4
POLITICS
GEORGIA TODAY
FEBRUARY 9 - 12, 2018
On Moral Rights of Georgia’s Foreign Policy OP-ED BY EMIL AVDALIANI
I
n geopolitics, there are no right or wrong sides. Each party pursues its own interests. Take the EU or the US. Both expand their influence in various parts of Eurasia and especially in the former Soviet space. Take Russia, which confronts European/American stratagems and does what it can to project its own influence in the region. However, in Georgia, many believe that Russia does not have the moral right to influence the country any longer (because of the difficult past), while in Russia, numerous politicians think that it is Georgia that does not have the moral right to follow a western path (because we have close historical ties). This “moralization” of international relations rooted in and influenced by a history of relations, for instance, between Georgians and Russians, is a strange and, I would argue, superfluous notion. This is particularly so as we live in an era where moral rights do not really help
in international relations. We live in an era where a strong economy, education and the military balance of power decide much of things. In other words, we live in an epoch of geopolitics, and whoever is stronger, Russia or US/EU, has its influence spread, for example, to the former Soviet space. Surely, much depends on what this or that people on the ground actually want in terms of the country’s foreign policy. But it also often happens that big actors can foster support for their cause even if it seems that there is no solid foundation for it. In Georgia, despite a decadeslong unequivocal pro-western foreign policy, some people are still pro-Russian, and no one knows how big support will be for pro-Russian policies if the EU/US decreases support of Tbilisi. We also live in the epoch when the US, major player and initiator of global projects such as the League of Nations (after WWI) and the United Nations (after WWII), introduced a new security strategy purely based on political realism. The realism where major players on the Eurasian continent are regarded with suspicion. Indeed, the new National Strategy
document of the US quite openly states that “after being dismissed as a phenomenon of an earlier century, the great power (i.e. geopolitics – E. A.) competition has returned.” It is a striking admission on behalf of the White House, and although in Europe and elsewhere, the dominant nature of the new “strategy document” might raise questions, in the South Caucasus many would think that it is more attuned to the geopolitical situation on the ground. Thus, when we talk about where Georgia’s place is in international relations, and how successful Tbilisi can be in NATO/EU integration, the main point is that the country is in the midst of a geopolitical battle based on pure military and economic calculations: a battle where moral rules serve little and where history is important, but not decisive. In the geopolitics of the modern period, as it was in earlier centuries, economic assets such as railways and pipelines could relate you closer to a country/bloc than a shared history or moral rights. We live in an interesting period when the Europe is in full march towards the former Soviet space. The process is still
Photo source: stratfor.com
slow, but it is steady. Just compare what the map this region was in 1991. A full 26 years has passed, and we already have Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia partially related to the EU. Indeed, the argument laid out here, that in geopolitics moral rights do not play a decisive role, is also reflected in the fact that Ukraine, a culturally and historically close nation to Russia, chose the EU. This very decision by Tbilisi, Kiev and Chisinau is a result of who is stronger and who can be a gravitation point for neighboring states. Being stronger in the modern world means having stronger diversified economies, and a great education system and military defense capabilities. Russia has almost all the above, but the EU has much bigger and better. This
goes to the article I wrote for the last issue of GT that only the powerful development of the Russian economy will make the country a pull for neighboring countries in the region. Until then, no morality rooted in shared history and culture of, let’s say Russians and Georgians, will save Moscow. As in earlier history, in the modern world, only those will win who are stronger militarily and economically. Emil Avdaliani teaches history and international relations at Tbilisi State University and Ilia State University. He has worked for various international consulting companies and currently publishes articles focused on military and political developments across the former Soviet space.
Presidential Candidates
OP-ED BY ZAZA JGARKAVA
A
lthough the future Head of State won’t have the right to interfere with political processes and their function will be limited to a “handshake,” the presidency still seems quite popular among Georgian politicians. Perhaps that’s why more names of those aiming for the
presidency are being discussed in the media, with a few new names added to the list of potential candidates. The list of candidates from Georgian Dream has been enriched with the active and former Foreign Affairs Ministers Mikheil Janelidze and Salome Zurabishvili, respectively. And former Defense Minister Irakli Alasania has been added to the independent candidates’ cohort. Neither party’s frontline has been left intact, as we saw updates there, too. For instance, it has been rumored that former
Parliamentary Speaker David Usupashvili will also take part in the autumn’s marathon. There are changes in the European subdivision of the United National Movement, where MP David Bakradze is being prepared for the vacant post instead of MP Giga Bokeria. Only the United National Movement is keeping their candidate’s name a secret. Apparently, they haven’t agreed on whether to sacrifice the former Foreign Affairs Minister Grigol Vashadze for presidency or not. The situation hasn’t changed in the pro-Russian camp though, where the ex-Speaker of the Parliament Nino Burjanadze is getting ready for the elections. The most prominent of these headliners would have been the issue as to whether current President Giorgi Margvelashvili would participate in the elections or not, but as usual, the latter has disappointed the media; at this point, experts can only speculate. Clearly, though, Mr. Margvelashvili is getting prepared for some battles. The draft law initiated by the government is obviously related to suppressing his presidential ambitions, as it forbids
officials from criticizing future court decisions. To put it simply, if Margvelashvili criticizes decisions issued by court, as for instance he did when the court ruling was issued against Saakashvili, he will be violating the law. It is also becoming apparent that President Margvelashvili is trying to maintain his “above-party” image, suggesting that if he still decides to participate in the elections, most likely he will do so as an independent candidate. However, the chances the current President has to gain victory in these elections is another theme, since former Tbilisi Majoral candidate Aleko Elisashvili is already considered a recognized leader in the very same segment of voters. The candidate of the “ordinary people” scored second in the local elections and surpassed the candidate from the UNM. It is difficult to foresee whether Margvelashvili will be able to become the candidate for the “ordinary people,” because he, as well as the people, are very well aware of the fact that the future president won’t be able to protect the “ordinary people” anymore. That is
most likely why political analysts advise him “not to carry the burden of the politician for a second time and not to plunge into the same river again.” True, it will be quite difficult for Margvelashvili to win the elections for a second time, especially that we now know, unlike five years ago, that billionaire Bidzina Ivanishvili won’t be on his side anymore. Despite such a “depressing” loss, polls show that Margvelashvili was still able to maintain high levels of trust and support among people. The question is whether this trust will be sufficient for him to gain victory in the upcoming elections. But even before that, Margvelashvili will have to neutralize the main hazard that the governing party is threatening him with by making “edits in the Girgvliani case.” These things might make it uncomfortable for the current President to take part in the coming elections, but the political processes could bring about such circumstances that despite what the experts forecast, winning the Presidential elections could be his one and only foreseeable chance for survival.
Ukraine Locked in “Transit Mousetrap” as Kyiv Realizes Consequences of a Quarrel with Poland BY DIMITRI DOLABERIDZE
F
ormer Minister of Transport of Ukraine, Evgeny Chervonenko, assessed today's economic situation of the country as a “transit mousetrap,” and urged Kyiv to realize the consequences of its quarrel with Poland. Chervonenko said this on news channel NewsOne that after Poland stopped allowing the transit of Ukrainian trucks, Ukraine became trapped, having previously lost contact with China because of its policy towards Russia, through which eastbound transit was carried out. “Hungarians: a long-paid departure, Romanians: tough. The Poles, who missed the most transit, locked us in a mousetrap. And do you want to quarrel further?” the Former Minister asked. Last November, Poland blocked the transit of Ukrainian trucks through the country and recently, the resulting ten-
sion between Warsaw and Kyiv has only increased. In particular, Poland has repeatedly noted that it does not agree with the policy of the Ukrainian authorities and their interpretation of historic events. So, this week, the Polish Senate passed a law criminalizing the spreading of Ukrainian nationalist ideas. In addition, since 2014, Kyiv has been pursuing a policy aimed at Russia; destroying economic, political and historical ties between countries. In particular, in the framework of the so-called “decommunization” in Ukraine, there has been a massive renaming of cities and streets; monuments are being demolished; and, last autumn, Kyiv banned the use of the term “Great Patriotic War.”