Tweet
Sergey Grinyaev: Decision to change administration in Tbilisi was
adopted by "managers from Washington"
Interview with Sergey Grinyaev, Director General of the Russian Center
of Strategic Assessment and Forecasts
by David Stepanyan
ARMINFO
Saturday, October 6, 15:49
Despite Mikheil Saakashvili's anti-Russian policy, some of Georgia's
key infrastructures are owned by Russia. Now that Bidzina Ivanishvili
has own the parliamentary elections can we expect more Russian capital
in that country?
Several companies at the territory of Georgia really belong to the
Russian private capital. As for the Russian state capital, its share
is not so much in Georgia, and will not grow much, at least, if the
"Georgian dream" comes to power, Russian political expert. As for the
private capital, here the situation is dictated only by the interests
of business - if the administration offers interesting cooperation
conditions, in that case the share of the Russian business in Georgia
will grow. Georgia's example at the post-Soviet territory is not
unique. In this context, we may remember the Baltic countries, which
have been actively conducting the anti-Russian policy but at the same
time existing at the expense of taxes for transportation of Russian
cargo through the Baltic ports.
Throughout their election campaign Georgian Dream kept expressing
loyalty to Georgia's pro-western orientation. Was it just a
pre-election move or will Ivanishvili continue moving westward in a
view of the fact that the United States continues being the key
sponsor of Georgia's infrastructure projects?
The current foreign policy course of Tbilisi will be continued.
Georgia will not get too serious geopolitical position. Neither will
U.S. lose its influence in the region with change of administration in
Georgia. I think that the scenario of changing power in Tbilisi is
nothing but a process of manageable transfer of power from one
controlled group to another controlled group. Therefore, President
Mihkeil Saakashvili so easily became opposition. I think he would
never do that but for his confidence in his future. Saakashvili needed
're-branding', indeed, because it has become too inadequate partner
even by standards of the U.S. Department of State. Saakashvili's
carrier of an inefficient manager ended when he got involved in the
August War of 2008 and gained no dividends despite the West's support.
Nevertheless, he believes that Saakashvili will not be left in trouble
even now. He will go to reserve like many persons of his level who
rose and fell on the CIS political horizon over the last decades.
Nevertheless, the situation in Georgia may get out of control because
the knot has got too tight in the given part of the region.
Besides the claims to sovereignty of South Ossetia and Abkhazia,
Ankara openly claims Adjara. In addition, the social-economic
situation in the country is getting worse. Therefore, 'managers from
Washington' adopted a decision to change administration in Tbilisi,"
What changes can we expect in Armenian-Georgian trade-economic
relations now that Georgian-Russian relations may change?
First of all, we should expect growth of commodity circulation between
Armenia and Georgia, including at the expense of Russian cargo
transit. We should also expect activation of the Russian business
activity, for which the transport problems of communication with
Armenia were important when calculating the economic benefit of the
new projects. Moreover, in case of the new conditions, investments
will be made in the transport infrastructure as well. I do not rule
out that the Russian state capital will be also attracted.
Undoubtedly, this will be a good sign for Armenia. Nevertheless, I
would like to emphasize that there is still no ground to say that the
situation in the Russian-Georgian relations will radically change.
Georgia is the key transit country for both Armenia and Azerbaijan.
What geo-political transformations can we expect in the South Caucasus
following the change of power in Georgia?
Indeed at present Georgia is an important element of the
geo-strategical maneuvers of the superpowers in the South Caucasus.
This is the reason of the scenario being developed in Georgia today,
as the USA does not want to lose control over the political situation
in such an important region especially that it has tense relations
with Iran. I think that another problem - aspiration of Georgia to
join NATO, is also linked with it. Anyway, at present I see no
obviously positive tendencies which could define the nature of the
bilateral Russian-Georgian relations at least for the mid-term
prospect. I offer to wait for the traditional "100 days" of Bidzina
Ivanishvili and after that we shall be able to make specific
conclusions and even predictions.
From: Baghdasarian
adopted by "managers from Washington"
Interview with Sergey Grinyaev, Director General of the Russian Center
of Strategic Assessment and Forecasts
by David Stepanyan
ARMINFO
Saturday, October 6, 15:49
Despite Mikheil Saakashvili's anti-Russian policy, some of Georgia's
key infrastructures are owned by Russia. Now that Bidzina Ivanishvili
has own the parliamentary elections can we expect more Russian capital
in that country?
Several companies at the territory of Georgia really belong to the
Russian private capital. As for the Russian state capital, its share
is not so much in Georgia, and will not grow much, at least, if the
"Georgian dream" comes to power, Russian political expert. As for the
private capital, here the situation is dictated only by the interests
of business - if the administration offers interesting cooperation
conditions, in that case the share of the Russian business in Georgia
will grow. Georgia's example at the post-Soviet territory is not
unique. In this context, we may remember the Baltic countries, which
have been actively conducting the anti-Russian policy but at the same
time existing at the expense of taxes for transportation of Russian
cargo through the Baltic ports.
Throughout their election campaign Georgian Dream kept expressing
loyalty to Georgia's pro-western orientation. Was it just a
pre-election move or will Ivanishvili continue moving westward in a
view of the fact that the United States continues being the key
sponsor of Georgia's infrastructure projects?
The current foreign policy course of Tbilisi will be continued.
Georgia will not get too serious geopolitical position. Neither will
U.S. lose its influence in the region with change of administration in
Georgia. I think that the scenario of changing power in Tbilisi is
nothing but a process of manageable transfer of power from one
controlled group to another controlled group. Therefore, President
Mihkeil Saakashvili so easily became opposition. I think he would
never do that but for his confidence in his future. Saakashvili needed
're-branding', indeed, because it has become too inadequate partner
even by standards of the U.S. Department of State. Saakashvili's
carrier of an inefficient manager ended when he got involved in the
August War of 2008 and gained no dividends despite the West's support.
Nevertheless, he believes that Saakashvili will not be left in trouble
even now. He will go to reserve like many persons of his level who
rose and fell on the CIS political horizon over the last decades.
Nevertheless, the situation in Georgia may get out of control because
the knot has got too tight in the given part of the region.
Besides the claims to sovereignty of South Ossetia and Abkhazia,
Ankara openly claims Adjara. In addition, the social-economic
situation in the country is getting worse. Therefore, 'managers from
Washington' adopted a decision to change administration in Tbilisi,"
What changes can we expect in Armenian-Georgian trade-economic
relations now that Georgian-Russian relations may change?
First of all, we should expect growth of commodity circulation between
Armenia and Georgia, including at the expense of Russian cargo
transit. We should also expect activation of the Russian business
activity, for which the transport problems of communication with
Armenia were important when calculating the economic benefit of the
new projects. Moreover, in case of the new conditions, investments
will be made in the transport infrastructure as well. I do not rule
out that the Russian state capital will be also attracted.
Undoubtedly, this will be a good sign for Armenia. Nevertheless, I
would like to emphasize that there is still no ground to say that the
situation in the Russian-Georgian relations will radically change.
Georgia is the key transit country for both Armenia and Azerbaijan.
What geo-political transformations can we expect in the South Caucasus
following the change of power in Georgia?
Indeed at present Georgia is an important element of the
geo-strategical maneuvers of the superpowers in the South Caucasus.
This is the reason of the scenario being developed in Georgia today,
as the USA does not want to lose control over the political situation
in such an important region especially that it has tense relations
with Iran. I think that another problem - aspiration of Georgia to
join NATO, is also linked with it. Anyway, at present I see no
obviously positive tendencies which could define the nature of the
bilateral Russian-Georgian relations at least for the mid-term
prospect. I offer to wait for the traditional "100 days" of Bidzina
Ivanishvili and after that we shall be able to make specific
conclusions and even predictions.
From: Baghdasarian