#8 - RW 8-27-04 - RW Home
RIA Novosti
August 26, 2004
IS MIKHAIL SAAKASHVILI SET TO FIGHT RUSSIA?

MOSCOW (RIA Novosti commentator Arseny Palievsky) - The statement made by Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili to the effect that his country was on the verge of war sounded like an explosion in the lull in the Georgian-Ossetian conflict zone. The Georgian leader stressed that "if the war begins, it will be a war between Georgia and Russia, and not between Georgians and Ossetians." Saakashvili also accused Russia of attacking Georgian forces in South Ossetia. "Those were Russian forces; there is no doubt about that," he said.

The reaction of the Russian Foreign Ministry was predictable. "The militarist rhetoric has been used increasingly frequently in official statements from Tbilisi," said the diplomats. We have heard hints about and accusations of the "northern neighbour," who is alleged to be the reason behind the problems and conflicts in Georgia. But the latest statements are seen in Moscow as a complete loss of any sense of proportion, bordering on irresponsibility. There are serious reasons for this conclusion. For example, there was the recent promise to show the world "the bodies of the killed Cossacks," but this promise was not fulfilled.

Just like many other elements from the statements by Georgian officials about the actions of Russians in the Georgia-Ossetia conflict zone, the report of mysterious Cossacks has not been confirmed by facts and hence promptly forgotten, especially because new accusations of this kind are provided with incredible speed. "The failure of the opportunist military actions in South Ossetia has revealed even more clearly the acute social and economic problems of Georgia. It would be reasonable to direct one's energy towards their solution, rather that towards finding the non-existent 'external enemy' or trying to disrupt the work of the Russian Embassy in Tbilisi," reads the official comment from the Russian Foreign Ministry.

Yevgeny Kozhokin, director of the Russian Institute of Strategic Studies, told RIA Novosti: "The Georgian president's position is deeply contradictory. On the one hand, he says that Georgia will become much stronger economically in three years, and these words are accepted with sympathy and interest in Russia, which would gain from the economic prosperity of its neighbour. On the other hand, it is impossible to boost the economy while balancing on the edge of war."

Mr Kozhokin believes that "none of the statements made by the Georgian leaders about South Ossetia's or Russia's guilt in the deterioration of the situation is true." To prove his point, he cites the fact that South Ossetia has been living openly in the past decade. Its citizens travelled to Georgia and Georgians came to South Ossetia quite freely. There was even a bus line between them. In point of fact, tension was gradually subsiding when the situation flared up again after Mikhail Saakashvili came to power in Georgia. There was only one change in the game - Mikhail Saakashvili replacing Eduard Shevardnadze; all the other players, both in Tskhinvali and Moscow, remained the same. They see no reasons for adding fuel to the Ossetian fire, but Mikhail Saakashvili explicitly and repeatedly declared his reasons for doing this.

"In my opinion, it would be in the interests of Georgia, South Ossetia and, of course, Russia if the Georgian president addressed above all the task of his country's economic development," said Mr Kozhokin. "If he creates this prerequisite, it will become much easier to solve all other problems."

Other experts agree that the anti-Russian statements made by Mikhail Saakashvili are nothing more than bluff and an attempt to curry favour with the voters and the West after the failure of his blitzkrieg in South Ossetia.

Anatoly Tsiganok, head of the Military Forecasting Centre, says: "The Georgian President knows that dealing with the main priority of Georgia - the restoration of the economy - is a long and thankless task." And so he rattles his sabre and presents Russia as an external enemy in order to rally the nation. In reality, Mr Saakashvili does not need an armed confrontation with Russia. He knows that the Georgian army has only a few battalions and it would be madness for them to fight the powerful armed forces of Russia, said the expert.

Sergei Kazennov, geopolitics section head at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences, told RIA that Mr Saakashvili's attempts to reform the Georgian economy and fight corruption have not brought any spectacular results so far. In this situation, "the Georgian president had to use other tools, in particular, the external enemy trick. Kokoity is not suitable for the image, but Moscow certainly is."

The militant statements made by the Georgian president and his striving to create an enemy image of Russia can earn him some short-lived political dividends. But in the medium perspective, let along in the long run, a quarrel with a neighbour like Russia cannot benefit Georgia, even though he claims to be a patriot.

Mikhail Saakashvili only talks about a new way for Georgia and puts the blame for the suffering of the Georgian people on their past idols - presidents Gamsakhurdia and Shevardnadze. In point of fact, his nationalist rhetoric and his policy vis-a-vis South Ossetia and Abkhazia differ but little from the line pursued by his predecessors. Moscow would like to have new relations with a new Georgia, rather than a repetition of the past.