From the outset, the exact qualities of the postrevolutionary setting under the presidency of Mikheil Saakashvili proved difficult to identify as it was still unclear whether the disintegration of Shevardnadze's regime would result in a democratic change or create a new kind of authoritarianism. It was also unclear if this approach, of having political elites build democracy through undemocratic methods, would prove durable. The aggressive and painful reforms would generate significant public discontent. Meanwhile, the external political competition between Russia and the US, NATO, and the EU increased because Georgia developed deeper linkages with the Western democratizers.

Saakashvili, during his second presidency, settled a number of state-building issues and established more responsive institutions. Competing external influences of democratic and autocratic conditionality would also peak during this period. These daunting political dynamics made the population more vocal in their demands for democracy.

Postrevolutionary Democratization

The removal of autocrats from power often raises the threat of new forms of authoritarianism. This threat emerges from the conditions shaped by existing authoritarian institutions and from the unwillingness of new political leaders to establish democratic institutions. These new leaders are not willing to practice established rules or equally distribute their gains to the survivors of the old elite or the politically neutral. The political elites typically preserve their power through constitutional provisions. In the case of Georgia, the Rose Revolution was supposed to bring democratic change. Revolutionary leaders had two main tasks. First, they had to implement the necessary reforms to accommodate the public discontent that fueled the nationwide demonstrations. The second task, to which Mikheil Saakashvili, Zurab Zhvania, and Nino Burjanadze subscribed, was power sharing and preventing the potential replication of regime- threatening methods. Mikheil Saakashvili received the vast majority of votes in the presidential election of January 4, 2004. Once in office, he amended the constitution in ways that had major consequences and would prove counterproductive to the democratic transition because they essentially eliminated the possibility of power parity. The amendments introduced the post of prime minister, strengthened presidential powers, and attenuated parliamentary capacities. The president could also now dissolve the parliament and the law enforcement ministers outright, declare a legislative act unconstitutional, and monopolize the agenda of the parliament using constitutionally defined powers. The president also was entitled to propose legislative initiatives and hold ad hoc hearings to draft laws.