This thesis presents Mikhail Saakashvili as a case study into charismatic authority, aimed to get a better understanding of the charismatic bond between Saakashvili and his followers. This thesis...Show moreThis thesis presents Mikhail Saakashvili as a case study into charismatic authority, aimed to get a better understanding of the charismatic bond between Saakashvili and his followers. This thesis is a qualitative research and for a large part based on oral sources. In this study new scientific approaches in the field of leadership studies are explored. This thesis argues that the Rose Revolution saw the revelation of Saakashvili as a charismatic leader. Saakashvili was able to create the notion of a strong leader by giving inspiring speeches and skilfully using the media. Furthermore, this thesis argues that Saakashvili’s charisma was for a large part build upon symbolism and mysticism. Finally, this thesis will argue that the government’s response to the massive protests in 2007 and the Russo-Georgian war in 2008 negatively affected Saakashvili’s charismatic appeal.Show less
Mikheil Saakashvili came to power in Georgia in 2003 after the bloodless Rose Revolution. He provided the people with the hope that Georgia would turn into a functioning democracy under his rule....Show moreMikheil Saakashvili came to power in Georgia in 2003 after the bloodless Rose Revolution. He provided the people with the hope that Georgia would turn into a functioning democracy under his rule. It turned out that these hopes were set too high. In this thesis I analyse how Saakshvili consolidated authoritarian rule, and how he used the security threats Georgia faced to achieve this.Show less
In two periods since the early nineties, first under presidents Shevardnadze and then under president Saakashvili, democratic progress in Georgia stalled. For the Georgian case the explanatory...Show moreIn two periods since the early nineties, first under presidents Shevardnadze and then under president Saakashvili, democratic progress in Georgia stalled. For the Georgian case the explanatory merit of two theories that attempt to explain democratisation is assessed . Carothers’ revised transition paradigm better explains the stagnation of democratic progress in Georgia in the Shevardnadze era, while presidential power theory is better at explaining that stagnation in the period of Saakashvili's presidential terms.Show less
