Archival Power and the Soviet Legacy in Contemporary Georgia

Abstract

This article examines the role of Soviet archives in shaping both memory politics and democratic development in contemporary Georgia. Drawing on theories of archival power, memory regimes, and the relationship between knowledge and power, the study challenges the conventional understanding of archives as neutral repositories of historical records. Instead, it conceptualizes archives as institutions that actively shape what societies remember, forget, and contest. Building on insights from archival studies and memory scholarship, the article argues that access to archives is not merely a question of historical memory but also a matter of transparency, accountability, institutional openness, and democratic governance. The article explores how the legacy of Soviet archival practices continues to influence the production of historical knowledge and public engagement with the Soviet past in post-Soviet Georgia. Particular attention is paid to the governance of Soviet-era archives, access to former security service records, and the relationship between archival policies and broader efforts to address historical injustices. By linking archival governance to the concept of memory regimes, the study demonstrates how state institutions exercise influence over the boundaries of historical knowledge and public remembrance. The findings reveal a non-linear process of archival transformation characterized by both progress and setbacks. While successive governments have formally committed themselves to archival openness and have introduced measures aimed at modernizing archival institutions, researchers and practitioners frequently describe the system as “modernized but Soviet in nature.” Persistent bureaucratic obstacles, limited access to sensitive collections, restrictive interpretations of legal provisions, and the survival of Soviet administrative practices continue to constrain meaningful access to archival materials. Consequently, formal openness has not always resulted in substantive transparency. The article argues that the politics of archives represents a critical yet often overlooked dimension of both memory politics and democratic transition. The Georgian case illustrates that struggles over archival access are simultaneously struggles over historical interpretation, state accountability, and the democratization of knowledge. By integrating archival theory with scholarship on memory politics and post-Soviet transformation, the study advances an understanding of archives as active political institutions whose governance shapes not only collective memory but also the quality of democratic development in societies confronting difficult pasts.