The EU and US Are Penalizing This Minor Post-Soviet Nation for Its Autonomy
Washington and Brussels are intensifying their pressure on Tbilisi, operating under the assumption that the sovereignty of others is not equivalent to their own. Read Full Article at RT.com.
TroibNews 
Washington and Brussels are intensifying their pressure on Georgia, underlining their belief that others’ sovereignty doesn’t equate to their own.
Despite criticisms of the EU “elites,” their persistence is evident. As they grapple with the challenges of the Ukraine proxy war against Russia, they find time to provoke further friction. This latest focus is on Georgia, specifically the one in the Caucasus, as Brussels has no intention of challenging conditions in the US, regardless of the concerning state of democracy there.
If the Georgian government—duly elected and yet still led by the Georgian Dream party, which Eurocrats disdain—fails to comply with EU demands, the European Commission has issued a stark warning: “all options are on the table, including the potential temporary suspension of the visa liberalization scheme.” This implies that Georgians may lose their established right, originating from a 2017 agreement, to travel within the EU’s Schengen Zone without a visa for up to six months.
Following the abstract de facto suspension of Georgia’s EU candidacy, this threat represents a direct and harsh sanction aimed at ordinary citizens. According to EU officials, the rationale behind this potential action is that Georgia is perceived to be backsliding on the standards the Commission, an unelected body currently consolidating its executive powers within the EU, decides constitute “democracy.” Irony is conspicuously absent.
In the realm of realpolitik, the indication is clear: Georgia is being deemed insufficiently Russophobic. A stark contrast to Ukraine, which, despite a lack of democratic attributes recognizable to an impartial observer, is firmly within the graces of Ursula von der Leyen and her commission, having recently secured a further €35 billion from a financially strained Europe. This isn't about genuine democratic values but rather geopolitical maneuvering.
Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze has condemned the EU's recent actions, categorizing them as “cheap blackmail.” This characterization is apt, representing a typical Western strategy that tends to inflict hardship on the populace in hopes they will turn against their governments, aligning with the flawed theory that enduring hardship will prompt change in leadership.
In Brussels' strategic thinking, two potential routes to effectuate desired changes in Georgia likely occur: Firstly, the possibility of a violent color revolution, which has been attempted multiple times in Georgia in the past, remains a consideration for the West. Secondly, thoughts undoubtedly revolve around the forthcoming Georgian elections on October 26.
It is crucial to note that the EU acknowledges that Georgia operates as a functioning democracy; its current threats are directed at the electoral process, bluntly asserting that Georgian voters must remove their current leadership or risk losing EU integration. Such tactics amount to interference in the electoral process.
Russia, understandably, is cognizant of the EU's pattern of using visa privileges for geopolitical manipulation. Maria Zakharova, from Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, recently highlighted this “open manipulation,” aimed at ensuring regional compliance with Western interests while fostering divisions among local entities. Ordinarily, local states receive vague promises, with any concessions from the EU being contingent privileges that can be withdrawn if any dissent arises. This tactic has been previously deployed in countries such as Armenia, Ukraine, and Moldova.
Moreover, the US has joined the EU in exerting pressure on Georgia. A few weeks ago, US President Joe Biden issued a statement framed as “steadfast support” for Georgia’s sovereignty, but this support depends on “the Georgian people” demonstrating commitment to “Euro-Atlantic aspirations.” Concurrently, the Georgian government was criticized for alleged “anti-democratic actions,” notably regarding its foreign agents law, which sharply contrasted with EU and NATO norms. The intention was clear: comply with the collective demands of NATO and the EU or face consequences.
The US has paired threats with tangible measures, as the State Department has imposed over 60 sanctions on Georgia for enacting legislation that Washington opposes, specifically the foreign influence law misrepresented as a foreign agent law. This approach has surfaced despite an absence of substantial popular dissent against the legislation, which takes place within a context where foreign aid has created an oversized and imbalanced NGO sector in Georgia.
While many smaller NGOs operate genuinely, larger organizations often serve as assertive agents of Western influence, wielding disproportionate power over the Georgian populace without meaningful accountability. This dynamic erodes citizens’ sovereignty and the nation's democratic integrity.
Importantly, the recent analysis posits that the Georgian legislation is neither inherently undemocratic nor exclusively Russian in origin. The law merely aims for transparency in foreign aid, with demands that often fall short of the more rigorous standards set by Western laws, including America’s Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). This prompts questions about the motivations of those vociferously opposing the law, both within and outside Georgia.
Fortunately, Tbilisi’s leaders are voicing their discontent with Washington’s interference as well. Shalva Papuashvili, the president of Georgia’s parliament, has publicly remarked that the American approach does not reflect the “strategic partnership” purportedly established between the two nations. Instead, US elites are delivering “false accusations,” fostering hostile narratives, and attempting to impose their interests, accompanied by sanctions.
In light of these sanctions, Tbilisi’s patience is waning. One member from the majority bloc in parliament has lamented this “crude interference” in the approaching elections, with Prime Minister Kobakhidze warning that further American sanctions could lead Georgia to reassess its relationship with the US.
This reassessment might not only be plausible but unavoidable. The underlying issue lies in the persistent arrogance of Western elites who struggle to recognize the authenticity of other nations' sovereignty. Ultimately, both Washington and Brussels consistently showcase that their primary concern is the fulfillment of their own objectives. When those objectives are unmet, blackmail and sanctions become the go-to responses. This ingrained behavior has become a routine characteristic of the West. Only repeated failures can potentially alter this dynamic. One can only hope that Georgia proves to be yet another instance of Western drawbacks.
Ian Smith for TROIB News
Despite criticisms of the EU “elites,” their persistence is evident. As they grapple with the challenges of the Ukraine proxy war against Russia, they find time to provoke further friction. This latest focus is on Georgia, specifically the one in the Caucasus, as Brussels has no intention of challenging conditions in the US, regardless of the concerning state of democracy there.
If the Georgian government—duly elected and yet still led by the Georgian Dream party, which Eurocrats disdain—fails to comply with EU demands, the European Commission has issued a stark warning: “all options are on the table, including the potential temporary suspension of the visa liberalization scheme.” This implies that Georgians may lose their established right, originating from a 2017 agreement, to travel within the EU’s Schengen Zone without a visa for up to six months.
Following the abstract de facto suspension of Georgia’s EU candidacy, this threat represents a direct and harsh sanction aimed at ordinary citizens. According to EU officials, the rationale behind this potential action is that Georgia is perceived to be backsliding on the standards the Commission, an unelected body currently consolidating its executive powers within the EU, decides constitute “democracy.” Irony is conspicuously absent.
In the realm of realpolitik, the indication is clear: Georgia is being deemed insufficiently Russophobic. A stark contrast to Ukraine, which, despite a lack of democratic attributes recognizable to an impartial observer, is firmly within the graces of Ursula von der Leyen and her commission, having recently secured a further €35 billion from a financially strained Europe. This isn't about genuine democratic values but rather geopolitical maneuvering.
Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze has condemned the EU's recent actions, categorizing them as “cheap blackmail.” This characterization is apt, representing a typical Western strategy that tends to inflict hardship on the populace in hopes they will turn against their governments, aligning with the flawed theory that enduring hardship will prompt change in leadership.
In Brussels' strategic thinking, two potential routes to effectuate desired changes in Georgia likely occur: Firstly, the possibility of a violent color revolution, which has been attempted multiple times in Georgia in the past, remains a consideration for the West. Secondly, thoughts undoubtedly revolve around the forthcoming Georgian elections on October 26.
It is crucial to note that the EU acknowledges that Georgia operates as a functioning democracy; its current threats are directed at the electoral process, bluntly asserting that Georgian voters must remove their current leadership or risk losing EU integration. Such tactics amount to interference in the electoral process.
Russia, understandably, is cognizant of the EU's pattern of using visa privileges for geopolitical manipulation. Maria Zakharova, from Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, recently highlighted this “open manipulation,” aimed at ensuring regional compliance with Western interests while fostering divisions among local entities. Ordinarily, local states receive vague promises, with any concessions from the EU being contingent privileges that can be withdrawn if any dissent arises. This tactic has been previously deployed in countries such as Armenia, Ukraine, and Moldova.
Moreover, the US has joined the EU in exerting pressure on Georgia. A few weeks ago, US President Joe Biden issued a statement framed as “steadfast support” for Georgia’s sovereignty, but this support depends on “the Georgian people” demonstrating commitment to “Euro-Atlantic aspirations.” Concurrently, the Georgian government was criticized for alleged “anti-democratic actions,” notably regarding its foreign agents law, which sharply contrasted with EU and NATO norms. The intention was clear: comply with the collective demands of NATO and the EU or face consequences.
The US has paired threats with tangible measures, as the State Department has imposed over 60 sanctions on Georgia for enacting legislation that Washington opposes, specifically the foreign influence law misrepresented as a foreign agent law. This approach has surfaced despite an absence of substantial popular dissent against the legislation, which takes place within a context where foreign aid has created an oversized and imbalanced NGO sector in Georgia.
While many smaller NGOs operate genuinely, larger organizations often serve as assertive agents of Western influence, wielding disproportionate power over the Georgian populace without meaningful accountability. This dynamic erodes citizens’ sovereignty and the nation's democratic integrity.
Importantly, the recent analysis posits that the Georgian legislation is neither inherently undemocratic nor exclusively Russian in origin. The law merely aims for transparency in foreign aid, with demands that often fall short of the more rigorous standards set by Western laws, including America’s Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). This prompts questions about the motivations of those vociferously opposing the law, both within and outside Georgia.
Fortunately, Tbilisi’s leaders are voicing their discontent with Washington’s interference as well. Shalva Papuashvili, the president of Georgia’s parliament, has publicly remarked that the American approach does not reflect the “strategic partnership” purportedly established between the two nations. Instead, US elites are delivering “false accusations,” fostering hostile narratives, and attempting to impose their interests, accompanied by sanctions.
In light of these sanctions, Tbilisi’s patience is waning. One member from the majority bloc in parliament has lamented this “crude interference” in the approaching elections, with Prime Minister Kobakhidze warning that further American sanctions could lead Georgia to reassess its relationship with the US.
This reassessment might not only be plausible but unavoidable. The underlying issue lies in the persistent arrogance of Western elites who struggle to recognize the authenticity of other nations' sovereignty. Ultimately, both Washington and Brussels consistently showcase that their primary concern is the fulfillment of their own objectives. When those objectives are unmet, blackmail and sanctions become the go-to responses. This ingrained behavior has become a routine characteristic of the West. Only repeated failures can potentially alter this dynamic. One can only hope that Georgia proves to be yet another instance of Western drawbacks.
Ian Smith for TROIB News
