Developing democracy, soviet legacy, and geopolitical tension: how political parties impact democracy reform in Moldova and Georgia

Political parties are seen as key actors in democratic consolidation as they promote democratic values and behaviours, and parties in multiparty systems such as Moldova are expected to do better than those in dominant party systems, such as Georgia, because they need to interact with other parties in a regular and systematic way to achieve their goals. This paper examines how political party interactions impact democracy reforms in pro-democracy regimes by comparing the multiparty system in Moldova (Alliance for European Integration coalition 2009-2015), to the dominant party system in Georgia (United National Movement 2004-2012). Using multi-method research, combining a most similar research design and process tracing methodology, a detailed comparative account of the two country cases is presented. These cases have functionally similar structural and contextual conditions that shape political party behaviours. Most prominently those of external influences dominated by geopolitical tensions between the EU and Russia; and the soviet legacies of endemic corruption and destructive political relationships. Taking these scope conditions into account, two different process theories illustrate the steps parties took to deal with changes to their democratic system. Findings show that parties in both systems failed to achieve essential democratic reforms, but in different ways. The multiparty system in Moldova allowed space for parties to negatively impact reforms from within the coalition government through instrumentalization and delay, as these parties were able to maintain clientelist networks and informal political processes, resulting in some institutional change but very little behavioural change. While the predominant party system in Georgia, provided the ruling party with the opportunity to exclude opposition and control reforms, meanwhile learning how to protect their growing economic and political control. While initial reforms were considered successful, a lack of inclusivity diminished the quality and impact of later reforms. These findings suggest that political parties react in differing ways, depending on the system they are in, to a combination of the external pressures present in the region and the soviet legacies shaping elite incentives. This leads to a mixed bag of results when it comes to democracy reforms. Offering possible insights into why some democracy reforms are more successful than others.