Kakha Gogolashvili
Director
Center for EU Studies
Georgia
Online press conference with Kakha Gogolashvili, director of EU Studies in the Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies (GFSIS).
Topic: Foreign policy of Georgia; European Integration and International politics.
The press-conference was organized within the framework of "International Press-Center "Dialogue": Diversification of the Sources of International News for Armenian Media" project. This project of Region Research Center is supported by the OSCE office in Yerevan.
David Stepanyan, www.arminfo.am
- The outcomes of the Riga Summit of the Eastern Partnership held on May 21-22 finally dispelled Georgia’s hopes for the abolition of the visa regime of the EU. What can Tbilisi expect from the European vector of its foreign policy, based on the 30 points of the conclusive Declaration of the Riga Summit?
Answer- This kind of interpretation of the Riga Summit declaration is wrong. The declaration indicated December 2015 as a date the final report on VLAP implementation by Georgia and assumed that the Commission will make a positive recommendation for granting Georgia Visa Free. Most probably this will happen during 2016.
- Armenia’s membership to the EEU was expressed as a necessity for Brussel’s new negotiations with Yerevan for the revision of the legal format of relations, mentioned in the conclusive Declaration of the Eastern Partnership Riga Summit. Do you think there are major differences in the European prospects of Armenia and Georgia?
Answer – Georgia has opened up large possibilities for functional integration with the EU by signing the Association Agreement. Armenia has closed its European perspective for many years, because of membership to the EEU. In the short run the difference may not be well noticeable, but in the medium run Georgia will enter into a totally new kind of relationswith the EU.
- TheprojectonbuildingaBridge of FriendshipontheArmenian and Georgian border, at first sight, testifies to the absence of any problems in the relations between Tbilisi and Yerevan after Armenia’s admission to the EEU. Are there any pitfalls in the real relations within this context?
Answer- The involvement of the two countries in two different integration processes shall not constitute problems in the relations between Georgia and Armenia. The two countries may stay good partners, unless Russia becomes more aggressive towards those countries who try to join the EU. In this case Russia may try to use Armenia as a matter of pressure on Georgia. Even in such a situation the governments of the countries can avoid the confrontation and continue to cooperate.
- In May the Russian Sputnik website was launched in Georgia in both Russian and Georgian with a prospect of opening an identically named satellite channel in the country. Some Georgian colleagues have already qualified this as Russia’s initial attempts to use soft power in Georgia. Could you please share your view on the prospects of that policy?
Answer - Russia uses its soft power against Georgia by financing some media outlets, like Sputnik and several NGOs pretending to be analytical centers. By this Russia promotes its propaganda in the country. Russia also supports certain political figures, sympathizing with Russia openly and allegedly tries to promote them. Other means of the soft power use is the distribution of Russian passports among the Georgian population.
- Those citizens of the country who are not the followers of the Orthodox Church are not considered to be citizens of the country by the Georgian Orthodox Church. How can this policy of the Orthodox Church of Georgia be reflected on the ethnic minorities residing in Georgia, including the Samtskhe-Javakheti and Kvemo-Kartli regions densely populated by Armenians and Azerbaijanis?
Answer – I have never heard such a qualification of “Georgians” from the Orthodox Church of Georgia. There may be any kind of declarations by different representatives of the Church, but never has this been the official position of the Orthodox Church of Georgia.
Emil Babayan, EurAsiaDaily, www.eadaily.com
- Back in mid 2013 the term “the European integration of South Caucasus” was still topical, and it presumed that all the three countries in the region will take the route of rapprochement with the European Union, moving forward on the rails of association. Today this term is not possible to use any more –Georgia took that route, Armenia turned in the opposite direction, and Azerbaijan stayed where it was. The question would be: how different is the current situation from the one presumed by the prospect of the regional European integration? Will that force the countries to move apart or will it create new opportunities for multi-format cooperation?
Answer - There were always doubts about similarity of European aspiration of all three countries of the South Caucasus. The Russian factor played the role in changing orientation by Armenia. With Georgia it has not worked, but the attempts to force the country to slide back from the European path will continue. As regards to the cooperation between Armenia and Georgia, this may continue in any condition. The countries still have FTA between them, can fully use the opportunities provided by their participation in different blocks (unless the EU and EAEU become at large extreme confrontational) and I do not see the reasons for the pessimism in this regards.
- The EU Eastern Partnership programme has often been criticized for being immature and for the lack of resources. In particular, this was said about policy and politics. Today, already as post factum there is a rather common opinion that the European Union was not ready to get into a strugglewith Russia for influence in South Caucasus, to allocate resources, to really increase its political weight in the region, propose a clear and viable alternative to the existing conjuncture, and as a result, overawed, in fact moving away from the idea of the EaP. Thus, do you agree to these statements, and if not, what are the real prospects of the “Eastern Partnership” as of the day (if not of the programme itself, but the policy after this logic) in South Caucasus?
Answer – EU has never abandoned the EaP. Indeed EaP cannot stay the same because of the changing context in Eastern Europe. While there was no strong Russian action to contain raising EU influence in Eastern Europe and South Caucasus in particular, EaP was advancing fast and without difficulties. That’ s why three countries from EaP were able to sign the AA agreements. This number could be four (with Armenia), indeed the Russian sudden awaking has produced impact on prospects of the EaP. In the new reality EaP will develop two multilateral dimensions one for all six countries, the other (additional) for three associated with EU countries. The first format will be weaker in terms of the ambition and the scope of issues covered, but the other format will go to the deeper topics of cooperation towards the closer integration of the mentioned countries with the EU.
- Atthelevelofdescriptionstheeuro- andEuropeanintegration promised a lot of good and boons to the potential participants, a bright future, a world without borders and so on. Now on the basis of the example of the two countries in the region - Armenia and Georgia – we can draw a preliminary conclusion which choice was correct, and which was not quite correct. Maybe Georgia should have gone to the EEU? And maybe Armenia has taken a stupid step and allowed for “September 3rd,” losing that very bright future? What do you think on this matter?
Answer – The political choice for countries does not always depend on their own desire. This is the case with Armenia. There is no doubt that integration with the European Union is much more beneficial, as far as this process results in the transformation of the county try into democratic and prosperous nation. Russia, being itself authoritarian and economically poorly developed country cannot offer the same prospects to those who integrate with it. It is well known that had Armenia been free in its choice the country would have made the choice (and it was close to it) in favor of European Integration.
- (On June 15) Information was published that a representative of ISIS was detained in Georgia. And in general, information has long been circulating within the journalistic circles that ISIS is increasing its presence in Georgia, so far only through individuals. At the same time, both Armenia and Georgia are actually separated from ISIS by only one state – Turkey, which supports these Islamists, has opened the borders to the world to these people, provides treatment to them in its territory, provide recruitment, supplies, and arms and so on. And it is from Turkey that they come over to Georgia. In this regard two questions come afore: first of all, how is Turkey as a sponsor of international terror viewed in Georgia at the political and social levels. Secondly, are appropriate measures taken in Georgia for erecting barriers against the Islamist ailment?
Answer – Georgia is a multi-confessional country. This fact is being used by ISIS trying to influence the Muslim population in the country by their ideology and recruit young citizens of Georgia into the ISIS military structures. The detained representatives of the ISIS/ISIL are Georgian citizens and obviously Turkish state has no relation to this fact. In general, the Turkish state is not financing terrorism and supports as we know fight against ISIS in Iraq. Turkey has opened its borders for the more than one million refugees from Syria and Iraq and provides support to Kurdish forces in Iraq fighting to free their cities from ISIS occupation.
Armen Minasyan,www.panorama.am
- In your opinion, what is the major shortcoming of the Eastern Partnership programme?
Answer – To my view EaP is a very well designed framework for cooperation, but the main problem is the lack of funding. It is important to increase the budget of programs and projects to support the objectives of EaP.
- What do you think the advantages and disadvantages of Georgia’s joining the Association Agreements with the European Union are?
Answer – AA is a most important step Georgia has done up to now in direction of the European Integration. I do not see any negative side of this action. The main issue is whether the country will effectively use this chance for deeper transformation and advancement towards the eventual membership in EU.
- Armenia is already joining the Eurasian, and Georgia is joining the European economic zone. The governments of the two countries consider that this should not become a reason for demarcation lines, on the contrary, good neighborly relations and economic cooperation between Armenia and Georgia should play a connecting role, to become a kind of a bridge between the EU and the EEU. Do you think such a development is possible and if yes, what mechanisms is it based on?
Answer – Armenia and Georgia can use their presence in two different integration projects. This is an especially good chance for businesses. For example, through joint ventures and industrial cooperation jointly produced goods (using the Rules of Origin established by EU-Georgia DCFTA) may be exported to EU free of customs duties as provided by AA for Georgia.
- Since the launch of the election campaign of the Georgian Dream, the necessity of re-exploitation of the Abkhazian section of the railroad has been spoken too much about, however things did not move from the starting point. Do you think there are real prerequisites for the implementation this programme, and what needs to be undertaken for that?
Answer – When the question of the reopening of the Georgia-Russia railway (passing through Abkhazia, Georgia) actualized Georgia and Russia were in the process of normalization of relations. Indeed this year Russia signed integration agreements with Abkhazia and South Ossetia, witch practically closed any possibilities for the further normalization and cooperation between two countries around joint projects, like the railway. I think that the railway will not be reopened quite a long time from now.
- What prospects for the future development of relations between Armenian and Georgian relations considering the Eurasian choice of Armenia and the European choice made by Georgia?
Answer – I already responded to similar question.
Gagik Baghdasaryan, www.newsarmenia.am
- Mr. Gogolashvili, how realistic are the hopes of some of the EaP states on EU and NATO accession in the near future?
Answer – Membership in the EU is a matter of long term strategy for Georgia, Ukraine and Moldova (who are closer to this aim than other three countries of EaP). This will not happen next 10 years, but all three countries most probably will join EU in the time span of two decades. Membership in the NATO depends on the geopolitical realities and the nature of security risks that can accelerate or vice versa hinder the process. It is difficult to predict how the political/security environment will change in the future, so the prospects of membership of Georgia or Ukraine in NATO remains unclear.
- Are any developments notes in the Georgian economy after signing the Association Agreement with the EU and do you expect any shifts in the future?
Answer – Impact of DCFTA on EU-Georgia trade cannot be observed quickly, but Georgia’s exports to EU started to increase from the beginning of 2015. Especially increase the share of EU in Georgia’s total exports.
- Will Europe open up its markets before Georgian manufacturers, what Georgian production may be demanded in the EU market?
Answer – Georgia counts on the increased exports of the agricultural products to EU.
- What do you think Saakashvili is doing in Ukraine? Does his and other similar appointments mean that this country has somehow confessed about its failure and has partially agreed to external governance?
Answer – I think that appointment of Saakashvili and other members of his team in Ukraine may contribute to the elimination of the corruption, which is the main problem of that country. Georgian reform were very popular in that country and President Poroshenko decided to capitalize on that. This does not mean that Ukrainians cannot rule their own country. Georgians and other foreign government officials will certainly be replaced by Ukrainian public managers of new generation in the future, when country starts normalizing.
Artak Barseghyan, Public Radio of Armenia, www.armradio.am
- How do you evaluate the current state of the Armenian and Georgian political relations in light of the quickly changing geopolitical processes?
Answer – Georgia and Armenia have some controversial foreign policy objectives, having impact on the regional stability, but there are too many common interests that make must for the rulers of both countries to find compromises and take into consideration each other’s positions. I think both understand that there is no alternative for deepening of cooperation, which fuels the spirit of good relations between Armenia and Georgia.
- What future for South Caucasus do you see in light of the strengthening of the Azerbaijani and Turkish tandem?
- Answer – Turkey undergoes deep process of democratic transition. Turkish population becomes more and more active politically, which was proved by the last elections. I think in the future Turkey will be seeking to promote peace and reconciliation between Armenia and Azerbaijan and will play constructive role in the establishment of the peace in south Caucasus.
- What can you say about the prospects of the development of the geopolitical alliance between Baku, Tbilisi and Ankara?
Answer – Georgia is and will stay in good relations with both countries, this bring also advantages to the country as a component of the Eurasian corridor. In the same time Georgia tries to Europeanize and establishes closer cooperation with the EU and NATO, which excludes possibilities of direct military blocking in the region with Azerbaijan. Georgia will never make alliance threatening Armenia’s security neither. In general Georgia’s cooperation with Turkey and Azerbaijan will never turn into alliance against Armenia, or somebody else.
+37410 563363
1/3 Buzand Str, 8 Floor, Yerevan, Armenia