On the Georgian rationalism

President of Georgia Giorgi Margvelashvili was one of more than a dozen foreign leaders who took part in the February 22 March of Dignity, which took place in the Ukrainian capital. In an exclusive interview with The Day, the Georgian president said he had admitted to his plane representatives of all factions of his nation’s parliament, as well as the executive branch, to emphasize Georgia’s all-party support for Ukraine and the Ukrainian people, Ukraine’s free choice and its fight for freedom and independence.

Estonian President Toomas Ilves wrote in an article that 2008, when Russia invaded Georgia, was the year of awakening which failed to wake Europe up. In your opinion, has Europe awakened now that Russia has unleashed aggression against Ukraine?

“We would be able to say so only when we will really reap the benefits of a diplomatic process aiming to create a peaceful dialog to resolve the conflict. While 2008 saw an emotional moment, it is now that people start to understand how extensive are the issues regarding the future of the Russian Federation’s neighbors.

“In my opinion, our partners and neighbors are increasingly aware that the relations between our countries should be pragmatic and aimed at building good-neighborliness up. This approach is starting to prevail. We unfortunately see, in fact, that the policies of the Russian Federation, based on the vision of the near abroad as a zone of privileged interests of that country, are counterproductive for Russia as well as the wider region. Upon looking at this region’s expanse, we see that it encompasses half of the world. We are discussing policies here that could destabilize half of the Eurasian continent, in fact.

“Ukraine is at war now, and we have to think, on the one hand, how to stop the bloodshed and stabilize the situation, but on the other hand, we must not forget that ‘frozen’ conflicts started immediately after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and unfortunately, they are not being solved, but only deepen.

“As for Georgia, we had a conflict with the active participation of Russia in the 1990s, which was essentially a hybrid war, just like what we see in Ukraine. After seemingly localizing the conflict, we saw Russian regular troops entering Georgian territory in 2008. Unfortunately, Russia went further and signed some agreements with these quasi-states [Abkhazia and South Ossetia. – Ed.] in 2014 against the background of what was happening in Ukraine, thus hindering search for a real peaceful solution of these issues. We should have a principled approach to such policies, not only during military confrontation, but also after it, and that approach should be focused on working for the peaceful coexistence of nations. This is significant not only for us, Ukraine and Georgia, but for the whole of Europe too.”

How do you think, does Europe understand the developments occurring in our region? British analyst Edward Lucas said in an interview that Ukraine was paying a heavy price for geopolitical education of Europe.

“I think the same thing was said about Georgia in 2008. We all have seen that statements made by the Russian Federation, the Kremlin are not just words, but, unfortunately, they have been implemented. Accordingly, our reaction to this reality should also be a Realpolitik one, providing a real response that would make clear that Russia’s near abroad should be governed by international law rather than privileged interests.”

As for the real response, Europeans, and in particular Angela Merkel, have said that a diplomatic solution is the only way out, but some politicians in the US and some European countries are in favor of delivering arms to Ukraine, so that it would be able to meet this reality of the Russian aggression armed to the teeth. How would you comment on this?

“No party on our side, including Ukraine, wants war. Neither Georgia nor Ukraine started their wars. So, our approach is a rational one, aimed at a peaceful solution of these issues through peaceful settlement. Meanwhile, we expect a very principled position from our partners who should help us to strengthen our states economically and diplomatically, as well as strengthen the armed forces of our countries. Naturally, it is not about taking a war course, but about stabilization and improving defense capabilities of our states.”

Your government bet on pragmatism in relations with Russia after coming to power, but as I have often heard from representatives of the Georgian government, it has brought almost no results for your country.

“I would not say so. Building a pragmatic relationship with Russia is the only right way in our view. On the one hand, we see some positive developments in the cultural and trade relations while, on the other hand, actions of the Russian authorities worsened the situation in late 2014 as they signed treaties with the occupied territories.

“Intensifying its rational approach, Georgia demonstrates to the world that she sees the bilateral relationship as a good-neighborly one and aims at solving issues through diplomatic rather than military means. It is valuable as it shows everyone that we are rational, while the Russian response looks much more aggressive against this rational background.”

Is the statement made by the Georgian prime minister’s special representative for relations with Russia Zurab Abashidze, who said that Georgia’s accession to NATO would not be on the agenda either today or tomorrow, an example of such pragmatic approach? It was in that way that Abashidze responded to Sergey Lavrov’s threats after the latter said that Russia was ready to take appropriate action should NATO take practical steps to “pull” Georgia into the alliance.

“I can repeat my statement for you. The European and Euro-Atlantic choice is the strategic choice of the Georgian people. This choice is above party politics. We develop our country in this direction. Naturally, there are processes in both NATO and the EU that affect the pace of our integration.”

By the way, do you expect any successes from the Eastern Partnership Summit, such as obtaining a visa-free regime with the EU?

“Naturally, we are interested in getting a visa-free regime. We have a very positive track record on implementation of the visa regime liberalization plan. We have a serious ambition to implement the Association Agreement. Other than that, we do feel that the EU should be more open and more responsive to our specific European ambitions. After the signing of the Association Agreement, we emphasized that our future lay with the EU. We also expect that against the background of the developing globalization process and the role that Georgia plays in the context of building up the Europe-Asia contact zone and exploring the resources of the Caspian Sea and the Black Sea, Europeans should more actively respond to the ambitions of Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine, as these countries are facing certain dangers due to the free choice they have made.”

We see almost daily press reports that yet another citizen of Georgia got a job in the Ukrainian government on renouncing their former citizenship. In the case of hiring former president Mikheil Saakashvili, who is wanted by your nation’s prosecutors, Georgia’s ministry of foreign affairs went as far as to invite the ambassador of Ukraine to Georgia for a talk. How do the Georgians see it all, will Ukrainian jobs offered to Saakashvili and some other former Georgian officials disrupt our countries’ relationship?

“Both Petro Poroshenko and I have mandates from our respective peoples, obliging us to build and strengthen our friendship. Even were we failing to fulfill these duties, and we do fulfill them, it would not bring about a discord between Georgians and Ukrainians, because we have historical roots and current goals in common. And so, I think it is impossible for us to spoil relations between the two countries. On the contrary, as was demonstrated today, we are working to deepen our bilateral relations.

“Moreover, based on our peoples’ liking for each other, mutual friendship and common strategic interests, I would say that any Georgian would be pleased to serve Ukraine. It is up to Ukraine to choose which Georgians it invites. Meanwhile, our friendship with Ukrainians is based on the historical good-neighborliness and strategic partnership rather than on interpersonal relationships.”

Georgian media report that the ruling party has lost its majorities in some city councils, and some allies of the Georgian Dream are leaving the coalition. How would you comment on it, is it a sign that the people are losing faith in your movement?

“This is a democratic process. Our country has passed the most important test as we had a peaceful change of government following the elections. The people will control us now. In democratic countries, it is the people’s role to correct leaders’ political ambitions a little, and I see no tragedy in these media reports. It is just the democratic process.”

Your country has transitioned from a presidential-parliamentary form of government to a parliamentary-presidential one. When this reform was effected, it was actually done to suit one person. Do you feel such transition to be justified, given that the situation is very complex at the moment due to increased activity of the revanchist Russia?

“You know, I am not a constitutional theorist. I have sworn an oath to uphold the constitution and serve under this constitution. Discussing it is up to political theorists and commentators, let them think about it. I have seen every kind of democracy to work in some countries; by the way, I was born in a country which had a great constitution, but it did not work. It was the Soviet Union, more particularly Soviet Georgia. Most importantly, one has to serve well under the existing constitution and the laws in force. When I was entering the electoral campaign, I knew what issues I would face. I knew it would be difficult, not because of the constitution, but because popular expectations were so high. This is a difficult transition process...”

What would be your wishes for our newspaper?

“I wish you to be very active and critical, especially at this time when there is a war and a special pressure on the press and TV. Therefore, on the one hand, you always have to make a choice whether to say something to keep the national interest protected, and on the other hand, you have to inform the public. This is a difficult moment in the life of your country, and I wish you and the entire Ukrainian people to bring your very hard struggle to a worthy conclusion. I am sure that it will end in a great victory of freedom, and it should be a victory for the Ukrainian state as well as for the Ukrainians as citizensof the European community.”