TRANSCAUCASIA AFTER NATO SUMMIT IN BUCHAREST: CUMULATION OF THREATS
Andrei Areshev

1 8.04.2008

Caucasia, Georgia, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Armenia, Karabakh, NATO
At the summit in Bucharest in early April, NATO members were split
over Ukraine’s and Georgia’s accession to the alliance, and it was
decided to postpone their membership process till December. There
could be no dual approach to the issue.

Some experts believe that the time factor will serve the purposes
of Moscow and other countries of the "old Europe" which are against
NATO`s forced expansion. They think that by December Kiev and Tbilisi
may face some problems that will make their NATO membership process
less probable and even removed from the agenda.

If there were even slightest possibilities that everything would happen
in such a way, we should find this process the most suitable for all
sides concerned, and, first of all, for the peoples of Georgia and
Ukraine, who are being persuaded by the mass media that the accession
to the western military alliance will their countries prosperous.

Let us abandon our illusions. The process of NATO`s eastward
expansion has gone too far, and there`s little doubt that in the
long run Ukraine and Georgia will be given the green light to join
the alliance. U.S., the ground slipped from under their feet in Iraq
and Afghanistan, is now preoccupied with gaining control over the
most important geopolitical regions in the post-Soviet territory-
Ukraine, Transcaucasia and Central Asia, where NATO’s first ever
Special Representative for the Caucasus and Central Asia, Robert
Simmons, had already arrived to demonstrate the Atlantic Alliance’s
willingness to expand its relations with the partner countries
of those regions. In fact, Washington sees these territories as a
springboard for their influence on Russia, Iran and China. That was
not by chance that some politicians in Kiev have been insisting that
some vast territories in Russia belong to Ukraine.

The current process of Ukraine’s and Georgia’s transition to NATO
membership is not a hypothetic but a real threat to the Russian
security. If we analyze the recent anti-Chinese hysteria over the
August Olympic Games in Beijing, we may get a clear picture of what
Russia is in for ahead of its 2014 Winter Olympiad in Sochi. The
regions of Transcaucasia, integrated in NATO, Georgia in the first
place (especially in case of successful annexation of South Ossetia and
Abkhazia), will be serve the U.S. interests aimed at destabilization
of the North Caucasus.

"Of course, Russia will take adequate measures to protect its
interests, – Russia’s Military Chief of Staff, Yuri Baluevsky, said.-
It will be something more than just military measures". The sooner
Moscow makes these steps, the better, as it is clear nowadays that the
verbal protests do not work and won`t stop NATO`s eastward expansion.

It is very likely that Tbilisi dares to launch military aggression
against Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Speaking at the mountain troops`
training center in Sachkher (near Kutaisi) on April, 8, Georgian
President Mikhail Saakashvili boasted that the country had purchased
a few billion dollars in arms deals. "Our lives are dedicated to the
future unity of Georgia, and we won`t give up until Georgia becomes
free and united. All our victories are before us".

Neither the Abkhaz people nor the South Ossetians or other national
minorities living in Georgia and Ukraine need be explained that
further integration of these two countries into NATO together with
"consolidation" of the Georgian and Ukrainian "political nations"
on the anti-Russian basis would only make their lives worse.

The signs of aggression are becoming more evident. Some Georgian
political analysts say "Russia is pushing Georgia to launch a military
action in Abkhazia". According to the head of the International Center
for Conflists and Negotiations, Georgy Khutsishvili, "Russia may take
active steps and officially recognize the self-proclaimed republics
or annex them and thus provoke a harsh reaction from Georgia".

In an interview with Estonia’s daily "Postimees", Georgia’s Prime
Minister Lado Gurgenidze leaked a word, saying that Georgia was
in principle prepared to recognize Kosovo. The official Tbilisi
accused Estonian journalists of misinterpreting Gurgenidze`s words
but "Postimees" reporter Igor Taro, who conducted the interview
with Gurgenidze, played the recording of the interview to prove that
Gurgenidze had really made that statement. However, these words could
be interpreted in another way: Gurgenidze wanted to say that Georgia
could recognize Kosovo as the Albanian state soon after Tbilisi founded
the solution to Abkhazian and South Ossetian issues as a result of a
military operation. And a possibility of such an operation is becoming
more real as Georgia receives informational and diplomatic support
from Washington. The U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Daniel Freed
has repeatedly promised that Moscow would face serious problems if
recognizes Abkhazia and South Ossetia, while only the recognition of
the two self-proclaimed republics (even in a form of bilateral defence
agreements) would prevent Saakashvili from large-scale provocations
and military campaigns.

The situation in Nagorno-Karabakh has also grown out of hand. A
U.S. diplomat Matthew Bryza said at the summit in Bucharest that
the talks on the status of the Nagorno-Karabakh should result in a
bilateral agreement. It must be noted that Mr. Bryza meant not the
negotiation process as such but the revision of the region’s status,
which presupposes concessions from Armenia. In order to make the
new Armenian government more tractable, some pro-Western experts in
Armenia, guided by the International Crisis Group, have spoken in
favor of economic sanctions against their homeland.

Observers say the constructors of the "new world order" are aimed at
presenting the "Abkhazian", the "South Ossetian" and the "Karabakh"
precedents a direct opposite to the "Kosovo" issue. And a key role
is assigned to NATO here. Neither the CIS nor the OSCE could set
anything against this. Even Kazakhstan opposed Russia’s decision to
withdraw from the regime of sanctions towards Abkhazia, and this is
only one of the examples of the existing differences between the CIS
and the OSCE over the "frozen conflicts" in Transcaucasia.

The position of Iran, which is strictly against NATO`s presence in
the Caucasus, turns out to be a more significant factor in stabilizing
the whole situation.

Too much depends on Moscow. Russia is expected to have a nerve to
prevent new bloodshed in the region.