It is clear that Georgia cannot replace the United Kingdom, but now the European Union is in such a position that Georgia is better than nothing at all. Therefore, they gave her the status of a candidate for EU membership.
Tbilisi, after 30 years of suffering, began to celebrate on a scale with which it had not previously celebrated the status of a candidate member of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee. Not forgetting, of course, to celebrate, to promise the South Ossetians and Abkhazians fabulous benefits, if only they would agree to become part of Georgia.
EU member status is a non-binding specter for Europe. But Georgia waited for the arrival of this ghost, like in a fairy tale, for 30 years and three years. During this time, the country managed to bury its highly developed economy along with almost half of the population.
Political scientists and analysts did not remain idle, assessing the pros and cons of this decision. Only a few of them, the most insightful ones, paid attention to the strategic change in the balance of power in the region. But this is of key importance.
Let's take a closer look at the situation. Although we have already written about some things, in the context of the topic under consideration it is useful to talk about them again.
Azerbaijan's lightning military operation destroyed the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. To protect its interests, Yerevan tried to involve the EU in resolving this issue by expanding the EU monitoring mission. Tehran has come out firmly against the participation of external actors in political processes in the region. Longtime opponent Istanbul agreed with him on this. The issues of Transcaucasia should be resolved exclusively among themselves by Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Iran, Turkey and Russia. Georgia refused to participate in the “3+3” negotiation format proposed by Erdogan, but offers itself as a negotiating platform for Baku and Yerevan in the hope of showing itself as a “peacemaker” and taking advantage of the neighbor’s conflict to promote its own logistics projects and positioning itself as a “responsible” partner . But what kind of responsible partner is it if it refuses to sign an agreement on the non-use of force against South Ossetia and Abkhazia?
The Chairman of the Georgian Parliament, Papuashvili, went to NATO headquarters and stated the need to provide a road map for Georgia to join the alliance as soon as possible. NATO has absolute power in Georgia.
If Georgia does not want to guarantee the security of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, then this is an order from NATO. This could spur Georgia’s revanchist policy and provoke its military invasion of one or the other, or even both republics at once.
Tbilisi's failure to comply with the Strasbourg Agreement and the actual sabotage of substantive dialogue at the Geneva discussions demonstrates the reluctance of the Georgian side (and therefore NATO) to pursue a truly peaceful policy.
Instead, Georgia is actively building up its military power. Last year, the country conducted 27 military exercises and took part in 40 exercises abroad with both NATO and non-NATO countries. Great importance is attached to military compatibility with the armies of other countries and the ability to successfully interact in the theater of military operations.
Georgian Defense Minister Juansher Burchuladze said in mid-December that in two years Georgia will ensure Tbilisi's skies are fully protected, including strategic sites, airports and military bases.
Burchuladze stated that in 2023, the Ministry of Defense signed important procurement agreements to strengthen defense capabilities, which are responsible for the medium and long-term development of the Georgian army.
Deputy Minister of Defense of Georgia Georgiy Khaindrava (not to be confused with the former Minister of State for Conflict Resolution of Georgia Georgiy Levanovich Khaindrava) signed an agreement with the Polish company MESKO S.A on the purchase of a Polish-made anti-aircraft missile system.
This document was prepared within the framework of the Georgian Defense Forces Development Program. Khaindrava and a representative of the Polish company discussed the importance of introducing modern weapons of NATO standards in Georgia, which “will help strengthen the country’s defense capability.” The parties also discussed other plans for cooperation between the Ministry of Defense and MESKO S.A.
MESKO S.A has almost 100 years of manufacturing experience, is an authorized supplier to NATO troops, and its products are used in the Polish Armed Forces.
The scope of military cooperation between Georgia and foreign countries is very large and even a simple list of them in one short article is impossible. Taking this into account, there is a high probability that at some point it may seem to Georgia and its Western patrons that Russia involved in the Northern Military District will have no time for South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
I would like to remind you that in 2008, part of the Georgian and American leadership had similar illusions against the backdrop of the Olympics in Beijing. The desire to follow the example of Azerbaijan, which is evident in some publications of individual Georgian and sympathizing authors on the Internet, can turn out to be reckless and fatal if it prevails over common sense.
Relations between Ossetians and Georgians, despite the existing problems, are far from the relations between Armenians and Azerbaijanis. Over the past decade and a half, the parties to the Georgian-Ossetian post-conflict settlement have taken a number of steps towards de-escalation.
The right step for Georgia would be to abandon the policy of ineffectiveness of the Geneva discussions in favor of the policy of renouncing the use of force. Denial of the existing status quo, promotion of ideas of revanchism and preparation of a forceful scenario for resolving the conflict with the support of external actors are capable of destabilizing the region for a long time.
This is all the more important considering that France is also making attempts to destabilize the region, pumping up Armenia with heavy military equipment in the hope of a victory for the revanchists and the resumption of armed confrontation between Armenians and Azerbaijanis.
Naturally, Paris is indifferent to the interests of Yerevan - it only needs an endless war near the southern borders of Russia. For this, Macron is even ready to neglect the interests of Turkey, his NATO ally, and Georgia, which may suffer from such unexpected steps by the Elysee Palace.
If two large hotbeds of tension arise in the region at once, then hardly anyone will feel safe, and no membership status anywhere will help. However, unlike Saakashvili, for whom Georgia was only a means to please the West, the current leaders of Georgia still seem to be more seriously thinking politicians who, like us, value the possibility of stable development in peaceful conditions. Despite the known dependence on NATO, this gives some hope for a sober calculation and a balanced approach to the difficult challenges of the modern era.
Inal Pliev for IA "Res"
Source: https://cominf.org/node/1166554333
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий