Saakashvili bad at keeping, failure at grabbing30.08.2010 | 12:57
Eccentric Georgian leader Mikheil Saakashvili keeps scolding his northern neighbor. This time the president of Georgia calls Russians historical imperialists. According to Saakashvili, the Russian state, that has always viewed itself as an empire, has been a good "grabber" but a bad "keeper". I wonder whether Mikheil Saakashvili remembers that it was he who failed to keep Abkhazians and Ossetians inside his state, and unleashed his imperialist aspiration to restore "constitutional order" by force in August 2008.
Answering this question, it will be clear to Saakashvili that criticism of Russia might turn against him in this case. Flunking the military adventure aimed at conquering South Ossetia, Sakartvelo's head is rightfully called a bad "grabber". Look for the "keeper" above.
But the president of Georgia continues: "Russia preferred the language of blackmail instead of a normal, cultural, favorite Russian, the language of threats and the language of artillery and rockets, air bombs".
Well, it's better to ask the Ossetians who were woken up by shell bursts on the night of August 7-8 about the language the Georgian leader was speaking then. Or those who lost their relatives during those five tragic days. Is Saakashvili ready to call this language the language of diplomacy?
Now, the best part: according to the president of Georgia no one wants to be in a place where shooting is heard. Golden words. Maybe, this was the logic the Georgian leader was guided by trying to drive unruly Ossetians back into his state?
There is an impression that sometimes Mikheil Saakashvili simply rambles in his speech projecting his own mistakes onto the republic's number one foe (as he takes it). GeorgiaTimes correspondent discussed Saakashvili's equivocal expressions with psychologist Yuri Levchanko.
Indeed, this is projection. On the whole Mikheil Nikolayevich is a psychotherapist's client, to some extent. I would like to remark that Georgia and Russia, its nations have great history. We ourselves often project Saakashvili's acts onto all Georgians, which, I think, is rather wrong. These are mutual fears already. That is why in this case the two countries must carry out a policy through cultural ties first of all. Yes, it's right to respond with cannons when one is bombed. But it is wrong to respond with total contempt for the whole of Georgia.
This is what Russian politologists think about Saakashvili's conclusions:
Sergey Markov, United Russia faction member, director of the Institute for Political Studies: I think the Georgian president is trying to advertise himself. He is trying to take advantage of the image of Russia that exists in some Western states where Russia is perceived as a militarized country that speaks the language of force with the rest of the world. At the same time today's Russia rejected domination over other nations, pulled out its troops from Eastern Europe by its initiative and agreed to the collapse of the Soviet Union. Saakashvili himself is an ultranationalist and xenophobe that hates other nations. Now I'm in Abkhazia and I can tell a lot about monstrous Georgian nationalists who hated Abkhazia and its people. There are lots of cases when it was prohibited for Abkhaz children to speak their native language during breaks at school. Besides, Saakashvili was preparing ethnic cleansings in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and only Russian troops stopped these crimes against small nations. He hates Russia for all that.
Sergey Demidenko, expert at the Institute for Strategic Evaluation and Analysis: Saakashvili's words are a normal move in present-day propaganda practice. The Georgian president does not invent things here. A different matter is that these statements should be considered in a wider geopolitical context: they imply Saakashvili's pursuit of the hostile policy toward Russia and those whom Moscow supports. I don't think he will ever abandon this line or that he will stop increasing military strength. That is why the situation in South Caucasus remains extremely tense; the region will keep balancing on the verge of an armed conflict. The latest statement on creation of the Georgian-Azerbaijani confederation points to possible deterioration of the situation since the problem of Javakhetia might add to Abkhaz and South Ossetian issues.