"Europe not confident in Georgian government's willingness to join EU" Caliber.Az from Tbilisi

Caliber.Az presents an interview with Mihail Chitadze, a Georgian analyst and expert on local self-government and decentralization.

- The European Union granted the status of candidate for membership to Moldova and Ukraine, while Georgia was offered to engage more seriously in strengthening democracy in the country. What do you think was the reason for such a decision by the EU?

- The reason is the policy of the Georgian government and the scale of Russia's influence on this policy. And this influence has long been no secret. Let's recall at least the subject of the deep-water port of Anaklia, which would be profitable to almost everyone, especially to Georgia and Azerbaijan, but unprofitable to Russia and could compete with its ports. In addition, the new port would have increased the economic independence of our countries, facilitating access to European markets, and would have provided an alternative route to the Caucasus and Central Asia for Europe. But the project was curtailed for some unknown reasons, and Georgia has lost not only large investments and fairly large profits but also the prospect of strengthening its economic independence, as well as a spacious channel of integration into the European economic system.

Of course, for Europe, membership in the EU of a country with a government under the determining influence of a state hostile to it is, to put it mildly, unprofitable. In addition, the West has long recognized the false democratic reforms carried out by our leadership, which, before the Ukrainian crisis, Brussels turned a blind eye to. Now they have become decisive for the future of Georgia.

To summarize, I would take the liberty to say that Europe is unsure of the Georgian government's willingness to join the EU.

- And yet, do you think this EU verdict on Georgia has anything to do with its refusal to open a second front against Russia? Also, if Saakashvili were in power now, would your country be given candidate status?

- The EU's decision is certainly political, but it is by no means connected with a second front. Besides, no one demands this from Georgia. Probably the reason lies in the ambiguous position with regard to this aggression: on the one hand, support for Ukraine, of course, is forced, under pressure from the population and the international community, and on the other hand, it is clearly loyal to the Russian authorities.

And about Saakashvili, I mean, if he were in power, I think the situation would have been really different. And not because he is a great democrat and fighter for democratic ideals, but despite some flirtations with Russia, he is considered a pro-western politician, and his government, though with obvious authoritarian features, is more democratic against the background of other post-Soviet countries.

- Do you think that Georgia's aspirations to get into the EU will moderate now?

- I think that for Georgia the aspiration to join the European Union is not just a wish, but a vital necessity, it's not just a desire to live well, but a survival factor. Unfortunately, our northern neighbor has created a state very much like the USSR of the eighties and we remember the end result very well. I (and not only I) assume that in the next decade the disintegration of the state will begin because of the policies pursued by the Russian authorities. The Caucasus will be the flagship of this process. The imperial authorities will try to take this aggression beyond their borders, and you and I will find ourselves under attack, so we must have time to protect ourselves. This will be very difficult, expensive, and costly to do on our own. So this is vital.

- How will this influence Georgia's relations with the West?

- Will Georgians be disappointed in the West? I don't think so, but definitely, the disappointment in their government will come (probably, it has already come). There has always been and probably will be a Western orientation in Georgian society. By and large, loyalty to the Russian Empire in Georgian society was due to the fact that it was a conductor of European values. After the revolution, the empire's mission for Georgia changed. Since the 90s, Russia lost this function altogether, and it became possible to communicate directly with the West. So, relations will change, but the desire for the European Union will remain.

- Do you think Georgia should continue to move towards the West or should it look Eastwards, to Azerbaijan and Türkiye?

- I do not think that the alliance with Türkiye and Azerbaijan is an alternative to the European Union, and one does not preclude the other. But this alliance is clearly dominated by Türkiye. Leaving Russia and joining Türkiye... I don't think that's the best alternative. Besides, the EU has clearly formulated standards of state arrangement with an open society, which more or less guarantees that the necessary reforms will be carried out in the countries that apply for it.

- In December the EU has to make a decision on the status of Georgia again. What are your expectations?

- Everything depends on society: if there is not much pressure, the authorities will do nothing, i.e. they will create a semblance of trying, they are working hard, but in reality, they are throwing dust in their eyes and by the deadline, when they get refusal, they will try to shift the blame on the European Union. They will most likely do that because there is too little time. So unless there is some radical change, the case will fail this time, too.