against “Hegemonism and Unilateralism.“, again directed at the United States.
At the trilateral meeting, President Xi made the idea of exclusive cooperation between the EU and China very clear. While the United States is trying to “decouple” from his country, President Xi reaffirmed that “China supports Europe in achieving strategic autonomy.”
The idea of Europe’s strategic autonomy is not strange for President Macron. The term refers to the EU’s ability to act independently in areas of strategic importance. These areas include defense policy, the economy, technologies and much more. According to some EU leaders, especially in the field of defense, the European Union is very dependent on NATO and the United States. That is why Macron and some other leaders support the idea of strategic autonomy – they want to see the European Union as an independent and strong player on the world stage.
Europe’s strategic autonomy is attractive to China: it is in Beijing’s interest that Europe and the United States be less interconnected. The Chinese government sees this as an opportunity to improve its relationship with the EU. Given the rising economic tensions in Sino-US relations, this goal is especially crucial. That is why President Macron was welcomed by his Chinese counterpart with great pomp and respect. The informal meeting between Xi and Macron in Guangzhou over a cup of tea proved once again that the Chinese president is very interested in cooperation with France.
No to decoupling, yes to de-risking
But Europe’s strategic autonomy is also involving less dependence on China in several areas. On March 30, President von der Leyen gave a speech on EU-China relations to the Mercator Institute for China Studies and the European Policy Centre ahead of her visit to China. In her view, the EU should focus not on “decoupling” but on “de-risking” from China. This message was also repeated by her and shared by Macron in Beijing during the visit.
Where does the idea of “decoupling” come from ? This issue was first discussed in Washington as a response to the heavy economic dependence on China. In relations with Beijing, the United States has taken a tougher stance – since Trump, Washington has pursued a strategy of “decoupling” economic ties with China, and this process continues under the Biden administration. For Europe, it is not realistic to decouple completely from China, but European leaders also know that dependence on Beijing carries high risks. This is why the EU prefers the “de-risking” strategy, which, according to Ursula Von der Leyen, contains several specific ways to deal with the different risks, such as diversifying trade and investment relations, technology transfers, etc.
Russia-Ukraine War
The war between Russia and Ukraine was another central topic of the visit. In this regard, the European leaders stressed the importance of involving China, a member of the UN Security Council, in the “promotion of a just peace”, which respects the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. Macron and Ursula wanted to convince XI to use its “special” relationship with Putin to stop Russian aggression against Ukraine, but there was no concrete promise from China in this sense. However, in the meeting with Macron, Xi and his French counterpart agreed that they are opposed to a nuclear war and to escalating the conflict between Russia and Ukraine in that direction.
Another key message sent by Europeans was about arming Russia. As we know, the Biden administration recently stated that China was considering providing lethal aid to Russia; Though It has already been proven that the PRC is only sending non-lethal aid to Russia, including helmets and body armor, but if it decides to send lethal aid as well, it would pose a serious threat to international security. That’s why after the meetings with Xi and Chinese Premier Li Qiang, the president of the European Commission told the media that she had warned China not to supply military equipment, directly or indirectly, to Russia. In addition, Ursula Von der Leyen made it clear that if Beijing decided to arm the aggressor, “this would significantly damage” relations between the EU and China. According to the French diplomat, after Mr. Macron asked Mr. Xi not to arm Russia, President Xi replied that “it was not his war.” When Emmanuel Macron and Ursula von der Leyen left China, the EU’s position on this issue was reaffirmed by the Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs of Germany – Annalena Baerbock. On April 14, during her visit to China and meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang in Beijing, they discussed this issue and the Chinese minister said, “We do not and will not deliver weapons to the conflicting parties at a later date.”
It is clear that for the EU, any Chinese lethal aid for Russia in the war would be seen as crossing the line. In addition, European leaders are asking China to become actively involved in ending the war between Russia and Ukraine, as Beijing is the only country that still has influence over Russia. However, the only concrete consensus during Macron and Ursula’s visit on the Russia-Ukraine war was President Xi’s promise to call Zelensky when the conditions and timing are right.
Taiwan issue
The high-level EU-China state visit obviously did not take place without the issue of Taiwan. On this subject, the President of the European Commission, Ursula Von der Leyen, was more critical. Both she and Macron reaffirmed their loyalty to the “one-China policy”, but Macron tried to avoid discussing critical issues with Xi, such as Taiwan and China’s human rights violations, while Ursula, on the Taiwan issue, mentioned that “the threat to use force to change the status quo is unacceptable“.
On his departure from China, Emmanuel Macron took questions from the French press on the plane, and his answers on the issue of Taiwan were controversial. In particular, he told the media that Europe ran a “great risk” of being involved in crises “that are not ours,” which would make it more difficult to build the EU’s strategic autonomy. He goes even further and said that “The worse thing would be to think that we Europeans must become followers on this (Taiwan) topic and take our cue from the U.S. agenda and a Chinese overreaction.” These statements became the main topic of the world’s media after China began large-scale military exercises around the island of Taiwan, just hours after the French president left Guangzhou to return to Paris. Macron’s views on Taiwan have been welcomed in China, but of course were criticized by some European policymakers. Annalena Baerbock’s statements on the issue show that Macron’s views are not shared by all European leaders. Indeed, during her visit to China on April 12, she condemned the recently launched military exercises around Taiwan and said Germany “cannot be indifferent” to the escalating tensions.
Other important results of the visit
While Emmanuel Macron was in China with CEOs of major French companies, it was clear from the beginning of the state visit that he was in Beijing to strengthen economic relations with China. Macron has signed several agreements for French companies in sectors such as pork, wind power, cosmetics and civil nuclear power. During this visit, France and PRC also issued a 51-point joint declaration on cooperation in various fields ranging from security to culture. The President of the European Commission also stressed the importance of continued cooperation between China and the EU on climate change and other common goals, but as she focused on “de-risking” for the EU economy, she did not sign a concrete agreement in Beijing.
Conclusion
In conclusion, we can say that the joint visit of Macron and Leyen to China was an attempt by European leaders to show their unity with regard to the EU’s foreign policy towards Beijing. It is true that on some issues, Macron acted more like a “good cop”, while Ursula chose a “bad cop” stance and at times criticized Chinese policy on several issues, including Taiwan and human rights in the Xinjiang region. However, the two EU leaders did manage to agree on two key messages: On the Russia-Ukraine war, they told President Xi that arming Russia would significantly damage EU-China relations and China should be actively involved in ending the war. Regarding EU-China relations, their message was that the EU does not follow the U.S. strategy of “decoupling” and prefers to “de-risk” from China. Time will tell if this strategy is effective or not.
Giorgi Khachidze – Author of the Blog, Intern, Civic IDEA
The Hoover Project on China’s Global Sharp Power – The China Index: Measuring PRC Influence Around the Globe on Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 9:00 AM PT | 12:00 PM ET.
The China Index is the first cross-regional project to objectively measure and visualize China’s overseas influence through comparable data. This event brings together report contributors from Bogota, Berlin, Tblisi, and Taipei, who will analyze the PRC’s influence campaigns in their regions, from Latin America to Germany to Central Asia.
ABOUT THE SPEAKERS:
Puma Shen is an associate professor at National Taipei University, the chairperson of Doublethink Lab and vice president of the Taiwan Association for Human Rights (TAHR), focusing heavily on disinformation and local tracking of privacy violations. He was a lawyer, and an expert in white-collar crime, including state crime, disinformation campaigns, and financial crime. His publications analyze Chinese information operations in Taiwan and the U.S., and he is now investigating United Front activities in Taiwan and Southeast Asia.
Didi Kirsten Tatlow is a sinologist and journalist. A graduate of the Beijing Language Institute (语言学院) and SOAS, University of London, she began her journalistic career in 1994 at the Hong Kong Standard, later moving to the Associated Press and the New York Times, among others, and winning multiple awards. After leaving China in 2017 she worked for think tanks in Berlin and Prague before returning to journalism in 2022 as a Senior Reporter for International Affairs at Newsweek magazine. She is an editor and author of Beyond Espionage: China’s Quest for Foreign Technology.
Parsifal D’Sola Alvarado is the founder and executive director of the Andres Bello Foundation—China Latin America Research Center in Bogotá, Colombia. He is a Chinese foreign policy analyst specializing in Sino-Latin American relations, and a non-resident senior fellow in the Atlantic Council’s Global China Hub. Between 2019 and 2020, he acted as Chinese foreign policy advisor to the foreign affairs minister of the Interim Government of Venezuela. He holds a BS in Telecommunications Engineering from Universidad Católica Andrés Bello, an MA in East Asian Studies from Columbia University, and an MSc in International Politics from SOAS, University of London.
Tinatin Khidasheli chairs Civic IDEA, a think-thank fighting the Soviet legacy in Georgia, confronting Russian propaganda, and advocating for sound defense and security policy. She served as the first female minister of defense of Georgia, and chaired the Parliamentary Committee for European Integration as well as the Inquiry Commission into Violations of Freedom of Speech and Telecommunication laws at the Parliament of Georgia. She holds a LLM in international law from Tbilisi State University and a MA in political science from Central European University.
Glenn Tiffert is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and a historian of modern China. He co-chairs the Hoover project on China’s Global Sharp Power and works closely with government and civil society partners to document and build resilience against authoritarian interference with democratic institutions. Most recently, he co-authored and edited Global Engagement: Rethinking Risk in the Research Enterprise (2020).
