Charged for Change: Can Georgia Power the Energy Community Ministerial Council Presidency?

Energy Community 101

The Energy Community (EnC) is more than just a regional energy initiative of the EU. It already is a successful experiment in European energy market integration between the Union and its neighbouring countries. Established by the Treaty on the Energy Community (EnCT) in 2005, its core mission is to create a single regulatory space for energy (and climate) by extending EU energy, environment, decarbonisation and competition law beyond the EU’s borders. Initially focused on the Western Balkans, the Community has expanded to include Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine deepening its reach into the Eastern Partnership region and the South Caucasus. Today, the EnC unites nine Contracting Parties, many of them formerly part of the Eastern bloc, in a shared framework aimed at regulatory reform, investment attraction and regional cooperation.1 What makes the EnC unique is its hybrid normative system, designed to promote legal homogeneity among EU law, Energy Community law and domestic legislation of its members.2 Through this model, the EnC facilitates the creation of a fully integrated energy market, reinforced by common rules on competition, security of supply and sustainability (also underpinning the triple objectives of the EU’s Energy Union framework3).

The Real Power Seat: Ministerial Council (and its Presidency)

At the very heart of the Energy Community’s institutional framework, of which the Community is justifiably proud, resides the Ministerial Council as the highest decision-making body. Composed of the government ministers of the Contracting Parties and the representative of the European Union, the Council adopts binding measures, sets strategic priorities and steers the legal and policy alignment of the Community with EU laws. Pursuant to Article 50 of the EnCT, the Presidency of the Council rotates annually among the Parties, following a sequence determined by a Procedural Act. The presiding country convenes and hosts the Ministerial Council sessions, with the Secretariat preparing the meetings, and otherwise supporting to shape the agenda and facilitate the potential consensus on the complex legal reform matters.4

Even though the presidency does not grant unilateral decision-making power, it holds agenda-setting and convening authority for the presiding country to influence policy direction and highlight its regional visibility in European energy diplomacy. In other words, the presidency is giving a chance to the Contracting Party to transform from a rule-taker into a true regional “convener” being capable of framing key discussions on actual energy reform questions across south-eastern Europe.

Moreover, with the privilege of hosting official meetings on its own national premises, the presidency creates space not only for strategic leadership but also for softer expressions of national identity. Even in energy governance, a well-positioned tamada may still find ways to gear the conversation not just through formal channels but also via the cultural nuances of diplomacy.

Georgia’s Turn: Under the Spotlight of Credibility

One thing is clear: While Georgia’s presidency of the Energy Community Ministerial Council entails a diplomatic milestone, it also serves as a litmus test of country’s political will and reform credentials. The presidency may place Georgia in a position to shape regional energy priorities and advance pressing topics such as electricity market reform, regional interconnectivity and the overall green transition.

However, this opportunity also brings enormous pressure and increased scrutiny upon the country. For example, five ongoing dispute settlement procedures against Georgia whether related to electricity, oil, gas and renewable energy on non-transposition of certain legislative pieces5 risk undermining the country’s credibility as a reform driver. The presidency offers no immunity from compliance and, in fact, may even intensify expectations to resolve such disputes more rapidly.

According to the latest Annual Implementation Report, Georgia's overall implementation level stands at just 52%, underscoring the urgency for tangible progress.6 Therefore, in order to avoid limiting the presidency to a mere symbolic gesture, Georgia must demonstrate proactive leadership by initiating inclusive policy dialogue, accelerating the implementation of the acquis and setting a clear timeline for adopting new legislation - particularly in the areas of market integration, decarbonisation, energy security, environmental protection and regulatory governance.

Although initiating truly inclusive policy processes may be politically and institutionally challenging, the presidency offers a rare window to bring together regulators and international partners around shared goals. This can take place not only through informal national initiatives but also within the formal structures of the Energy Community’s Ministerial Council. As the presiding country, Georgia holds the authority to set the agenda and host the Ministerial Council meeting where EU representatives, Contracting Parties and key observers are all present.

That said, the presidency does not automatically confer any additional advantages for advancing domestic legislation. Progress in adopting and implementing reforms will remain difficult without continued political, technical and financial support from the EU and its institutions. The Energy Community can indeed act as a facilitator but reform outcomes will ultimately rely on Georgia’s willingness to actively align with European norms.

Opportunity or Missed Moment?

Arriving at a moment of domestic political uncertainty and an intentional slowdown in EU-Georgia accession talks, the 2025 presidency of the Energy Community Ministerial Council may still represent one of Georgia’s strategic tools for re-engaging with its international partners. Following the latest political events, Georgia’s current leadership may seek to restore credibility on the international stage. Energy governance, with its emphasis on rules-based cooperation and regional integration, offers a less politically “charged” but highly visible avenue to do so. Moreover, with over 80% of Georgia’s population firmly supporting EU integration, the presidency may act as a possibility to reconnect national ambition with European vision – making energy a unifying bridge between the public’s clear will and the EU institutions.

But does the Energy Community recognize this opportunity? Even during the challenges, the Energy Community may continue to offer tangible economic and geopolitical incentives which is grounded in the mutual commitment of both sides to advance the country’s energy sector development. There has undoubtedly been momentum in recent years. Even though Georgia’s energy sector still lags in modernization with outdated infrastructure, regulatory gaps and limited investment in green technologies, the country has shown increasing alignment with EU energy standards. Key legislative reforms have been passed and an Integrated National Energy and Climate Plan has been adopted.7 Yet, bigger ambition in demonstrating alignment with the objectives of the European Green Deal8 and REPowerEU9 agenda is needed to signal policy predictability to investors and further advance the green agenda. The incoming national climate law, if eventually framed ambitiously, could seal this agenda by including a climate neutrality pledge, carbon budgeting and sectoral decarbonization targets.

Not Just a Seat, Nor a Trophy - But a Test

In summary, Georgia’s presidency of the Energy Community Ministerial Council can - and should - serve as an opportunity to refocus on the fundamentals: genuine regulatory alignment, transparent governance and a credible commitment to a clean energy future. It could be a moment to demonstrate not only readiness to continue implementing reforms but also the maturity to lead them regionally - anchored in the shared values of the European project.

Nevertheless, the presidency alone does not guarantee substance. Without credible political will and concrete steps, it risks remaining largely symbolic - another missed opportunity in a time when tangible progress is urgently needed. In the absence of democratic institutions and accountable governance structures, none of these ambitions will materialize.

On another side, if used wisely, the presidency could become a platform for pragmatic engagement where mutual interests in sustainability, energy security and regional connectivity might help restore trust and cooperation with European partners. Georgia can either rise to the challenge and lead through action - or allow this opportunity to fade into rhetoric.

Therefore, at this critical juncture, the presidency is not a prize - it is a test. A test of whether or not Georgia is prepared to back its European aspirations with action. And only if that test is met with resolve and reform might it become the kind of moment to which a Georgian tamada would raise a glass - not for ceremony’s sake but in celebration of meaningful regional leadership.