South Caucasus: Glocalization of the Pandemic

• Main Authors: A. M. Iskandaryan, H. G. Mikaelian
• Format: Article
• Language: Russian
• Published: MGIMO University Press 2020-03-01
• Series: Международная аналитика
• Subjects: south caucasus; coronavirus; institutional substantiality; alarmism; crisis
• Online Access: https://www.interanalytics.org/jour/article/view/269
• ISSN: 2587-8476; 2541-9633

The coronavirus pandemic has become a test of States ‘ ability to respond to external challenges. The article assesses how quarantine measures are introduced and observed in different countries of the South Caucasus-from recommendations to the introduction of a state of emergency. It also examines the consequences these measures entail for the legitimacy of power, the structure of elites, and the quality of public administration in the region. From the analytical viewpoint, the South Caucasus represents an ideal model: different measures to combat the pandemic in these countries lead to different results. In general, the ideology of fighting coronavirus is based on isolationism and alarmism. Isolationism in the South Caucasus is part of a global trend, and in some cases, manifests itself as the result of Western normative influence. Alarmism is also a necessary factor in the fight against the virus: it was panic that became the basis for the rare consolidation of society around authorities in transit countries and mass approval of strict restrictions imposed by the national governments. Unlike previous crises of the twenty-first century, the pandemic creates a demand for the competence of the authorities and the willingness to implement political decisions at the expense of the comfort and economic interests of citizens. The peculiarity of the South Caucasus is that the demands for competence caused by the pandemic followed the desire of citizens to pressure governments to fight corruption, which was the main driver of the revolutions in Armenia and Georgia. Amidst the spread of the disease, the demand for sufficient work of state institutions has come to the fore. If Georgia’s relative success in fighting the pandemic goes on, this will be another indication for the rest of the region of how important it is for the state to be “institutionally sound”.