Georgia is symbolically on NATO's side in Black Sea

Recently Poland hosted the largest military exercises in NATO's history - 'Anakonda 2016'. To everyone's surprise, Georgian unit, which was perfectly prepared by the project of NATO's rapid reaction forces, withdrew from the exercises at the last moment. Although it is not clear whether it was an initiative of Tbilisi or Brussels.

One version says that the participation of Georgian army in these exercises became a stumbling block among among two groups of member countries of the Alliance, and those who did not want to irritate Russia "for nothing" took over at the last moment. And the participation of army from one of the Caucasian countries could become an additional irritant to Moscow, which was already irritated because of military maneuvers near its border in the Kaliningrad region and at the Baltic Sea.

But this does not exactly mean that NATO will be as compliant on some other issues. For example regarding the creation of the so-called "NATO group" at the Black Sea.The name is pretty nominal, because the Alliance has no armed forces - it has armies of its member countries, cooperating on the basis of statutory documents and with the help of coalition commanders.

There is idea of Romanian leadership to form joint naval group with the participation of all Black Sea countries (except for the Russian Federation) under 28 + 2 formula, in other words, with the participation of Ukraine and Georgia, which are not in the Alliance, but work closely with it in the military-political sphere. The same formula works at the Baltic Sea with the participation of Sweden and Finland, which are also not NATO members.

The idea of Bucharest was immediately supported by NATO Deputy Secretary General, the US diplomat Alexander Vershbow,. He announced that Washington favors this plan during his visit to Kiev.

Georgia paid attention to "NATO's Black Sea fleet" project, but official Tbilisi remains silent. It seems that after what happened with 'Anakonda 2016', Georgian leadership is waiting for specific decisions of the Warsaw Summit, where 28 NATO members plan to approve a program of military-political alliance at the Black Sea with the assistance of two of three countries that are not members of the Alliance.

Georgian leadership understands that despite lobbying of this project by the US and its closest allies among some Eastern European countries (although Bulgaria, for example, already opposed this), the adoption of corresponding decisions in Warsaw is not guaranteed. So Georgian Prime Minister Giorgi Kvirikashvili, Foreign Minister Mikhail Janelidze and even Defense Minister Tinatin Khidasheli, who is considered to be the most radical pro-Western politician, do not hurry to make statements and do something prematurely. On the other hand, independent experts have no doubt that if this issue will be raised, Georgia absolutely will speak "for" it. For example, this opinion was expressed by editor in chief of 'Arsenal' military-analytical magazine, Irakli Aladashvili. According to him, "Georgian naval forces have always actively participated in all exercises that were held at the Black Sea."

At the same time, Georgia's capabilities in this matter are very limited as a result of "five-day war" in 2008: first of all, Russian ground troops that have reached the Black Sea port of Poti (Georgian naval forces base), as well as Russian naval and air forces have destroyed most of the ships that were unable to evacuate to Batumi, to the zone that falls under Russian-Turkish agreements of the last century.

In addition, since that time Russian fleet blocks all movements of naval vessels from Georgian coast, without entering coastal waters, in other words, without violating the international law. But if Georgian naval forces will try to go beyond the coastal waters, Moscow may refer to a threat to the coastline of Abkhazia, and indirect violation of Medvedev-Sarkozy agreement of August 12, 2008, by Georgia. It is no wonder that after "five-day war" the US warships, which previously often visited Poti, stopped to come to this port, paying "friendly visits" only to Batumi.

So the active participation of Georgia in "NATO's Black Sea fleet" project is possible only theoretically, in the form of providing infrastructure of Poti and Batumi to locate NATO forces. But this means that NATO countries are ready for a very serious confrontation with Russia, up to such maneuvers and confrontations of naval forces that can be called direct collision. Especially since the Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Straits prohibits prolonged stay of non-Black Sea States' warships in the Black Sea.

According to common opinion of local experts, the Alliance is clearly not ready for such level of confrontation near Georgian coasts. Therefore, most likely, this could hypothetically lead to the expansion of zone of real influence of the NATO members' naval forces to Odessa, led by Mikhail Saakashvili. The former president of Georgiahas repeatedly stated that he would be glad if NATO warships would stay near Odessa port, where the ships of Ukrainian naval forces are located. "It will establish peace and will help to increase the number of tourists in Odessa," the former president happily said in an interview.

But if during the Warsaw summit they will decide to create "united fleet", Georgian naval forces will likely be able to participate in any maneuvers of NATO naval forces just like at 'Anakonda 2016': by symbolically sending two or three observers.