For more than two years now, DASI, an organization of Georgians living abroad, has been actively engaged in Georgia's political life. Our overarching mission is the development of democracy in Georgia and the transformation of the country into a functional, democratic state. To achieve this general objective, DASI has also pursued concrete and targeted actions. These specific goals are particularly critical today, at a moment when Georgia is farther from democracy than at any point in its three decades of independence. More than that, not only democracy but Georgia's very statehood is now at risk and in need of rescue.
These two years of activity have been exceptionally difficult and fraught with challenges. It is self-evident that DASI faces resistance from the forces that have usurped power in Georgia today. Less expected—but equally real—has been resistance from groups with whom, in principle, we should share common goals.
The primary source of friction with the progressive segment of Georgian society lies in how Georgians living abroad are perceived by groups that remained in the country. Most of these groups see the diaspora either as a mere voting reservoir during elections (one citizen, one vote) or as communities that should confine themselves to local, peripheral activities and nothing more. Underlying this view is a distinctly patronizing attitude. According to this logic, Georgians who left the country "abandoned the front line," sought comfort abroad, and therefore have little legitimacy to speak about developments in Georgia. Their role, supposedly, is to adopt without question the perspectives of those who remained "on the front line" and offer unconditional support.
DASI was founded in direct opposition to this narrow and dismissive framework. Its founders and members believe—and know—that they can and must do far more than the limited role assigned to emigrants by much of Georgian society. Not only can we contribute more; we are obligated to do so. In our view, Georgians abroad must be active, living, and equal participants in Georgia's political process. There are many reasons for this—and many advantages for the country.
Before outlining those advantages, we must state clearly: the condescending attitude toward emigrants held by parts of Georgian society is entirely unacceptable. Everyone knows that for someone who genuinely loves their country, living abroad is often harder than death itself. For each of these people, emigration is a temporary condition imposed by objective circumstances—something that must and will change. In the meantime, however, they can do immense good for the country from where they are.
First, their time abroad has given them substantial experience. They understand their professions deeply and have firsthand knowledge of both the successes and failures of the countries in which they live. Sharing this professional and civic experience would be of enormous benefit to Georgia. Second, they view developments in Georgia from a different angle. Their perspective differs fundamentally from that of those on the "front line." It is more distanced from daily tactical skirmishes, calmer, more structured. Living abroad does not require constant survival under threat, and this allows for more strategic thinking. Ignoring this perspective is a serious mistake. Third, precisely because they are abroad, these individuals possess extensive professional and social networks. If coordinated, they can advocate for Georgian interests abroad with far greater effectiveness than is commonly assumed. The depth of this unrealized potential became unmistakably clear when the de facto authorities effectively stripped emigrants of their voting rights.
It is with this vision and motivation that DASI engages in Georgia's political process. We are firmly convinced that Georgian statehood once again stands on the brink of extinction. This is the result of numerous internal and external geopolitical factors that cannot be fully explored here. The path to survival lies in Georgia's return to a democratic process and in the creation of genuine, strong democratic institutions. Since power today has been usurped by forces controlled by Russia, this goal can only be achieved through the removal of that force. From the very beginning—and still today—DASI's position has been unequivocal: the central demand of all pro-Georgian protest forces must be the immediate resignation of the de facto government, the installation of a new administration that will first conduct democratic elections and then immediately begin the reforms necessary to pull the country out of its acute political and economic crisis. Above all, such a government must serve not specific political ideologies or factions, but Georgia's national interests. For this reason, the force we envision is explicitly non-partisan.
For over two years, DASI has consistently urged its allies and like-minded partners to unite the protest movement around a single, clear demand: the immediate resignation of Ivanishvili's de facto regime and its replacement by a new administration. All other demands are ineffective and absurd. Calls for new parliamentary elections, for example, are frequently heard. But who would conduct these elections? If the existing de facto regime remains in charge, elections held even a hundred times would be falsified a hundred times—because the regime cannot retain power otherwise. Advocates of new elections understand this and propose elaborate mechanisms to somehow force democratic elections under the same regime. But if the regime agreed to such conditions—and if those conditions were miraculously implemented—it would, in effect, be signing its own resignation. If Ivanishvili's regime would accept those terms, it would accept its departure from power. So why not demand directly what is both necessary and inevitable?
In short, the immediate and unconditional removal of Ivanishvili's de facto regime from power is the only correct demand. We welcome the fact that more and more Georgians are beginning to share this view. It is only a matter of time before the removal of the usurpers becomes the central demand of the protest movement. Given the immense protest energy in the country—and the historical fact that no traitorous force has ever maintained effective rule in Georgia for long—fulfilling this demand is a question of strategy and timing. However, the resignation of the government is only one part of the larger puzzle called the restoration of Georgian statehood and the return to a democratic path. The second—and perhaps more difficult—part begins afterward.
This subsequent phase has two stages. The first is the period between the removal of Ivanishvili's regime and the holding of new elections. These elections must be open and secure, and all legitimate political forces must be guaranteed equal participation in the pre-election process. Achieving this requires time and a stabilizing authority. Realistically, six months to one year will be needed before democratic elections can be held. The second stage is the post-election period, which is no less important than the first.
How should the country navigate these two critical stages? Here, too, DASI offers a distinct and clearly articulated vision.
Both stages require the creation of a non-partisan group that will lead Georgia out of its deep crisis. The task facing this group is extraordinarily complex. In the first stage, it must ensure internal economic, financial, and social stability while initiating electoral reforms. In the second stage, it must implement deep, structural reforms.
Within Georgian society, a consensus is emerging around the first stage. Various groups describe the proposed solution as a transitional government, a temporary government, or a technical government. While details differ, the principle is the same: the mission is to guide the country safely toward new democratic elections.
No such consensus exists regarding the second stage. Many consider discussion of it premature, while others argue that post-election decisions should be left to the newly elected political force or coalition.
Today's Georgia is in a profound crisis—indeed, calling it a single crisis is almost inadequate. The country faces simultaneous economic, cultural, social, financial, educational, healthcare, political, and constitutional crises. Historically, states find themselves in such conditions only after major cataclysms. The United States after the War of Independence, France after the First Revolution, Germany after World War II—all underwent moments of fundamental re-founding. Regrettably, Georgia now faces a similar historical moment. Such crises cannot be resolved through normal political processes. Overcoming them requires the consolidation of all societal resources, full mobilization, and the formation of a shared vision for a new stage of national development.
For this reason, leadership must be assumed by a non-partisan civic group endowed with a broad mandate from society, including political parties. Its mission must extend beyond stabilizing the country until elections; it must also carry out deep post-election reforms and re-constitute the state itself. With broad societal and political participation, this group must develop a foundational reform plan and begin implementing it. After democratic elections, it should receive a parliamentary mandate to continue these reforms while simultaneously preparing the ground for a return to normal political life. Once a stable, sustainable political system is established, the group should hand power to political forces that prevail through parliamentary competition.
Georgia should have undergone a similar process after the collapse of the Soviet empire. Internal conflict, the absence of long-term strategy, and active external interference prevented this. Foreign powers worked deliberately to prevent patriotic forces from consolidating and laying a solid foundation for Georgian statehood. Much of the country's political instability stems from this failure.
In conclusion, Georgia must rebuild the foundations of its statehood, design deep reforms, and implement them rapidly to escape its acute crisis.
Over the past two years, DASI has discussed this vision with many people and frequently encountered resistance. The main argument against it has been its alleged irrelevance. Critics ask how one can speak of theoretical or foundational reforms while state terror prevails and people struggle daily for physical survival. Others question the need for deep reform when Georgia already has a constitution and laws, arguing that the problem is not the absence of a legal framework but the regime's departure from it.
Both criticisms have simple answers. Daily struggle for survival makes sense only if victory leads to a better future. Victory requires unity around a shared vision. That vision cannot simply be a return to the current constitutional framework. Georgia's existing constitution is part of the problem, not the solution. Because the country failed to establish fundamental principles in the early years of independence, today's constitution is a product of political expediency rather than national interest. It reflects successive attempts by dominant political groups to reshape institutions in order to prolong their hold on power. These attempts continue today and will intensify. As a result, the current constitutional order serves those in power, not the Georgian people.
Returning to constitutional norms would be an improvement over the present situation—but it is insufficient for long-term development. A complete renewal of the political system and constitution, aligned with Georgia's national interests, must become the cornerstone of future reforms.
To achieve this, Georgia's progressive and patriotic forces must consolidate around this vision. From that consolidation, a smaller, effective team must emerge—one with both short-term and long-term action plans for building a Georgia that protects the interests of all its citizens. All other solutions are temporary; the next deep crisis would only be a matter of time. Thinking about fundamental change amid daily struggle is not premature—it is at least thirty years overdue, and much of today's catastrophe is the direct result of that delay.