Tweet
GEORGIA'S POLITICAL MODEL: "CYPRUSIZATION" OR "LEBANONIZATION"
Daily Georgian Times
October 14.10.2008 08:40:05
Georgia
Political processes in Georgia have acquired quite dangerous trends
that can be somewhat difficult to forecast. Russian aggression has
given rise to a new geopolitical benchmark not only on the regional,
but also on the global level. The establishment of a new world order
has been initiated, in which the US hegemony is going downward and may
even be experiencing a total collapse. This is not only in military
and political terms, but also because of the onset of a very deep
financial crisis and possible collapse.
The biggest geostrategic failure of the current Bush administration
is indicative of the deterioration of the USA military and political
status in Iraq, and most notably in Afghanistan. There, NATO is
relinquishing control over the situation, and very soon we may witness
the entry of traditional Taliban movements in this country. This
is accompanied by the fact that Karzai, Afghanistan's president,
has made an official address to Mula Omar, leader of the Taliban
Movement, and called on the initiation of strategic cooperation and
the participation of Mula Omar in the Afghan government.
Against this background, in a geopolitical context signs of
tri-polarism are emerging - the players being the USA, the Russian
Federation and the EU. The most interesting aspect is that the new
tri-polarism has started from the Caucasus region and will be developed
within this region. Such factors have been identified as well, even in
terms of the distribution of a new balance of powers at the regional
level. This can be seen in the initiation of the "Caucasus political
platform" and the introduction of new regional leaders.
Geostrategic positions of the Russian Federation in the Caucasus region
have obviously increased; Russia's is allied with Iran and indirectly
with Turkey. Apparently, in the context of geopolitical redistribution,
a new trend of management of conflict spots can be observed. This
was demonstrated in the resolution of the Karabagh conflict, when
Turkey decided to take on a more active mediator role and initiate the
process of tightening ties with Armenia. The processes, of course,
will have a negative effect on Georgia, which can lose its unique
geopolitical status and become just a certain geopolitical "adjunct."
If the "Gordiev knot" of Turkey-Armenia and Armenia-Azerbaijan opens,
which will be followed by the modification of relations between Russia
and Turkey, Turkey and Iran, and Azerbaijan and Iran, the general
political background of the region will change entirely. In which
case, the Georgian-American strategic modality may become secondary
and serve as a major opposing factor to new geopolitical coalitions.
Such a complicated geopolitical modality for Georgia is already
becoming a reality. The development following the August 7 events
indicates the possibility that such a scenario may emerge. By
approximation, geopolitical transformation of the Caucasus region may
become very similar to the model of the Near East region, which was
identified at the end of 70's and early 80's. In such a case, however
disappointing, Georgia may be destined to repeat the experiences of
Lebanon, which had the most acute problems of territorial integrity,
domestic policy disorder, a difficult regional political situation
and direct involvement of the International Community at the national
and regional levels, e.g. NATO, EU, USA, USSR and the UN.
Exactly during this most complex geopolitical background, Georgia tries
to balance relations with all regional powers, of course, excluding
Russia (due to objective reasons) and identify a new geopolitical niche
in the processes being developed around the country. "Mechanical moves"
of Georgian diplomacy that are not supported by specific analytical
approaches (such a negative trend has become especially visible today)
further aggravates the issue of successfully resolving of the country's
foreign policy issues. (Not only is there the absence of a relatively
decent-functioning strategic research center, but even the state
structures do not take due efforts in this direction.) But this is a
tactical weakness, and can be fixed relatively easily. The strategic
level geopolitical stance is characterized by the trend of being out of
Georgia's control, since is determined by the power centers which have
global and regional influence, and are duly represented at present -
the EU, USA, Russian Federation, UN, OSCE, Turkey and now Iran.
Therefore, when we talk about Georgia's possible role in regional
and trans-regional levels in such circumstances, many researchers
compare it to the model of "Cyprusizaton," which is identical only
from the viewpoint of legal clichés (since the North Cyprus republic
has been recognized by only Turkey, Abkhazia and so-called South
Ossetia are in the same condition in Georgia's case, which have
been recognized only by the Russian Federation). If we talk in the
context of geopolitical modality, Georgia can be better compared with
"Lebanonization." Specific examples to clarify this can be seen in
the table below:
To see table click:
http://www.geotimes.ge/index.php?m=home&am p;newsid=13014
Such is the basic analysis of the geopolitical situation developing
around Georgia. We will see what the future holds.
David Chaduneli , Malkhaz Gulashvili "Azri," GT Center for Strategic
Research 2008.10.13 16:21
--Boundary_(ID_rquJPv3KgiksCK9TPq5wVQ)--
Daily Georgian Times
October 14.10.2008 08:40:05
Georgia
Political processes in Georgia have acquired quite dangerous trends
that can be somewhat difficult to forecast. Russian aggression has
given rise to a new geopolitical benchmark not only on the regional,
but also on the global level. The establishment of a new world order
has been initiated, in which the US hegemony is going downward and may
even be experiencing a total collapse. This is not only in military
and political terms, but also because of the onset of a very deep
financial crisis and possible collapse.
The biggest geostrategic failure of the current Bush administration
is indicative of the deterioration of the USA military and political
status in Iraq, and most notably in Afghanistan. There, NATO is
relinquishing control over the situation, and very soon we may witness
the entry of traditional Taliban movements in this country. This
is accompanied by the fact that Karzai, Afghanistan's president,
has made an official address to Mula Omar, leader of the Taliban
Movement, and called on the initiation of strategic cooperation and
the participation of Mula Omar in the Afghan government.
Against this background, in a geopolitical context signs of
tri-polarism are emerging - the players being the USA, the Russian
Federation and the EU. The most interesting aspect is that the new
tri-polarism has started from the Caucasus region and will be developed
within this region. Such factors have been identified as well, even in
terms of the distribution of a new balance of powers at the regional
level. This can be seen in the initiation of the "Caucasus political
platform" and the introduction of new regional leaders.
Geostrategic positions of the Russian Federation in the Caucasus region
have obviously increased; Russia's is allied with Iran and indirectly
with Turkey. Apparently, in the context of geopolitical redistribution,
a new trend of management of conflict spots can be observed. This
was demonstrated in the resolution of the Karabagh conflict, when
Turkey decided to take on a more active mediator role and initiate the
process of tightening ties with Armenia. The processes, of course,
will have a negative effect on Georgia, which can lose its unique
geopolitical status and become just a certain geopolitical "adjunct."
If the "Gordiev knot" of Turkey-Armenia and Armenia-Azerbaijan opens,
which will be followed by the modification of relations between Russia
and Turkey, Turkey and Iran, and Azerbaijan and Iran, the general
political background of the region will change entirely. In which
case, the Georgian-American strategic modality may become secondary
and serve as a major opposing factor to new geopolitical coalitions.
Such a complicated geopolitical modality for Georgia is already
becoming a reality. The development following the August 7 events
indicates the possibility that such a scenario may emerge. By
approximation, geopolitical transformation of the Caucasus region may
become very similar to the model of the Near East region, which was
identified at the end of 70's and early 80's. In such a case, however
disappointing, Georgia may be destined to repeat the experiences of
Lebanon, which had the most acute problems of territorial integrity,
domestic policy disorder, a difficult regional political situation
and direct involvement of the International Community at the national
and regional levels, e.g. NATO, EU, USA, USSR and the UN.
Exactly during this most complex geopolitical background, Georgia tries
to balance relations with all regional powers, of course, excluding
Russia (due to objective reasons) and identify a new geopolitical niche
in the processes being developed around the country. "Mechanical moves"
of Georgian diplomacy that are not supported by specific analytical
approaches (such a negative trend has become especially visible today)
further aggravates the issue of successfully resolving of the country's
foreign policy issues. (Not only is there the absence of a relatively
decent-functioning strategic research center, but even the state
structures do not take due efforts in this direction.) But this is a
tactical weakness, and can be fixed relatively easily. The strategic
level geopolitical stance is characterized by the trend of being out of
Georgia's control, since is determined by the power centers which have
global and regional influence, and are duly represented at present -
the EU, USA, Russian Federation, UN, OSCE, Turkey and now Iran.
Therefore, when we talk about Georgia's possible role in regional
and trans-regional levels in such circumstances, many researchers
compare it to the model of "Cyprusizaton," which is identical only
from the viewpoint of legal clichés (since the North Cyprus republic
has been recognized by only Turkey, Abkhazia and so-called South
Ossetia are in the same condition in Georgia's case, which have
been recognized only by the Russian Federation). If we talk in the
context of geopolitical modality, Georgia can be better compared with
"Lebanonization." Specific examples to clarify this can be seen in
the table below:
To see table click:
http://www.geotimes.ge/index.php?m=home&am p;newsid=13014
Such is the basic analysis of the geopolitical situation developing
around Georgia. We will see what the future holds.
David Chaduneli , Malkhaz Gulashvili "Azri," GT Center for Strategic
Research 2008.10.13 16:21
--Boundary_(ID_rquJPv3KgiksCK9TPq5wVQ)--