Georgia doesn’t want to be bargaining chip in relations between NATO and Russia

Interview by Georgy Kalatozishvili, Tbilisi. Exclusively to Vestnik Kavkaza

The next summit of NATO will take place on September 4-5, 2014, in South Wales. NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen announced that there “we would mark the end of our ISAf mission in late 2014 and a new stage of cooperation in Afghanistan. We will take further steps on modernization of our alliance to stay strong, flexible, and ready for any security challenges. And we will confirm a link between Europe and North America, which is a source of our power, security, and success.” However, Tbilisi hopes that Georgia will get the MAP on joining NATO at the summit. Is it possible in the context of the Ukrainian events? Political scientist Petre Mamradze and military expert Teona Akubardia answered this question for Vestnik Kavkaza.

Vestnik Kavkaza: Petre, is it realistic for Georgia to get the MAP in Wales? Can the Ukrainian events influence a decision by NATO members?

Petre Mamradze: Of course they can influence and they influence it now. The rhetoric becomes stronger. However, it is unlikely that Georgia will get the MAP. Today NATO has to demonstrate that the alliance pays attention to post-Soviet countries and try to support them, in the context of recent decisions and acts by the Russian government. The necessity is connected with their image cultivation. But the real rapprochement between Georgia and NATO, especially full membership, is out of question.

As for the MAP which is called a road map, I think the topic is exaggerated, as MAP is a phantom which doesn’t require anything. NATO members take no responsibilities on security of the country which gets the road map.

Vestnik Kavkaza: Teona, are there signs that leading European powers – France and Germany – will change their position on reasonability of granting the MAP to Georgia, after the Ukrainian crisis, for not to split with Moscow absolutely, as the Caucasus is as important region for Russia as Crimea and Ukraine?

Teona Akubarida: The question on NATO expansion to the Caucasus was one of main factors of a start of the August war in 2008. The then-President Dmitry Medvedev also said about it. As for the MAP, in this case positions of France and Germany were the most important. I would call them skeptical countries. In light of recent events over Ukraine probably they will soften their stand on rapprochement with Georgia. At least I don’t expect any conflicts between Russia and Georgia over the MAP. Our Prime Minister Irakly Garibashvili stated that there is no threat for Georgia and the Georgian authorities intend to improve security and guarantees of the international society in the context of Ukrainian events. Several American congressmen addressed the White House to grant the MAP to Georgia. The issue may be included into agenda of the upcoming summit. What a final decision will be, time will tell.

It is interesting that officials give more careful predictions. For example, the head of the parliamentary committee for international affairs Victor Dolidze  who stands for joining NATO made a strange statement: “We won’t agree with the exchange ‘Crimea to Russia, Georgia to NATO’.” I think the statement was made to exclude overestimated expectations and Moscow’s indignation. It is not clear whether the West wants to split with Russia because of the MAP, while Georgia doesn’t want to be token money again.