Ramesh Ganohariti
Why does a population sometimes mobilise to ‘protect democracy’ but at other times does not mobilise in support of or against acts that indicate democratic backsliding? Using the case of Abkhazia, the paper highlights the tension between democratisation, equal rights, and access to citizenship on the one hand and the state’s imperative to ensure its survival and the security of its dominant ethno-national (titular) group. Since declaring independence in 1992, Abkhazia has shifted from inclusive to exclusionary citizenship policies, particularly targeting ethnic Georgians, who were stripped of their citizenship in 2014. Despite the seemingly undemocratic character of this policy, it went largely unchallenged – while in other instances of backsliding, the population has mobilised to ‘protect democracy’. The paper argues that this supposed discrepancy is best explained by examining the event through the lenses of sovereignty, ethnodemographic security, and state security rather than democratisation or backsliding. The denaturalisation of ethnic Georgians underscores Abkhazia(n)’s prioritisation of ethno-demographic and state security over inclusion, democratisation, and legal norms such as the prohibition of retroactive lawmaking. These findings reflect the broader dynamics in contested states, where the imperatives of ethnodemographic security and state survival often override democratic norms.