These days, large-scale multinational NATO exercises, codenamed Agile Spirit, are being held in Georgia, which literally translates as “Agile Spirit”. Such maneuvers are being held in this Transcaucasian region for the ninth time, but this year, according to Tbilisi’s statement, they are twice as large as the number of combat equipment and personnel involved. Apart from Georgia and the USA, 12 more countries are taking part in them.
Not all of them are full members of the North Atlantic Alliance - however, Georgia itself, as is known, despite the many years of Brussels promises and aspirations of Tbilisi politicians, did not join NATO. What does not prevent the alliance to use this country for the realization of its own militaristic ambitions, in particular to create tension at the borders of its main geopolitical opponent, namely Russia.
One of the main goals of these exercises, which, according to Georgian Defense Minister Levan Isoria, is to maintain stability and peace in the Black Sea region, is rather strangely formulated. This geographic specification suggests certain reflections. If you look at the latest year's news bulletins regarding unsafe incidents near the Black Sea, you can easily establish: they all occurred due to the fault of another (also inferior) partner of NATO, namely Ukraine.
This incident, and the situation in the Kerch Strait, and numerous smaller incidents, one way or another connected with the provocations of the Ukrainian authorities.
At the same time, it is quite obvious that all these, if one may say so, “operations” were developed not by the Ukrainian military themselves, but by their direct NATO curators and foreign instructors working in the country. In other words, the irony is that, in announcing concern for stability and security in the Black Sea region through NATO exercises, the alliance itself is in fact the only one who threatens this stability and security. In this sense, Ukraine’s participation as a partner of NATO in Agile Spirit is completely natural and significant.
In reality, there is no need to be a rocket scientist to understand: the maneuvers deployed in Georgia are primarily directed against Russia and those countries that Russia supported in a difficult moment and helped in confronting Georgian military aggression (again, planned and prepared by NATO members themselves) .
It is, of course, about Abkhazia and South Ossetia. And if there is no tension in the RSO - at least in the internal political situation, in Abkhazia they are now preparing for the difficult presidential elections to be held on August 25th.
The arrival of a conditional pro-Georgian politician in Sukhum is absolutely excluded. It should be understood that in the Abkhaz conditions and after the armed conflict of 1992-1993, this is impossible in principle.
The Abkhaz society is not something that does not vote - in principle, it will not allow such a politician to appear in their stands. However, at the same time, within the country that was once part of Georgia, there is a rather high political competition, and this, in turn, also creates a certain tension. At least four or five candidates can be equally realistic in an absolutely realistic way to apply for the presidency.
Let’s say so, if official Tbilisi tried to play some kind of its game in Abkhazia in these elections in order to undermine stability in the country that had won its independence, it would be easier not to try to work according to the traditional scheme, promoting its candidate (that is, loyal to the Georgian the authorities are politicians), and to arrange unrest and chaos by pushing the pro-Russian candidates between their heads with each other, as well as contribute to increasing tensions between Sukhum and Moscow.
I do not want to say anything unequivocal, but several months before the presidential elections in Abkhazia, a rather strange story happened with the poisoning of one of the leaders of the local opposition, Aslan Bzhania, who had serious chances for success in the struggle with the current government. Bzhania survived, despite the fact that his condition, according to doctors, was critical.
Until now, there is no evidence or convincing versions of who needed to do this. However, this case seriously aggravated the relations between the government and the opposition and in a certain sense undermined the trust (at least of the opposition part of Abkhaz society) to Russia as a guarantor of security in the region. To assert now that Tbilisi stands behind Bzhania’s poisoning would be pure conspiracy, but it is certainly important to understand who the only beneficiary in this story is and against which background NATO conducts multinational exercises in Georgia.
Another thing is also important - how beneficial is the involvement of NATO in a geopolitical confrontation with Russia directly for the Georgian people themselves. Can the Georgian people (not to be confused with the Georgian establishment) extract any practical benefits from these military processes? As history shows, it is unlikely. The 2008 conflict, launched and planned by the curators from NATO, objectively ended a disaster for the Georgian people. Also illustrative is today's example of Ukraine, whose authorities from cooperation with NATO have brought nothing to their own people, except for the ongoing five years of war. Official Tbilisi stubbornly does not want to learn either from its own or others' mistakes, again and again stubbornly attacking the NATO rake, and these teachings are just another confirmation of this.
The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.