History rhymes: intellectual resistance and state repression in Georgia

A demonstration in support of integration and membership with the EU in Tbilisi in October 2024. Photo: Mirko Kuzmanovic / Shutterstock

As they say, history does not repeat itself, but it rhymes. This is especially evident in the streets of Georgia since November 28th 2024, when the illegitimate Georgian Dream (GD) government officially declared its intention to abandon EU accession efforts. Every night since, protesters have been blocking the main avenue in defiance. The chant of youth, mostly students, echoes through the streets: “If there won’t be justice, there won’t be peace.” This phrase hints at GD’s vision of establishing a Russian-influenced “peace” – one in which there is no room for liberty.

The legacy of intellectual resistance

The concept of relentless resistance against Russian interference is nothing new for Georgians, least of all for students and intellectuals. In fact, intellectual resistance has always been central to Georgia’s resilience against Russia. After the collapse of the Russian Empire in 1917, Ivane Javakhishvili, a prominent Georgian historian, scholar and public intellectual whose work significantly shaped modern Georgian historiography and consciousness, along with a group of Georgian intellectuals, pushed for the revival of national identity and the restoration of statehood. These efforts materialized through the establishment of the first university in the Caucasus, Tbilisi State University (TSU), in 1918, and just months later, Georgia’s declaration of independence on May 26th 1918.

It is important to stress that the efforts of Javakhishvili and his contemporaries in founding Tbilisi State University were not merely an academic endeavour but an act of Europeanization, positioning Georgia within a western intellectual tradition. The team of intellectuals consciously reinforced ties with the European world and sought to situate Georgia within the European family. According to the Institute for Development of Freedom of Information (IDFI):  

“Ivane Javakhishvili was elected as a member of the Georgian delegation to the Paris Peace Conference. The Conference started on 18 January 1919 and it was focused on the creation of the new international order after the First World War. The issue of the self-determination of small nations was raised on the Conference, which gave a historical opportunity to Georgia to enhance its independence and gain international recognition.”

However, that independence was short-lived. In 1921, Soviet forces invaded Georgia, stripping it of sovereignty and establishing an authoritarian regime that particularly targeted the intellectual sphere. As Stephen Jones argues in Georgia: A Political History Since Independence, Soviet policies deliberately sought to eradicate the intellectual movements that had grown in the short-lived Democratic Republic of Georgia (1918–1921), replacing them with Marxist-Leninist doctrine. The repression intensified during the 1930s, particularly under Stalin’s direct influence. The Great Purge (1936–38) led to the widespread persecution of scholars, poets and students who were accused of “counter-revolutionary” or “nationalist” tendencies. The NKVD (Soviet secret police) carried out mass arrests, accusing intellectuals of nationalism, bourgeois ideology, or connections to foreign powers. Many of these accusations were fabricated, and the trials were often conducted with predetermined outcomes. The situation in Georgia today mimics Soviet tactics through its repression of students, academic staff and institutions.

Academic suppression and political persecution

Today, when one enters the courtyard of Tbilisi State University, an inscription reads: “I couldn’t attend the lecture today. Z. Tsetskhladze, R. Kiknadze.” These are the names of two students detained due to their political activism and protests. This marks the beginning of a new semester and symbolizes the ruling party’s intent to bring students under government control.

In the case of Zviad Tsetskhladze, he has been accused of organizing or leading group violence, which carries a sentence of six to nine years in prison. However, Transparency International Georgia has analyzed the report on which the investigation is based, stating:

“The report alleged that these individuals were ‘inciting protesters to rebel, instructing them to disobey lawful police orders, and teaching them how to create dangerous, explosive, and incendiary devices.’ Additionally, it claimed that Zviad Tsetskhladze was comparing the events in Tbilisi to the so-called ‘Euromaidan’ protests in Ukraine in 2014, instructing protesters on how to block streets and build barricades. The content of the report largely repeats the same propagandistic messages that high-ranking officials had been voicing from political platforms for months ahead of elections… In the present cases, there is not a single piece of evidence—no witness testimony, no audio or video recordings, nor any written documents—that would prove that the defendants had prearranged to engage in group violent actions, that they had an organizer or leader who issued orders, or that they were aware of the purpose of an organized group and its criminal intent.”

It can only be assumed that the vast majority of other protest-related administrative, and criminal, cases can likewise be determined to be politically motivated, lacking any real foundation or evidence.

Those who have not been imprisoned are being threatened with fines or the revocation of their student status. Most recently, students from the Shota Rustaveli Theatre and Film Georgia State University have become the latest targets. For more than 80 days, protesting students had been staying overnight in the university foyer. However, on the evening of March 9th, the administration demanded that they vacate the space, citing the need for disinfection. The students expressed a willingness to relocate within the building, but instead, the administration called the police. Officers imposed fines of 5,000 Georgian lari on each student and later threatened them with administrative detention, ultimately forcing them to leave.

To justify the fines, the police invoked a recently enacted law by the ruling Georgian Dream party, which bans “unauthorized protests in closed spaces”. The crackdown continued the following morning, on March 10th, when some students received notifications that their student status had been revoked. The administration advised them that they could appeal the decision by submitting a formal request to the university rector. In response, students gathered outside the public broadcaster, demanding a live debate and inviting rector Giorgi Shalutashvili to address their concerns. They accused him of misrepresenting events and insisted on student representation in the discussion. Amid mounting pressure, the broadcaster agreed to air a debate on March 15th. Two days before the debate, the first statement on the reinstatement of students’ status came not from the university but from the ministry of culture, revealing a political intervention and lack of institutional autonomy. Shortly after, the university announced it would not revoke the students’ status.

For comparison, according to the History Project overseen by IDFI:

“During the years 1937–1938, 49 students were put on trial under Stalin’s repressive policies. The youngest was 19 years old. Of these 49 students, 35 were executed, 7 were sentenced to 10 years in prison, one received an 8-year sentence, another was given 3 years, 2 were killed in prison through torture, and 3 were released.”

State control over academia

Academic staff are also facing increasing suppression, with legal scholars and professionals emerging as primary targets. On March 10th 2025, two lecturers from the Tbilisi State University Faculty of Law were dismissed, allegedly for political reasons. This reinforces the growing trend of state interference in academia. Just days earlier, on March 4th, the Georgian parliament passed the first reading of a legislative amendment that grants the High Council of Justice the authority to determine where judges can teach, stripping them of their previous autonomy to lecture at universities of their choice. This measure significantly expands the power of the High Council of Justice, particularly under the influence of Levan Murusidze, a figure closely tied to the ruling party, further entrenching political control over legal education.

A parallel can also be drawn to the Soviet policy of controlling legal education and the judiciary. Stalin’s regime ensured that judges, legal scholars and law professors were subject to state oversight, preventing any independent interpretation of the law that might challenge the government’s authority. As Peter Solomon details in Soviet Criminal Justice Under Stalin (1996), the legal system was systematically subordinated to political control, with judges, prosecutors and law professors compelled to align themselves with the Party line or face expulsion, imprisonment or execution. This shows intent to allow the state to have power over understandings of justice and the judicial system. This naturally led to ideologically weakening key principles of the law.

From Soviet tactics to modern repression in higher education

These developments are unfolding against the backdrop of the ruling party’s vague statements about substantial reforms to the higher education system. The process remains shrouded in secrecy, with a special government committee overseeing the so-called reforms under the leadership of Irakli Kobakhidze. His central role points to the fact that these measures are not aimed at improving education but rather at enforcing ideological conformity. Kobakhidze has stated that “two educational centers—Tbilisi State University and Kutaisi International University—should carry equal weight in delivering education in Georgia.” This signals a government-driven restructuring that threatens the independence of academic institutions. The elevation of Kutaisi International University – established by Bidzina Ivanishvili – suggests a broader strategy of strengthening politically aligned institutions while undermining those that maintain intellectual autonomy.

As a cautionary tale, over the course of recent events, Ilia State University became a direct target of government pressure when it was placed under conditional accreditation despite meeting all the formal evaluation criteria. As one of Georgia’s leading research universities, Ilia State University has been a hub for interdisciplinary studies, European integration efforts, and academic freedom. Its commitment to open discourse and institutional autonomy has often placed it at odds with government attempts to consolidate power. However, the university’s firm stance and principled response resulted in a successful appeal, securing a six-year authorization. Yet, in parallel to this victory, Kobakhidze made statements emphasizing the need for substantial changes in higher education reform. This timing has caused fears that GD is preparing for further restrictive measures. The attack on Ilia State University appears not to have been an isolated incident but part of a broader strategy to tighten control over universities and suppress intellectual independence.

This approach closely resembles Soviet-era tactics, where universities that failed to align with state ideology faced administrative and financial suppression. Under Stalin, higher education institutions were systematically transformed into instruments of state control through purges of faculty deemed politically unreliable; the imposition of Marxist-Leninist doctrine on curricula; and the strategic allocation of resources to favour ideologically compliant institutions. As Terry Martin in The Affirmative Action Empire details, Soviet policies promoted institutions that reinforced state narratives while dismantling those seen as fostering nationalist or independent thought. Similarly, Sheila Fitzpatrick in Education and Social Mobility in the Soviet Union describes how university admissions, faculty appointments, and academic disciplines were tightly regulated to cultivate a politically loyal intelligentsia, effectively eliminating intellectual autonomy and dissent.

The parallels between past and present are undeniable. Just as the Soviet authorities sought to dismantle independent academic institutions and silence critical thought, GD is now taking similar steps to exert control over universities. Yet, history shows that academia in Georgia has never surrendered without resistance. From the founding of Tbilisi State University in 1918 as an assertion of national and intellectual autonomy, to the underground dissident movements of the Soviet era, the fight for academic freedom has long been at the heart of Georgia’s struggle for self-determination. Today, as universities face renewed repression, students and scholars once again stand at the forefront of resistance, refusing to let education become a tool of authoritarian control.

Please support New Eastern Europe's crowdfunding campaign. Donate by clicking on the button below.

academia, Georgia, Georgian Dream, protest, Russian interference, South Caucasus, students