“External forces will propose new schemes for reshuffling until 2028, but they should not forget that legal proceedings over banning their agent parties lie ahead!” Georgian Dream MP Levan Machavariani wrote on social media.

According to him, “after foreign forces became convinced that it was impossible to whitewash the bloody past of the United National Movement itself, and after they lost every election to the Georgian people by betting solely on the UNM, they artificially created several new parties.” In this context, Machavariani refers to Giorgi Gakharia’s party and the party For New.

“Unfortunately, the vast majority of opposition parties in our country are agent groups subordinate to foreign forces, which we call the ‘collective National Movement.’ They are controlled through a single vertical. Their patrons have repeatedly attempted to reshuffle their agents into various configurations in order to deceive our society, but every such attempt has ended in failure. Of course, the so-called wealthy NGOs are also an integral part of this network.

“After foreign forces became convinced that it was impossible to whitewash the bloody past of the United National Movement itself, and after they lost every election to the Georgian people by betting solely on the UNM, they artificially created several new parties.

“Gakharia’s party is one such example. He was brought back into politics when, through Charles Michel’s mediation, a 43% threshold was set for the 2021 elections. According to his undisclosed message, he claimed that Bidzina Ivanishvili’s political project was behind the party. He was spreading this message among Georgian Dream supporters. The calculation of external forces was for Gakharia to draw away our voters and prevent Georgian Dream from crossing the threshold.

“When, following the 2021 elections, Gakharia openly and without concealment formed coalitions with the ‘National Movement’ in four municipalities, his ‘collective National Movement’ affiliation became so obvious that his foreign patrons had to radically change something.

“For the crucial 2024 elections, another reshuffling of the agents’ configuration began. Lelo and Gakharia’s party were to be distanced as much as possible from the ‘collective National Movement,’ and they were supposed to attract so-called neutral and undecided voters.

“At the same time, the ‘National Movement’ and its direct affiliates were supposed to work with radical voters; Lelo’s segment was supposed to consist of ‘semi-radicals,’ while Gakharia’s party was supposed to position itself as a ‘supposedly constructive’ force.

“To guarantee the full retention of the radical voters of the United National Movement itself, the party For New was also created.

“In this way, the agent network operating under a single vertical was maximally diversified.

“The results of the 2025 elections were less important to the agents’ foreign patrons. The minimum objective was to continue the process of separating Lelo and Gakharia from the ‘collective National Movement,’ while the maximum objective was the October 4 revolution. The rest of the agents were instructed to boycott the elections, while only these two parties were allowed to participate. In this way, they once again attempted to create the illusion that these parties were developing an independent agenda.

“As I have already mentioned above, according to the plan of external forces, Lelo was supposed to be positioned in the eyes of society as a ‘semi-radical’ force, while Gakharia was to be presented as a ‘supposedly constructive’ force. Accordingly, they were also supposed to have corresponding messages regarding the revolutionary plan of October 4.

“Lelo’s position was to participate in the elections in the morning and attend the ‘anti-government protest’ in the evening — ‘semi-radical.’

“Gakharia’s position was to refuse to join the ‘anti-government protest’ — ‘supposedly constructive.’

“I would also remind you that Lelo was made to give up its parliamentary mandates together with the ‘National Movement’ and For New, as befitted radicals, while Gakharia was instructed to retain his mandates, as befitted a ‘supposedly constructive’ force. Only after the planned October 4 revolution failed was Gakharia instructed to use his parliamentary mandates.

“It is noteworthy that two weeks after the failed revolution, the foreign patrons officially had Gakharia’s party issue a statement regarding entering parliament.

“Another continuation of the process of separating Lelo and Gakharia from the ‘collective National Movement’ in the eyes of our society was the creation of the so-called opposition alliance in March. According to the plans of their foreign patrons, these parties were supposed to remain outside the so-called alliance, while the agent parties participating directly in the alliance were supposed to create artificial noise. Everything developed according to plan. The radical parties united by the so-called alliance attracted public attention through the noise, while ‘semi-radical’ Lelo and ‘supposedly constructive’ Gakharia once again remained outside the spotlight.

“For foreign patrons, two issues proved so fundamental and existential that they needed the entire diversified agent network under their vertical to mobilize to such an extent that they themselves exposed their entire network. Given the importance of these issues to foreign forces, all agent parties and wealthy NGOs had to demonstrate extreme unity and solidarity, both in their messaging and actions. At that point, the risks of exposing their diversification strategy became secondary to them.

“The first issue is Georgia’s transparency law. The adoption of this law limited, to a certain extent, the ability of external forces to circulate black money in Georgian politics. Consequently, their ability to finance their agents decreased. In my previous posts, I discussed at length and in detail their campaign against this issue through the fraudulent ‘Russian law’ narrative.

“The second issue is the so-called ‘anti-LGBT propaganda’ law, which establishes two sexes and prohibits LGBT propaganda, particularly the introduction of this agenda into schools and kindergartens. The foreign patrons of the agents attach such importance to the spread of ultraliberal ideology and to convincing society that there are more than two sexes and that a woman can become a man and vice versa, that they preferred to place not only radical and semi-radical parties, but even the ‘supposedly constructive’ Gakharia on the side of LGBT propaganda.

“The majority of our citizens have already deciphered all these configurations of the agent opposition. This is also demonstrated by the fact that Lelo’s number of voters was cut in half, while Gakharia’s was reduced by two-thirds in 2025 compared with the 2024 elections.

“External forces will propose new schemes for reshuffling until 2028. However, they should not forget that legal proceedings over banning their agent parties lie ahead!” Machavariani wrote.