by David Stepanyan, Yerevan. Exclusively for VK
Agavni Karakhanyan, Director of the Institute of Public Society and Regional Development, told VK about changes and geopolitical alterations of Georgia in the South Caucasus Region after the elections.
- Victory of Georgian Dream at the parliamentary elections in Georgia means upcoming changes in the country. What changes should Armenia and Georgia expect in the light of changes in Georgian-Russian relations?
- The mentioned changes in Russian-Georgian relations are not so obvious. I disagree with the idea that victory of opposition in Georgia would bring radical changes in foreign policy. What grounds do we have to expect changes? Only persistently built up thesis about a new player on the Georgian political field Ivanishvili as a “Kremlin project?” The topic of “Russian footprints” of Ivanishvili was dropped on the field of electoral political battles by Georgian authorities and has no documental proof, it was verbal, that is messages of opposition leader and his supporters about the coalition’s “restoration of diplomatic relations with Russia and will solve the problem with Russia for sure”. But if many see “Russian recurrent tunes” in these statements, why isn’t the “transoceanic connection” so obvious? This provokes an analogue with the “American dream” of Georgian. During the electoral campaign, the opposition leader emphasized prospects of cooperation with the US and Europe on many occasions, stressing on the fact that he “quit his business in Russia for the sake of freedom of Georgia”. But there are reasons to believe that Saakashvili would not just give up his power. He is seen off too early. His team has not expired its political potential. Although the society is disappointed and tired of the same people, Saakashvili’s party has a resource of power it may fully use until the presidential elections. No surprise, Saakashvili said in his video message that he was planning to assist the parliamentary majority in electing the prime minister and forming a new government. For example, there is the official admission of defeat which will surely be followed by congratulations for the former political opponent “who will take the fate of Georgia in his hands with hopesfor further democratization and the course for integration in Europe and NATO. I believe Ivanishvili will take the lead, but the electoral promises, as it often happens, would be forgotten. Nothing spoils opposition as much as power. So let’s not be hasty. Let’s wait.
- Acknowledgement of the fact that all problems of South Ossetia and Abkhazia caused by the nationalistic pro-American course of Mikheil Saakashvili develops. What prospects of mutually acceptable settlement of conflicts do you expect with the change of power in Georgia?
- I would like to warn against over-exaggerated expectations in this issue. The harsh, unconstructive policy of Saakashvili towards South Ossetia and Abkhazia pushed them away from Georgian influence, it is a fact. Regarding changes in this policy, lack of a political program of the opposition bloc forces us to focus on the electoral rhetoric of its leaders. There is not a hint in declarations that Georgia was planning to “free” Abkhazia and South Ossetia and not considering them part of its territory. It is hard to imagine victorious opposition to announce that now, when it has taken power. Lack of harsh nationalistic rhetoric and systemless of the oppositionist bloc which will most likely split, does not mean that opposition leaders are unfamiliar with the sense and understanding of national interests. When developing policy for Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the best formula is that the problem remains, but relations develop. Such serious issues are not resolved instantly. It takes time. With account of the fact that the process is bilateral, the position of the opposite side of conflicts cannot be neglected. For example, Saakashvili is more suitable for Abkhazians, because chances that he will find common grounds with Moscow are minimal.
- On September 23, the leader of the Georgian Dream said that his coalition was considering restoration of railway and road connection with Abkhazia. The declaration is of great interest for Armenia. What are its prospects after the victory of the bloc at the elections on October 1?
- It is hard to overestimate the role of restoring communications with Abkhazia for Armenia. It would not be an exaggeration to say that opening railway and road connection through Abkhazia will be vital for our country. Talks and projects on restoration of old communications in the region were numerous. But the “railway cordon” on this way formed by the Georgian president cannot be broken yet. I remind that one of supporters of opening railway connection through Abkhazia is Turkey, a rapidly growing economy interested in direct access to Russian markets, better to say the southern markets of Russia. It may only be realized with restoration of communications through Armenia, restoration of the Kars-Gyumri Railway line.
- Russia and Iran will soon sign an agreement on construction of the Kazvin-Resht-Astara Railway. Besides the RR, Azerbaijani Railways and Iranian Railways are taking part in the project. Have the elections results in Georgia introduced their changes to the geopolitical project?
- It is all not that simple. The Communication corridor is always essential for Moscow and Tehran, because this is not a matter of economic pay-off, but strategic dividends. In this context, any communication project is justified. The fact that any strategic route would bypass Armenia is a matter of concerns of Yerevan only. It is hard to imagine a situation where any regional player would quit strategic calculations and projects just because someone else does not fit in it. And finally, I would not link relate changes of the North-South Corridor’s direction and Armenian involvement in the project with the switch of power in Georgia. The switch of power presupposes certain offset of accents, maybe priorities, but not scrapping of state interests.
- Georgia is the key transit state for Armenia and Azerbaijan. What geopolitical transformations in South Caucasus should be expected with the switch of power in Georgia?
- Geopolitical transformations in South Caucasus are relation to possible changes of political economy in foreign affairs of Georgia associated with the personality and achievements of the opposition leader and upcoming prime minister. Possible changes of communications of Georgia and Abkhazia are realistic and have the right for existence, because they are base on economic pragmatism, interest, experience of the future prime minister as a businessman and prospect of economic configuration of the region. Economic motivation of Ivanishvili as a financial and business activist will affect political decisions. We have the right to expect new readings of foreign economic policy of Georgia in the region and scrapping of the harsh policy of isolation of conflict republics and stress on transit dividends of the current authorities of Georgia. With doubtless disappointment of Azerbaijan with smoothening of Georgia of harsh isolation of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Turkish support of plans to restore communications in South Caucasus should not be ruled out. Armenia will be inevitably involved in the adjusted format of economic relations of the region.
