FORGOTTEN GEORGIA
Igor Muradyan
Story from Lragir.am News:
Published: 12:18:02 – 29/08/2012
The modern Georgian state is built on demonstrative logic and
configuration which renders it vulnerable, and if interpreted in
terms of its transit and service-based nature which was consciously
created by the Georgian policy makers, it predetermined the foreign
political priorities.
Certain dropping interest of the United States and NATO in the South
Caucasus helps to some extent achievement of some goals, for example
in Armenia though in strategic terms it is not in its interests. For
Azerbaijan, the dropping level of Western presence in the region may
lead to its loss of certain understanding of the perspective. Abkhazia
and South Ossetia are in the stage of flourishing of their statehood.
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic is acquiring the nature of a regional
subject.
For Georgia the indifference of the United States towards the region
or significant loss of interest will lead to a political catastrophe.
These categories may appear false or irrational but in fact this is
the basic condition for the existence of states of the states of the
South Caucasus.
The impression is that the Georgian political class has understood the
situation their country has appeared in and the Georgian leaders are
either trying to return interest in their country or to adjust to the
new situation. Most probably it should be understood that Georgia has
not lost its importance for the western community. The current level
of its importance is stagnant, the role of Georgia in the strategy
of the United States and NATO has been identified. Apparently, there
is not a higher level of interest but it means lack of perspectives
for the country and its political elite.
There are, certainly, advantages in this with relative stability
and importance in the sphere of transportation and services, Georgia
could achieve progress at economic and social levels as well on the
condition of limiting political ambitions and generation of elements
of the policy of neutrality. But most probably Georgia’s western
partners are not interested in Georgia’s position. The United States
is interested in a decorative model of Georgia with its medium-level
interest and limited responsibility of its partners for its welfare,
security and success.
For any other country of many other regions that compare to Georgia
with their area and population this model would be ideal but for
Georgia this status means gradually shrinking “cover” and parasitical
behavior. The Georgian society understands the danger and risk of
such a situation of the country, its policies and priorities, and
the current oppositional efforts might be attempts to understand the
current situation and propose something more viable and dynamic in
social terms.
However, the Georgian society is too engaged in the invented concept,
and hardly any Georgian politician will reject the current model
of existence of their country and elite. Now Georgia needs to keep
up its image of a progressive, positively developing country and a
lot of resource is spent for this. There might be a meaning in this,
especially that the Georgians tend to assess political and economic
perspectives more rationally and unfortunately the younger generation
may have reconciled with the decorative style. In fact, it is the
only basic way of earning their living.
Zviad Gamzakhurdia, the legitimate ex-president elected by the entire
nation, said, “Georgians cannot expect a lot from the world and from
themselves.” It should be noted that U.S. Republican politicians,
more than Democrats, are attached to the key agencies, the Pentagon
and the CIA, which will explain the framework of the U.S. policy for
the next one or two decades though style may differ.
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/politics27215.html