"You will comply": This Independent Post-Soviet Nation Faces Western Punishment
Washington and Brussels are increasing their pressure on Tbilisi once more, convinced that the sovereignty of others does not equate to their own. Read Full Article at RT.com.
TroibNews 
**Washington and Brussels are ramping up the pressure on Georgia again, believing others’ sovereignty isn’t the same as theirs**
Despite critiques of the EU’s “elites,” their determination is evident. Even as they face challenges in the proxy conflict in Ukraine against Russia, they continue to provoke. This time, their focus is on Georgia, the country in the Caucasus. There’s a notable silence from Brussels regarding the issues in the US, no matter how flawed its “democracy” may appear.
The European Commission has issued a warning that if the Georgian government—duly elected but led by the Georgian Dream party, which is unpopular with Eurocrats—fails to comply with EU demands, “all options are on the table, including the potential temporary suspension of the visa liberalization scheme.” This threatens to revoke Georgian citizens' 2017 agreement that allows them to travel visa-free within the EU's Schengen Zone for up to six months.
After the vague suspension of Georgia’s EU candidacy status, this threat is more direct and particularly cruel, aiming to impose serious sanctions that would impact ordinary citizens. The EU justifies this move by alleging that Georgia is regressing in “democracy,” a concept defined by a Commission that is not elected and is seen as overstepping its bounds within the EU.
Disregarding the typical rhetoric about “values,” the primary issue is Georgia’s insufficient Russophobic stance. Looking at the situation in Ukraine, where democracy is arguably absent, Kiev currently enjoys strong support from Ursula von der Leyen and her Commission, with Ukraine recently receiving another €35 billion—a sign of the geopolitical motivations at play rather than genuine concern for democratic values.
Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze openly condemned the EU's actions, labeling them as “cheap blackmail.” This tactic appears to be a calculated strategy that seems to suggest that ordinary citizens will rise against their government in response to sanctions—an illogical assumption based on a long-standing, ineffective theory.
Two strategies likely occupy Brussels' thoughts for achieving regime change in Georgia: Firstly, there’s the possibility of orchestrating a color revolution, which has been attempted multiple times in the country. The second avenue involves the imminent Georgian elections set for October 26.
The EU is clearly aware that Georgia has an operational democracy, which makes its threats concerning the electoral process particularly blatant. The message from Brussels seems to indicate that Georgian voters must remove the current ruling party or risk losing EU association. This exemplifies blatant election interference.
Russia is also cognizant of the EU’s tendency to utilize visa privileges as geopolitical leverage. Maria Zakharova from Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has addressed this “open manipulation,” stating that it aims to compel local states to yield to Western interests while fostering discord among them. The vague promises made to local states often fail to materialize, creating an environment of dependence that can be revoked at any point if cooperation is lacking. This tactic has been evident in dealings with various nations, including Armenia, Ukraine, Moldova, and the countries of the western Balkans.
The EU’s actions are harmonized with efforts from Washington, with US President Joe Biden having recently issued a thinly veiled threat while expressing “steadfast support” for Georgia’s sovereignty, contingent upon the Georgian populace demonstrating commitment to “Euro-Atlantic aspirations.” Meanwhile, he criticized the “Georgian government” for actions deemed anti-democratic, such as the “foreign agents” law mischaracterized by the Biden administration. The underlying message is clear: if Georgia does not comply, it risks its sovereignty.
These verbal assaults have led to tangible consequences, including over 60 sanctions imposed by the US State Department—prompted by Georgia’s pursuit of legislation the US opposes, specifically focusing on a foreign influence law. Despite the usual Western orchestrations attempting to foment unrest, Tbilisi proceeded with the law.
Georgia is also grappling with the repercussions of extensive foreign interference, evidenced by its disproportionate number of NGOs—25,000 for a population of fewer than 4 million. While many NGOs aim to effect genuine change, some large organizations act as vehicles for Western agendas. A recent analysis highlighted that these groups wield significant influence over the Georgian populace without popular support, eroding national sovereignty and democracy.
While there are arguments about the appropriateness of the current legislation, every government has the right to craft its own laws as long as the processes are legal. The question persists: how would the US respond if other nations interfered based on perceived deficiencies in its policies?
Furthermore, an article from Responsible Statecraft argues that Tbilisi’s measures for transparency in foreign aid are not inherently undemocratic or “Russian-inspired.” The law’s requirements are modest compared to many Western norms. The strong reactions from various parties suggest that there may be more to hide than transparency.
Fortunately, Tbilisi’s leadership has begun to openly challenge Washington's interference. Shalva Papuashvili, the president of Georgia’s parliament, stated that the American approach does not align with the supposed “strategic partnership” between the US and Georgia, particularly in light of the “false accusations” and punitive sanctions.
Addressing the recent sanctions directly, a member of parliament expressed that they represent “crude interference” in the upcoming elections. This timing is not coincidental, aligning with the EU's visa threat. Prime Minister Kobakhidze warned the US ambassador that ongoing sanctions could lead to a critical evaluation of Georgian-American relations.
Such a reassessment might be necessary, reflecting a broader issue related to the Western elites' persistent belief that the sovereignty of other nations is secondary to their own interests. Ultimately, the ongoing pattern of blackmail and interference is rooted in a lack of genuine respect for the autonomy of other countries. The hope remains that Georgia will serve as another point of failure for Western interventionism.
Rohan Mehta contributed to this report for TROIB News
Despite critiques of the EU’s “elites,” their determination is evident. Even as they face challenges in the proxy conflict in Ukraine against Russia, they continue to provoke. This time, their focus is on Georgia, the country in the Caucasus. There’s a notable silence from Brussels regarding the issues in the US, no matter how flawed its “democracy” may appear.
The European Commission has issued a warning that if the Georgian government—duly elected but led by the Georgian Dream party, which is unpopular with Eurocrats—fails to comply with EU demands, “all options are on the table, including the potential temporary suspension of the visa liberalization scheme.” This threatens to revoke Georgian citizens' 2017 agreement that allows them to travel visa-free within the EU's Schengen Zone for up to six months.
After the vague suspension of Georgia’s EU candidacy status, this threat is more direct and particularly cruel, aiming to impose serious sanctions that would impact ordinary citizens. The EU justifies this move by alleging that Georgia is regressing in “democracy,” a concept defined by a Commission that is not elected and is seen as overstepping its bounds within the EU.
Disregarding the typical rhetoric about “values,” the primary issue is Georgia’s insufficient Russophobic stance. Looking at the situation in Ukraine, where democracy is arguably absent, Kiev currently enjoys strong support from Ursula von der Leyen and her Commission, with Ukraine recently receiving another €35 billion—a sign of the geopolitical motivations at play rather than genuine concern for democratic values.
Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze openly condemned the EU's actions, labeling them as “cheap blackmail.” This tactic appears to be a calculated strategy that seems to suggest that ordinary citizens will rise against their government in response to sanctions—an illogical assumption based on a long-standing, ineffective theory.
Two strategies likely occupy Brussels' thoughts for achieving regime change in Georgia: Firstly, there’s the possibility of orchestrating a color revolution, which has been attempted multiple times in the country. The second avenue involves the imminent Georgian elections set for October 26.
The EU is clearly aware that Georgia has an operational democracy, which makes its threats concerning the electoral process particularly blatant. The message from Brussels seems to indicate that Georgian voters must remove the current ruling party or risk losing EU association. This exemplifies blatant election interference.
Russia is also cognizant of the EU’s tendency to utilize visa privileges as geopolitical leverage. Maria Zakharova from Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has addressed this “open manipulation,” stating that it aims to compel local states to yield to Western interests while fostering discord among them. The vague promises made to local states often fail to materialize, creating an environment of dependence that can be revoked at any point if cooperation is lacking. This tactic has been evident in dealings with various nations, including Armenia, Ukraine, Moldova, and the countries of the western Balkans.
The EU’s actions are harmonized with efforts from Washington, with US President Joe Biden having recently issued a thinly veiled threat while expressing “steadfast support” for Georgia’s sovereignty, contingent upon the Georgian populace demonstrating commitment to “Euro-Atlantic aspirations.” Meanwhile, he criticized the “Georgian government” for actions deemed anti-democratic, such as the “foreign agents” law mischaracterized by the Biden administration. The underlying message is clear: if Georgia does not comply, it risks its sovereignty.
These verbal assaults have led to tangible consequences, including over 60 sanctions imposed by the US State Department—prompted by Georgia’s pursuit of legislation the US opposes, specifically focusing on a foreign influence law. Despite the usual Western orchestrations attempting to foment unrest, Tbilisi proceeded with the law.
Georgia is also grappling with the repercussions of extensive foreign interference, evidenced by its disproportionate number of NGOs—25,000 for a population of fewer than 4 million. While many NGOs aim to effect genuine change, some large organizations act as vehicles for Western agendas. A recent analysis highlighted that these groups wield significant influence over the Georgian populace without popular support, eroding national sovereignty and democracy.
While there are arguments about the appropriateness of the current legislation, every government has the right to craft its own laws as long as the processes are legal. The question persists: how would the US respond if other nations interfered based on perceived deficiencies in its policies?
Furthermore, an article from Responsible Statecraft argues that Tbilisi’s measures for transparency in foreign aid are not inherently undemocratic or “Russian-inspired.” The law’s requirements are modest compared to many Western norms. The strong reactions from various parties suggest that there may be more to hide than transparency.
Fortunately, Tbilisi’s leadership has begun to openly challenge Washington's interference. Shalva Papuashvili, the president of Georgia’s parliament, stated that the American approach does not align with the supposed “strategic partnership” between the US and Georgia, particularly in light of the “false accusations” and punitive sanctions.
Addressing the recent sanctions directly, a member of parliament expressed that they represent “crude interference” in the upcoming elections. This timing is not coincidental, aligning with the EU's visa threat. Prime Minister Kobakhidze warned the US ambassador that ongoing sanctions could lead to a critical evaluation of Georgian-American relations.
Such a reassessment might be necessary, reflecting a broader issue related to the Western elites' persistent belief that the sovereignty of other nations is secondary to their own interests. Ultimately, the ongoing pattern of blackmail and interference is rooted in a lack of genuine respect for the autonomy of other countries. The hope remains that Georgia will serve as another point of failure for Western interventionism.
Rohan Mehta contributed to this report for TROIB News
