On the website apn.ru is published a great historical research entitled «Was Georgia an ally of Russia? The political model for survival of the Georgian state». «North Caucasus» publishes short excerpts from this conceptual work and strongly recommends studying its full version
In the past few years, especially after the August events, one has often heard the voices, accusing Russia of the fact, that because of its unintelligent and short-sighted policy, it lost its most reliable ally in the Caucasus - Georgia. Such voices are heard from both Russia, and, of course, Georgia. They say that historically Georgia always defended the Russian interests, since Catherine's time it was a stronghold of Russia in the Caucasus, that the Georgians have always been loyal allies of the Russians, and perhaps even our closest friends. However, during the last 15 years, not bright and criminal policy of Russia on splintering parts of the traditionally Georgian territory, the refusal to allow Georgia into NATO, the stupid ban on the sale of wine and Borjomi led to the situation when even such a close friend and ally like Georgia has turned away from Russia and is ready to run anywhere, but only as far as possible from us. Here is such a position. I think you have faced it, too - it is quite widespread.
It is often emotionally colored by regular interviews with representatives of the Georgian public - with someone we known and love, who theatrically frowning, say in dear voice, frequently sounding on TV: «If Putin gave us back Abkhazia and Samachablo, if permitted wine – his photos would have been hung in every Georgian house and attitude of our people would have been as before» or «Russia is interested to have Georgia, as before, as its ally». You have probably heard. But is this true? Was Georgia an ally of Russia? Was it «as before»? Let's investigate.
To begin with, it is necessary to say that anyone, who carefully reads the history of Georgia, soon acquires a persistent feeling of deja-vu - a feeling that exactly this has already been here and with the same result. And it is not even particularly depends on what version of Georgian history he/she reads - in its traditional or modern interpretation. The similarity of events and actions in different historical periods is just amazing - at times it seems that it is possible to move characters or words in places, and nothing will change!
Gradually one understands that, starting from the Middle Ages, in different historical eras and in different circumstances Georgia has always and everywhere acted in the same way, or, in other words, has always and everywhere shown a similar pattern of behavior.
Behavioral models of states or nations have been known for a long time. In fact, the Italian genius Machiavelli, in his «State» described nothing else but a universal behavioral model of the state. And our great compatriot, Lev Gumilev, the son of Anna Akhmatova and Nikolai Gumilev, built his famous system of ethno-genesis in many ways on the models of people’s behavior. He called them «behavioral patterns», and said that they were formed differently in every nation and in accordance with very specific, distinctive historic conditions. As a result of complex processes, ethnic groups begin to acquire stable and recurring features that distinguish them from other ethnic groups...
In one form or another, the Georgians always had their statehood, and in their case it is more appropriate to speak about the behavior of not the Georgian nation, but namely, the Georgian state. Quite surprisingly the behavioral models of the Georgian state in the last 450 years have not changed at all...
Let us study the Georgia’s behavioral model, highlighting its main points and trying to systematize and combine into periods.
1. Georgia is under the authority of a foreign power. No matter how that authority has been formed - imposed on Georgia, or called by Georgia. It is important that Georgia is dependent.
2. Regardless of the nature of formation of that authority, the rulers - the top of Georgia - almost entirely support a foreign «master», at most join it and imitate it, trying to show that they are very similar to it and live by its interests. The same process, with a glance to smaller opportunities, is demonstrated by the entire Georgian people – they «become much alike» with the people-protector and show much in common with it. This process of «similarity between the peoples and interests» is developed in Georgia much more strongly than in other countries and peoples, who in one way or another have fallen under the authority of some state. Consciously or not, by this behavior Georgia shows that, they are not just allies or vassals with its patron - they are part of a «master», its best friends, the most loyal aides and allies. They are just like it.
3. All the period under the rule of the patron, this policy is used by Georgia to obtain benefits and privileges - financial, territorial and others, scoring in this great success compared to other areas.
4. Over time, the «master» becomes weaker, and its weakness on the one hand, begins to threaten the interests of Georgia, as bears lost profits, enlarges the risk of attack from outside, on the other hand, the weakness of the master gives good chances to profit by its own or controlled territories and resources. But Georgia has no power to do so, and then...
5. Georgia immediately begins to actively seek for a new patron. The first search for a new «master» starts the most fondled and favored by the old patron aristocracy. In the future it will become the greatest enemy and denigrator of the old «benefactor».
6. Georgia complains about the old master, tells terrible things about it, lamenting about how hard it’s live was under that master and at the same time praises the new candidate, shows how deeply it has been impressed, tells how they resemble each other, to what extent their interests are common, and tries to imitate it.
7. Now the alliance with the new master is concluded. Authorities and people triumph. After receiving assurances Georgia instantly begins to capture territories, including the territories of the old «master», demonstrating contemptuous and insulting attitude towards it. And at the same time it seeks to strengthen the friendship with a new patron, demonstrating its complete loyalty, admiration, and showing its similarity to it.
All. The cycle is completed. Then one can proceed to step 1 and repeat the process many times with little changes...
So, first, it must be clear that Georgia has never been an ally of Russia in the Caucasus. It is an axiom. Georgia has always been the ally of the strongest, regardless of who was strong. As soon as the patron of Georgia ceased to show strength - it immediately turned away from it, starting a new search for a strong, and having found, it would make a 180-degree turn and begin an attack against the interests of the old «master», offending it and ugly biting off parts of its territory. There are no exceptions from this pattern of behavior.
A key element of this model – what most fundamentally distinguishes it from relations of other states with their «patrons» and supporters – is the fact that Georgia is positioning itself in relation to the «master», not simply as an ally, executing specific commitments in exchange for some actions of a stronger partner, but creates the illusion of friendship, loyalty and sincere attachment to the patron. In order that the «master», obeying false sense of unity, may settle the problems of Georgia or provide protection to Georgia, if the Georgians settle them.
This is a very important point, and not to understanding it means to equal the people’s favorite pilot Valiko Mizandari and the actor Vakhtang Kikabidze, who wildly hates Russia.
There may be many ways to treat such a model - to accept it, not to accept, to consider it to be a betrayal and prostitution, or, conversely, the protection of national interests. I am personally not inclined to emotions and consider it to be just a model of behavior - a peculiar and specific model, which, however, has proved its efficiency and effectiveness. However, the limited effectiveness and limited efficiency. On the one hand, it did not allow Georgia before and does not allow now realizing all of its geopolitical dreams, but on the other – guaranteed the Georgians their survival as a nation that, taking into consideration turbulent and dangerous history of the Caucasus, is already an enormous victory.
Yes, probably, from a moral point of view this is not the most powerful model and it smells with betrayal from a mile. But what is a treachery in politics? It is a method to achieve one’s goal. Old and wise Winston Churchill called a betrayal particular political gift. Can one blame Georgia for having such a gift? Can one blame the suckerfish? Hardly. However, if I were a potential master of Georgia, I would prefer to be clearly aware from the very beginning that I am not «a genius of pure beauty», not an example to follow and not «the sun, rising for Georgia from the North», but only a part of its traditional political model, the part, at the expense of which the Georgian national interests would be realized in the end.
The history of Georgia has given us no other choice over the past 500 years. And it is very possible that after some 20 years we will see how in the center of will be pompously opened a museum of American occupation and see how fairly aged Mikhail Saakashvili from the rostrum with pain in his voice will speak about the heavy legacy of NATO and sincere aspiration of Georgia for Russia.
I hope one won’t believe him. |
FACT
