In Georgia, a Political Uproar Erupts Over a 2008 War With Russia

"The leader of the governing party said the country should apologize for a conflict for which some Georgians wrongly blame Moscow, heightening a monthslong political battle.

For months, politics in the Caucasus nation of Georgia has been roiled by a tussle between those advocating closer relations with the West and those who lean more toward Russia.

Now, as the country prepares for critical elections in October, the leader of the governing party has ignited a political firestorm by saying that Georgia should apologize for a 2008 war with Russia for which some Georgians wrongly blame Moscow.

On Saturday, Bidzina Ivanishvili, the founder of the governing Georgian Dream party, who built his fortune in banking, metals and real estate in Russia, said that the people of South Ossetia, which broke away from Georgia in the 1990s and expanded with Russian support in 2008, should receive an apology for the war that eventually broke out.

His comments at a rally in Gori, a town that was briefly occupied by Russian forces in 2008, were quickly condemned by pro-Western activists and the opposition.

On Sunday, hundreds of people came to the Parliament building in Tbilisi, the capital, to protest against Mr. Ivanishvili’s statements, shouting, “No to the Kremlin’s diktat!”

The 2008 war with Russia lasted five days, but it left deep wounds in Georgia. It was initially fought over the breakaway Georgian province of South Ossetia, but quickly spread to other parts of the country.

Russia blocked the main east-west highway, and briefly occupied the strategic Black Sea port of Poti and other towns. Its troops stopped about 25 miles from Tbilisi as a cease-fire was reached with the help of international mediators.

In 2009, an independent fact-finding mission set up by the European Union found that the war was initiated by “a sustained Georgian artillery attack” that was not “justifiable under international law”.” The report also accused some sides, including separatist formations, of violating international humanitarian law.

But some Georgians wrongly blame Russia for the war, which is why Mr. Ivanishvili’s comments blaming the country’s opposition set off such an uproar.

Mr. Ivanishvili, who entered Georgian politics in the early 2010s, promised a “Nuremberg trial” against members of the United National Movement, a pro-Western party that was in power during the 2008 war, after parliamentary elections next month.

After the elections, he said, “all the perpetrators of the destruction of the Georgian-Ossetian brotherhood and coexistence will receive the strictest legal response.” He called the opposition “criminals” and “traitors” who “in 2008 burned our Ossetian sisters and brothers in flames.”

“We will definitely find strength in ourselves to apologize,” said Mr. Ivanishvili, who is officially an honorary chairman of the governing party, but who is widely believed to be its shadow leader.

Mr. Ivanishvili’s remarks were part of an increasingly polarized electoral campaign in Georgia. The elections are scheduled for Oct. 26.

At the end of 1991, Georgia was among the most pro-Western states to emerge from the ashes of the Soviet Union. But in recent years, the government of the Georgian Dream party, which has been in power since 2012, has grown increasingly critical of Western policies, and unwilling to criticize Russia over events in Ukraine.

In May, defying large-scale protests, the Georgian government passed a law that aims to limit the influence of pro-Western nongovernmental groups and media outlets in the country.

The government is also now considering a package of bills that would ban “alternative” forms of marriage, the public promotion of same-sex relationships and gender-affirming surgery, among other measures.” [1]

1. In Georgia, a Political Uproar Erupts Over a 2008 War With Russia. Nechepurenko, Ivan.  New York Times (Online) New York Times Company. Sep 16, 2024.

 

Norite būti geresniu bosu ar komandos žaidėju? Žiūrėkite „12 piktų vyrų“

 „1957 m. klasikiniame filme „12 piktų vyrų“ Henry Fonda, kaip prisiekusis Nr. 8, metodiškai įtikina likusius prisiekusiuosius, kad 18-mečio berniuko, kaltinamo tėvo nužudymu, byla nėra atvira ir uždaryta. -- kitaip tariant, kad jis nėra kaltas, be pagrįstų abejonių. Paauglys išvengia elektros kėdės.

 

 Tai, kaip prisiekusysis Nr. 8 pritraukia 11 žmonių prie savo požiūrio, yra meistriškumo klasė, kaip vienas žmogus gali paimti skeptiškų – net priešiškų – kolegų grupę ir priversti juos dirbti kartu, siekiant vieno tikslo, pasukdamas žemyn riedinčią komandą produktyvia. Naudodami tinkamą komunikacijos taktiką, lyderiai gali nukreipti savo komandas į didesnį dalyvavimą, labiau apgalvotus sprendimus ir geresnius rezultatus.

 

 Svarbiausia, kaip rodo Fondos personažas filme, lyderiams modeliuoti sprendimo sustabdymą, tiriant galimybes ir vertinant faktus. Klausimų kėlimo ir kolegų logikos spragų nustatymo procesas, o ne dogmatiškas požiūrio reikalavimas, atveria kelią bendradarbiavimui ir susitarimui.

 

 Tai pamačiau iš pirmų lūpų, būdama didelės nekilnojamojo turto investicijų bendrovės konsultante. Nors ir geriau apsirengę ir mandagesni, šios kompanijos direktoriai veikė panašiai, kaip žiuri filme „12 piktų vyrų“: jie neklausė vienas kito, kalbėjo vienas per kitą ir džiaugėsi parodydami, kas kitam negerai.

 

 Kai pažiūrėjo filmą, jie atpažino jų bendravimo stilių. Nors jie nerėkė ir nereiškė menkinančių, rasistinių komentarų, kaip žiuri nariai, į susitikimus jie ateidavo, turėdami išankstines nuostatas, prie kurių buvo pasiryžę laikytis. Jiems puikiai sekėsi „pagauti“ arba sugauti kitus klaidingu mąstymu ar klaidomis, kas užgniaužia diskusijas. Taikydami metodus, kuriuos demonstravo prisiekusis Nr. 8, jie išmoko veiksmingo būdo daryti įtaką vienas kitam ir kartu pasiekti geresnių rezultatų.

 

 Pavyzdžiui, filme prisiekusysis Nr. 8 atveria duris diskusijai sakydamas: „Aš tiesiog noriu pasikalbėti. Nežinau, ar tikiu [berniuko istorija], ar ne. Galbūt, netikiu,  gal klystu?" Pažiūrėję filmą, valdybos nariai tapo labiau linkę tyrinėti galimybes, užuot tvirtinę, kad yra teisūs, o visi, kurie nesutiko, klydo. Jie uždavė atvirus klausimus, pavyzdžiui: "O kas, jei...?" ir "Ar tai įmanoma...?" ir "Ar galėtume pabandyti...?" Jie taip pat susidūrė su savo šališkumu dėl to, kas galėjo prisidėti, pripažindami, kad kiekvienas iš jų turėjo unikalios patirties, iš kurios galėjo pasisemti, net jei jis ar ji nebuvo aptariamos temos ekspertas.

 

 Pagrindinis bet kurio lyderio, nesvarbu, formalus ar neformalus, supratimas yra tas, kad jei norite, kad komandos nariai priimtų geresnius, labiau bendradarbiaujančius, sprendimus, pirmiausia stebėkite, kaip komandos nariai bendrauja vieni su kitais. Kuo jie panašūs į žiuri filme „12 piktų vyrų“? Ar jie mano, kad jie teisūs, o visi kiti klysta? Ar kas nors dominuoja diskusijoje? Ar kažkas ignoruojamas? Ar yra hierarchija?

 

 Jei atsakymas į šiuos klausimus yra „taip“, išbandykite šiuos veiksmus, kad modeliuotumėte sėkmingiausią elgesį:

 

 -- Būkite ramus. Sustabdykite sprendimą ir ištirkite galimybes.

 

 -- Užduokite atvirus klausimus ("Ar įmanoma, kad...?; ar pagalvojote apie...?"). Nurodykite, kas protinga žmonių mintyse ar idėjose.

 

 -- Remkitės komandos žmonių patirtimi ir įgūdžiais, įtraukdami juos į diskusiją. Pavyzdžiui, jei kas nors iš komandos gerai nuspėja, kas gali nutikti, paprašykite jų nustatyti logikos skyles.

 

 - Derinkite mintis ir patirtį, kad patobulintumėte vienas kito idėjas. Komandos pateiks geriausius atsakymus, kai niekas nėra nugalėtojas ar pralaimėtojas.

 

 Kaip atrado Henry Fonda, vienas ne toks piktas žmogus gali viską pakeisti.

 

 ---

 

 Susan Lucia Annunzio yra vadovavimo trenerė, autorė ir High Performance centro prezidentė bei generalinė direktorė. Ji taip pat yra Čikagos universiteto Booth verslo mokyklos vadybos docentė. Su ja galite susisiekti adresu reports@wsj.com.“ [1]

 

1. The New Workplace (A Special Report): The Experts --- Want to Be a Better Boss Or Team Player? Watch '12 Angry Men'. Annunzio, Susan Lucia.  Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 16 Sep 2024: R.4.

Want to Be a Better Boss Or Team Player? Watch '12 Angry Men'

 

"In the 1957 classic film "12 Angry Men," Henry Fonda, as Juror No. 8, methodically persuades the rest of the jury that the case against an 18-year-old boy accused of murdering his father isn't open and shut -- in other words, that he isn't guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The teen is spared the electric chair.

How Juror No. 8 brings 11 people around to his point of view is a master class in how one person can take a group of skeptical -- even hostile -- colleagues, and get them to work together toward a single goal, turning a low-performing team into a high-performing one. By using the right communications tactics, leaders can guide their teams to increased participation, more-thoughtful decisions and better results.

The key, as Fonda's character shows in the movie, is for leaders to model suspending judgment while exploring possibilities and assessing facts. The process of raising questions and identifying holes in colleagues' logic -- rather than dogmatically insisting on a point of view -- paves the way for collaboration and agreement.

I saw this firsthand in my role as a consultant to a large real-estate-investment company. Although better dressed and more polite, the directors at this company had been operating similarly to the jury in "12 Angry Men": They didn't listen to each other, talked over one another and took delight in pointing out what was wrong about another director's opinion.

When I had them watch the movie, they recognized their own communication style. Although they weren't yelling or making belittling, racist comments like the jury members, they came to meetings with preconceived notions to which they were determined to cling. They excelled at "gotcha," or catching others in flawed thinking or errors, which stifles discussion. By adopting the techniques that Juror No. 8 demonstrated, they learned an effective way to influence one another and to collectively get better results.

For example, in the movie, Juror No. 8 opens the door to discussion by saying, "I just want to talk. I don't know whether I believe [the boy's story] or not. Maybe I don't. Supposing we're wrong?" After watching the movie, the board members became more willing to explore possibilities instead of insisting they were right and anyone who disagreed was wrong. They asked open-ended questions such as: "What if. . .?" and "Is it possible that. . .?" and "Could we try. . .?" They also confronted their biases about who was able to contribute, recognizing that each director had unique experiences from which to draw even if he or she wasn't an expert in the subject matter being discussed.

The main takeaway for any leader, whether formal or informal, is that if you want team members to make better, more collaborative decisions, start by observing how team members interact with each other. How similar are they to the jury in "12 Angry Men"? Do they assume they're right and everyone else is wrong? Is someone dominating the discussion? Is someone being ignored? Is there a pecking order?

If the answer to these questions is "yes," try these steps to model the most-successful behaviors:

-- Stay calm. Suspend judgment and explore possibilities.

-- Ask open-ended questions ("Is it possible that. . .?; have you thought about. . .?"). Point out what's smart about people's thoughts or ideas.

-- Build on the experience and skills of the people on the team by bringing them into the discussion. For example, if someone on the team is good at predicting what can go wrong, ask them to identify holes in the logic.

-- Combine thoughts and experiences to enhance each other's ideas. Teams will come up with the best answers when no one is a winner or a loser.

Like Henry Fonda discovered, one not-so-angry person can make all the difference.

---

Susan Lucia Annunzio is a leadership coach, author and president and CEO of the Center for High Performance. She also is an associate adjunct professor of management at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business. She can be reached at reports@wsj.com." [1]

1. The New Workplace (A Special Report): The Experts --- Want to Be a Better Boss Or Team Player? Watch '12 Angry Men'. Annunzio, Susan Lucia.  Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 16 Sep 2024: R.4.