CIS faces inevitable transformation

The Messenger, Georgia
Feb 18 2005

The successful velvet revolution in Ukraine has paved the way for
great changes in former Soviet countries, as it was further proof
that Russia is losing its dominating influence in the Commonwealth
of Independent States.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, uniting former Soviet
republics in the CIS was an effort on the part of Moscow to retain
its imperialist grasp on these countries. Many in Russia hoped that
this union would allow Moscow to establish a sphere of influence and
eventually lead to the reintegration of the other republics.

Although Russia was not able to realize these plans completely, over
time the other states have formed two groups. On one side countries
firmly within Moscow’s orbit, like Belarus and Armenia and on the other
side – countries that try to distance themselves from Russia and seek
closer ties with the West. Among these countries is Georgia, which
despite being a member of the CIS, faces constant pressure from Russia.

Nowadays when discussing the CIS, the probability of further velvet
revolutions inevitably comes up. In particular, Kyrgyzstan will hold
parliamentary elections on March 6 and Moldova on February 27. Some
have already labeled anticipated demonstrations in Kyrgyzstan
the “Tulip Revolution,” as March 13, when the second round of the
parliamentary elections is planned, is the peak of the blooming period
of the mountain tulips.

Russia is anxiously observing the possibility of the Kirghiz velvet
revolution. As the Russian newspaper Argumeniti i Fakti states,
if the Tulip Revolution is actually enacted, similar revolutions
may take place in neighboring Central Asian republics. There is
no doubt among Russian analysts that these revolutions are of an
“anti-Russian” nature, but there is serious difference of opinion
as to how to resist them. Moscow did everything in its power to halt
the Orange Revolution in Ukraine, but to no avail. At the same time,
the conditions in Kyrgyzstan are completely different in comparison
to those in Georgia and the Ukraine.

The success of the Ukrainian Orange Revolution was greeted with
enthusiasm in Moldova. President of Moldova Vladimir Voronin was the
only president of the CIS countries who attended the inauguration
of Viktor Yushchenko. Many in Moldova believe that the revolution in
neighboring Ukraine will isolate the separatist regime in Transdnestria
and lead to the restoration of Moldovan territorial integrity.

But Konstantine Zatulin, a member of the Russian Duma and also the
chairman of the institution of the CIS countries, was quoted by the
Russian newspaper Argumenti i Facti as saying that the situation
there is very complicated as Ukrainian nationalist forces also have
territorial claims on Transdnestria. This statement can easily be
interpreted as another effort on the part of Moscow to start an ethnic
conflict in post-Soviet space.

The Ukrainian revolution was the heaviest blow for neo-imperial minded
Russians. This event marks the end of Russian hopes for reintegrating
CIS countries and the beginning of an era where Ukraine will provide
serious opposition to Moscow within the commonwealth.

The position of Georgia towards the CIS is of special importance. For
years after the fall of the Soviet Union, Georgia refused to join the
commonwealth, but after defeat in Abkhazia then-President Shevardnadze
agreed to involve Georgia in the alliance. At that time, many believed
that CIS membership would lead to Russia letting up on pressure to
Georgia and return Abkhazia and Ossetia. Unfortunately, this turned
out to be a laughable misconception.

Due to Russia’s repeated efforts to violate the sovereignty of Georgia,
many consider it necessary to pull out of the CIS. Parliament even
adopted a relevant proclamation, but the Shevardnadze administration
resisted, saying that though CIS membership brings no good to the
country, it does no harm either and that it was necessary for Georgia
to use the CIS to express its own position. Nevertheless, Georgia’s
protests against the Kremlin at various CIS summits have yielded no
results over the years.

Mikheil Saakashvili has so far been “alone” at CIS summits, but
the appearance of Viktor Yushchenko should create quite a different
atmosphere there and possible revolutions in Kyrgyzstan and Moldova
could also radically change the balance of power in the commonwealth
as well.