NATO demonstrates omnivore
“In Georgia itself, most politicians agree that NATO can only be entered within internationally recognized borders. Unfortunately, the contradictions between Georgia and South Ossetia are fueled by constant disputes over the demarcation of the territory, and voices are heard in the country that NATO membership is the only way to stop these local conflicts. "
Former NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen invited the Georgian authorities to start a discussion on the acceptability of the country's accession to this organization without the territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. According to the official, the military-political bloc departs from its principle that only a state that does not have territorial conflicts can be a member of the alliance.
This proposal, even if made by the former head of the organization, first of all suggests that NATO seeks to absorb as many territories as possible in a geopolitical confrontation with Russia. The ideal situation is to drive a wedge between our country and each neighbor who is not yet a member of the alliance, include the country in the North Atlantic Treaty and force it not only to deploy troops under its combined (read: alien) command, but not to spend less than 2% of GDP for the so-called defense.
I would like to recall that if the entrance to NATO costs a ruble, then the exit can cost two. In 1973, members of the alliance decided to prevent Iceland from leaving NATO and pledged to intervene in the sovereign affairs of this country, and declare its withdrawal.
In Georgia itself, most politicians agree that NATO can only be entered within internationally recognized borders. Unfortunately, the contradictions between Georgia and South Ossetia are fueled by constant disputes over the demarcation of the territory, and voices are heard in the country that NATO membership is the only way to stop these local conflicts.
In Georgia today people of different generations live side by side.
Some still remember the USSR as a natural strengthening of ties in all areas - from education to culture. Others were born and live in an era of information war and heated conflicts and want peace, openness and a safe life. Still others have become radicalized and are pushing their foreheads together, hoping to pull the coals they need for themselves from ever new bonfires.
We - in a situation where NATO is militarizing the European space - must finally offer the Georgians an alternative that I never tire of talking about. Russia should appear before the Georgians as a country of opportunities for education, cooperation in the field of science and culture, a partner for the implementation of new economic projects and a mediator in an interethnic dialogue with the Abkhaz and Ossetians. This is the only way we will knock the soil out of the haggling outcasts who are ready to lease the country to the military of others, if only to annoy Russia.
Such an outcome cannot be allowed.
The author’s point of view may not coincide with the position of the publisher.