Orkhan Sattarov exclusively to Vestnik Kavkaza
When, a couple of months ago, Georgian Prime Minister Bidzina Ivanishvili decided to seriously take up the fulfilment of his promises to halve the rates for energy and gas, and the new Minister of Economy of Georgia began to speak of a possible revision of contracts with the State Oil Company of Azerbaijan, a major player in the gas market of Georgia, a fairly calm reaction followed from Baku. President of SOCAR Rovnag Abdullayev, a well-experienced man in the energy market, said only: "They are in euphoria. They have yet to take up their offices and examine the documents. The real statements will be made after that." This was true: after a meeting between Rovnag Abdullayev and Bidzina Ivanishvili on November 9, the issue of renegotiating was safely forgotten. Ivanishvili said after the meeting: "We talked about our relationship, which is very good, and about how we should deal with our neighboring country. At the same time, we discussed the summits, in particular, with the president. You have to see what kind of a nice building SOCAR has in Georgia. It is very well-designed, we may have no buildings like this,” Ivanishvili said. As for tariffs on gas and oil, according to the prime minister, there was no specific conversation on the subject at the time, although "the government will try to reduce them,” Business Georgia reports.
Ivanishvili is a new man in politics, and for many people he remains a "dark horse." The position of such political powers like Russia, the U.S. and the European Union concerning Ivanishvili is not clear yet. In the EU, the measures against the supporters of President Saakashvili undertaken by the new government are watched with suspicion and concern, and against this background the great powers do not fully believe in the sincere interest of Tbilisi in further European integration, despite the assurances of the Georgian leadership and the fact that the first foreign visit by Ivanishvili as prime minister was made to Brussels. In the U.S., the leadership was surprised to learn that the prime minister of a small Caucasian country had decided to postpone his visit to Washington, scheduled for late November, to next year, because it was necessary to adjust the "vertical of power" in the country. It is not known when the visit of Ivanishvili to the U. S. will take place. Russia has heard signals from Tbilisi about the desire to normalize relations and to bring the issues of Abkhazia and South Ossetia into the framework of bilateral relations and is now awaiting concrete action to be taken by the Georgian leadership. However, the ability to establish effective cooperation between Tbilisi and Moscow, when one side calls the other an "occupier," remains in question. We can hardly talk about the possibility of a radical change of the Georgian foreign policy vector. Probably Ivanishvili is now trying to restore the room for foreign manoeuvre lost by Saakashvili after the 2008 war. But the fact that Russia officially recognized the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, as well as the position of Georgia, narrows the powers of the prime minister to implement this task, and so the Georgians are trying to act in other areas.
Representatives of the new Georgian government in a short amount of time managed to provoke ambiguous reactions from their regional partners - Baku and Ankara – by their controversial statements, including even the suspicion that Tbilisi is ready to act to the detriment of their interests. Thus, in early November, the minister for reintegration Paata Zakareishvili was "distinguished" when he stated in an interview to the newspaper "Kommersant" that he supported the unconditional opening of the Georgian-Abkhaz part of the railway with Russia. This was a part of the policy of “de-isolation of Abkhazia," Zakareishvili said, unlike his predecessors, postponing the issue of the return of Georgian refugees to Abkhazia. It would seem that this issue is especially Georgian. But the idea was strongly supported in Armenia, because Yerevan is also concerned about the way out of the isolation in which it is now as a result of its policy concerning Nagorno-Karabakh. The opening of the Georgian-Abkhazian section of the railroad would open to Armenia a direct connection with Russia. Furthermore, it would enable official Yerevan to insist in negotiations over the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in the OSCE Minsk Group format on the opening of transport communications with Azerbaijan without preconditions (liberation of the occupied territories around Nagorno-Karabakh and the return of refugees), following "the example of Georgia". Moscow would also be interested in this step by Tbilisi, as it would be able to get a direct corridor for supplies to its military base in Gyumri, eliminating the need for a costly route through Iran.
Baku, of course, perceived the words of Zakareishvili neutrally at the official level, without interfering in the internal political issues in Georgia. But the attitude was negative among the experts and the media, sending an indirect signal of the actual mood in Azerbaijan. In mid-November Zakareishvili responded to harsh criticism of his initiative on the part of the political scientists of Baku, calling their comments "irresponsible", and also expressed his satisfaction with the "neutral position" of the Azerbaijani officials. On November 27, the Georgian minister for reintegration at the meeting with the Ambassador of Azerbaijan to Georgia, Azer Huseyn, was able to learn about the position of Baku on the issue. Coincidentally, the next day, November 28, Zakareishvili announced that the issue of renewal of railway traffic through Abkhazia was removed from the agenda. "This topic has been closed almost immediately after the Abkhaz side has not shown interest in it, i.e. as soon as this idea was sounded,” the Georgian minister said.
Immediately after the issue of the opening of railway communication with Russia through Abkhazia settled down, Ivanishvili’s government raised another hot topic. As VK reported a few days ago, in an interview with a local newspaper "Resonance" Ivanishvili said that "the construction of the Kars-Akhalkalaki railroad raises a number of questions. Maybe I would have to ask a question about it during my visit to Azerbaijan and gently explain to a friendly country that at some point it may not be good for us, and the problem requires settlement". According to the prime minister, the process will not be easy, since the railway construction has already begun. "Before construction it would have been easier, and now it is hard. We have to respect our neighbors and the commitments made by the previous government, but at the same time there is a question which needs answers. Our ancestors left us a geographically unique place, and we need to take care of it and properly use it, to make the best use of all our options,” the Georgian Prime Minister said.
This news has also caused a storm of positive emotions in the Armenian community of experts, since the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railway left Armenia in the backyard of a major regional project in the South Caucasus promoted by Azerbaijan, which will connect the region with Europe and become an important transportation hub between Asia and Europe. Yerevan is extremely sensitive about this project, which inevitably will significantly reduce the transit role of Armenia, expressing its outrage at the construction of BTK at all levels - with its launch the economic isolation of the country will grow even more.
Many analysts have interpreted Ivanishvili's statement on the eve of his visit to Baku on December 26 as a desire to revise Georgia's participation in the project or get additional financial preferences. But the denial or revision of previous agreements by Georgia would unleash the hands of Azerbaijan for symmetric actions in other areas of Georgian-Azerbaijani relations. Thus, the agency "Regnum" spread information, citing unnamed sources in the government of Azerbaijan, that Baku may revise the price of gas for Georgia. "Azerbaijan exports gas to Georgia for a ridiculous price of $200 per thousand cubic meters; such prices do not exist anywhere in the world. But Azerbaijan, given its strategic relations with Georgia, always made such concessions. In addition, the investments of Azerbaijan in Georgia amounted to $3 billion. Our country is one of the major investors in the Georgian economy. Therefore we do not understand the statement by Ivanishvili that the construction of the Kars-Akhalkalaki railway as part of the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars raises certain questions. Georgia in fact has not invested a single cent in the construction of the road, all the costs were paid by Azerbaijan; moreover, thousands of Georgian citizens were employed in this project. Georgia rather benefited from the construction of the BTK than lost, in connection with it. Georgia is interested in maintaining strategic relations with Azerbaijan,” the source said.
Realizing that the atmosphere around his ambiguous statement is heating up, the Georgian prime minister decided to defuse the situation before his visit to Baku. "Georgia has no plans to suspend construction of the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars," Ivanishvili said on December 24 according to 1news.az. At the same time, the Prime Minister expressed concern that, after the Kars-Akhalkalaki-Tbilisi-Baku railway comes into operation, the turnover of the currently operating railway lines of Georgia will reduce. "The project is interesting; however, in the first phase there are economic issues. Specifically, there are concerns that with the coming into operation of the Kars-Akhalkalaki-Tbilisi-Baku railway then freight turnover on the old country roads, as in Georgian ports, will be reduced," Ivanishvili said. He expressed hope that the problem will be resolved, but Ivanishvili will not discuss the project during the visit to Baku.
Watching the activity of the new Georgian leadership and its controversial statements, it seems that Ivanishvili is trying to build equidistant relations with all regional and inter-regional partners. Involuntarily, a parallel with some elements of the unsuccessful foreign policy concept of Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu – "no problems with neighbors" – comes to mind. Today, some experts speak with irony about the Turkish phenomenon of "zero neighbors without problems." Does the new government team in Georgia want to adopt a similar concept? According to the experience of recent history, the complex geopolitical realities of the Caucasus can hardly be suitable for such foreign experiments.
