Putting Aside the West & Russia- in Need of a Third Choice
Op-Ed
In the wake of April 9th, triggered by the sporadic bunches of flowers and wreaths that were laid on the tragic-day memorial in front of the Government House in Tbilisi, I started to think. No more crowds there – just the authorities and occasional political activists, turning up on regular annual basis in the newly-born mournful national tradition. I saw it all in 1989, accompanied by my American friends and colleagues, poised to make a documentary about the soviet military machine crushing peaceful demonstrators in Georgia. The film was shown in the United States shortly after the tragedy had taken place to let the wider world conceive the final wriggles of the soviet monster. It was truly hard to shoot, edit and interpret, but it was all done in adequate order and style; we were still alive, and the nation was still functioning as well as it could.
The nation endured this inflicted pain and it came out of the other side. I am still around too . . . If anything kills me someday soon, it would not be potential future tragedy, old-age or a malady. The killer of this good old curmudgeon is going to be a series of meditations on the subject of the state of the nation after the demise of the Soviet Union.
This ‘killer thought’ is derived from the analysis of a political paradox we have received as a consequence of the fall of the evil soviet empire. The crux of the paradox I am talking about is that in soviet times, Georgia was a wholesome land with no territorial and border problems, although it was bent under the burden of communist ideology. Now that Georgia is an independent free nation, it is butchered into several territories – either occupied or functioning on its own – with shattered and unattended borderlines. So, what is preferable – to be part of the bad and oppressive Soviet Union, with an intact territory, or to be free and independent with a huge chunk of the once integral territory dead and gone?
As tricky as this crucial historical question sounds, nobody has the answer to it. Nobody! Not one Georgian political scientist, active politician, regular civil servant or even the wisest man or woman in today’s society. This question is unanswerable; and even if it was, nobody would agree to face the risk of a ruined reputation if one ventured to respond. Of course, the ideal answer would be to have Georgia untouched, with its historical lands, that are currently within the jurisdiction of a couple of foreign countries, regained. On top of that, throw freedom and independence, and developed capitalism into the bargain, plus membership with NATO and the EU and simultaneous friendship and fruitful cooperation with Russia. Wouldn’t this be wonderful? But this is all wild daydreaming and naïve wool-gathering. In harsh reality, this nation is badly suffering from what it has lost as a result of the collapse of the USSR, as vicious and oppressive a regime it was.
This is the political paradox I am talking about: the past model of existence was bad, yet Georgia was whole; the current model of existence is good but Georgia is not totally united. If the given is that we could have our territories back provided we embraced Russia rather than the West, what would an average Georgian say to this? Would an average Georgian agree to forfeit national freedom and independence for restored territories? This is where doubts start eating away at all of us, as we feel that we cannot have both national independence and territorial integrity. We cannot have both because our land coveter is too big, too powerful, too strong headed, too imperial, too voracious and too full of grudge against Georgia. And the friendly West with its endless international formats, meant to help us, is right in the middle of the boring and exhausting Sisyphean toil. Now the question is, which priority will preponderate out of those awful alternatives.
By Nugzar B. Ruhadze