The actuations of Putin’s advocates make it difficult to adopt a common posture in relation to our occupied regions – Zaza Piralishvili

InterPressnews interviewed philosopher Zaza Piralishvili to discuss acute issues of Georgia’s internal and external policy.

- Over the last two or three years, Georgia witnessed rapid changes in its political scene: Irakli Alasania’s ouster was followed by the Free Democrats’ move to abandon the coalition. Mrs. Panjikidze and Mr. Petriashvili have also resigned. Later the President delivered a rather significant speech in the Parliament as well. How would you evaluate the recently occurred changes in the Government as well as the parliament? And what could you say regarding the steps taken by the President?

This is not the first time over the past year the results of psychological incompatibility have been reflected in the country’s domestic policy. I’ve no idea, this may be normal for big business; clearly though, this is absolutely abnormal for a tiny country like us. A man banished from a business organization just becomes unemployed. As a rule, this does not harm business; However, to remove a political or a political group with some useful resources from the political arena is nothing good for the country as this may entail a number of unexpected consequences, as this happened in Alasania’s case.

A couple of days ago, the Free Democrats overtook our TV space, and you can be sure this triggered a massive backlash from the members of the National Movement as well as the Georgian Dream. Precisely in similar situations they start spreading rumors or delivering a message saying that on Nov.15 the former Defense Minister planned to arrange a coup along with the Nationals. Therefore, such concoctions are as a rule extremely actively disseminated by the agitators “dwelling” in social networks.

They have immensely well shown their attitude to their political partners or adherents in 2012, when quite unexpectedly they abolished the Georgian Dream Movement without even expressing their gratitude to the people who voluntarily endangered the safety of themselves and their families in order to serve them.

Internal political spats and endless tit-for-tats have also inflicted serious harm on the government. Image for a minute how low their rating would have been without Free Democrats, Republicans and some other political figures who helped the Georgian Dram leaders in communicating with our young generation as well as the Western politicians. Precisely these people were the pillars of the coalition and precisely they guaranteed the people that the country’s political course would remain unchanged. That is why I am stating: a conflict with Mr. Alasania and Margvelashvili will have a serious ripple effect not only on the domestic but also on the international stage.

The will have to make redoubled efforts to ensure our people that the country will remain on course, especially, under the given circumstances when one of their famous members has recently started hammering into our heads an idea saying that Russia will drop the centuries-long practice of putting pressure on us. A political persecution against Alasania has only exhilarated the Russian who now are actively calling on the Georgian Dream to do away with the Republicans too.

- The Nationals have succeeded in holding a protest event “No to Annexation”. We all know that this rally will have no effect on the ongoing processes in Abkhazia as well as on Russia’s plans in terms of Georgia; however, all demonstrations have a definite purpose; thus, what do you think the Nationals aimed to do by staging their rally? Did they want to demonstrate their power? Was this protest action a triumph of democracy? Or if we repeat Goka Gabashvii’s words, has the public shown the yellow card to its government at this demonstration?

- From the very start, it was obvious that absolutely nothing special would happen at this rally and all their high-sounding words regarding a coup clearly could not change this. And if someone is really determined to gather my and other experts’ career histories to examine them under a magnifying glass, I would advice them to take this political prediction into consideration … All right let’s now return to the topic. By holding this rally, the National Movement simply tested their power and authority against this dark background when the country is licking some serious wounds and the government is trying to resolve the immensely acute problem of our occupied regions. The Nationals simply wanted to figure out whether they were still able to mobilize the people’s opinion and whether the public’s dissatisfaction with the present government has overshadowed the negative and antagonistic attitude against them. Plus they have more or less catered to their curiosity by working out that despite the fact that they are not such an extremely despicable force as they were a year ago, they’ve failed to save their face and will fail to echo the people’s dissatisfaction with the present authorities in the future too. I’ve reiterated and I will underscore again that the fact that our Government does not have a constructive opposition with the ability to point them to their mistakes such as their eagerness to award their own selves with flagrantly boosted bonuses is far from being good for the country or its people. In the given situation, these serious shortfalls will be eliminated only if a relative political will emerges and as we have already learned through experience pinning hopes on this political will can bring us nothing good. I am sure that the Nationals will try to determine the gauge of their strength by staging protest event in the country in the future too.

However, it is also worth pointing out that when the International Community is putting unrelenting pressure on Russia because of its eagerness to depredate Ukraine, holding a protest rally against occupation was mandatory. Frankly speaking, I cannot grasp the present situation and I cannot get what made the government to stand aside and allow the Nationals to stage a rally against annexation. What is actually going on in our country today? Is the issue of the Russian occupied breakaway regions of Georgia no longer acute in our country? How could they have committed the force with an immensely low rating from our public to express protest against Russia’s determination to annex Georgia? Are they deliberately denigrating the importance of this immensely significant issue? These are the core questions the present political biggies must answer under any circumstances.

The actual fact is that no one believes anything coming from the Nationals today. No one expects them to perform any good deed and draw positive changes in our lives. It’s obvious that precisely such political adversaries without any political prospect suit the leading team today.

Hence, in today’s Georgia, a political symbiosis of two powers is being formed out of which one is doing its best not to be replaced by the other political force, while the other is helping the first to secure its standing in the political stage. However, it’s also the fact that our public is abiding the coming of this third political power. Today the National Movement has succeeded in pushing the Georgian Dream members’ backs against the wall.

Here it’s also worth noting that in our day-to-day Georgia there is not even a single left-wing party that would have managed to collect such a large amount of people at their rally.

- At the rally, the Nationals passed harsh judgment and criticism on the Government’s policy in relation to Abkhazia and South Ossetia. One of the members of the National Movement, Davit Bakradze, appealed to the acting authorities not to keep silent when the enemies are grabbing our territories; Irma Nadareishvili defined the present top officials as unqualified and unsuccessful politicians who have no backbone or ability to govern a country. Goka Gabashvili accused them of swindling their own people for two years, while leader of the Movement “Return,” Malkhaz Pataraia, urged them to remove State Minister, Paata Zakareishvili and Abkhazia’s interim governor, Vakhtang Kolbaia, from their posts.

--Naturally, this issue will remain our sour point triggering internal clashes and confrontation until it ceases to exist. I would advice the members of the National Movement as well as their adherents to try to catch on to the situation and comprehend what kind of a special occurrence took place in 2008 that made the International Community to abstain from associating our and Ukraine’s problems to one another.

In addition, we have always been faced with another extremely acute issue: we have proven inapt to build a consensus by stipulating some common principles that will be observed by each of us. On the contrary, a consensus is still being viewed among us as a manifestation of weakness and gullibility despite the fact that neither the English nor the French people have something against a consensus while dealing with different issues of national importance without a consensus, any state is doomed to failure – this is a constant; without a consensus any society are doomed to permanent “cold” or “hot” civil wars.

To define this more precisely, today the Nationals are seeking to be in the limelight by saying a decisive word in such vulnerable issues as Georgia’s attitude to the Russians’ policy, territorial integrity, western orientation, Ukraine’s developments etc. And this is really dangerous as it poses threats to us and our country. It’s extremely dangerous when a political power without any kind of political perspective enjoys a monopoly on the country’s most pressing issues. As for our Government, they are immensely restraint and show no sign of having something against this. Due to some obscure reasons, the present authorities are immensely timid and have a lax attitude about the ongoing developments in our country.

As early as in 2012, it was absolutely clear that the Dream Government lacked leaders with political acumen and ability to get involved in debates and deliver eloquent speeches whenever the necessity for this emerged. Unfortunately, the Coalition still lacks the people who can spark enthusiasm among the people and goad them to action. Like the Nationals, the members of the Coalition are also inclined to label the people as their “foes” and as their “adherents” and this obsolete practice is naturally nothing good neither for them nor the country and its people.

--As Mikheil Saakashvili announced in his TV address to the Georgian people “we must show the Government of Georgia that the nation is as united around a common idea as never before, we must make them realize that the name of Ivanishvili’s Georgia has been dragged through mud, while the Georgia of the Nationals could have held its head up high.” How would you evaluate the statements from the ex-president as well as the messages it delivered to the people via these statements?

- Through this rally, Mikheil Saakashvili himself wanted to prove that his appeals and exhortations can still attract thousands of Georgians. Among the Nationals as well as other political circles there are people who are very well aware of the fact that the old leaders have no political prospects. And today Saakashvili has to grapple with the Georgian Dream Coalition and at the same time fight to retain influence over his own party. As for his messages, they said nothing new; these trite messages have been reiterated by the members of National Movement again and again.

--The representatives of some intellectual circles adherent to the National Movement and namely, Sergey Kapanadze, has presented us with rather interesting proposals of what kind of steps the country can take if the Russians get down to taking active steps in Georgia’s breakaway regions. The title of the document is as follows: “New Era in Russian-Georgian Relations: the importance of formulating anti-annexation strategy.” How big is the chance that the Government will look through this document and adopt a plan to counter Russia’s desire to annex Georgia?

-- I’ve already focused on the importance of building a consensus. It’s obvious that any European country would have thought to build a path to a consensus and deal with similar issue through it. However, in order to do this, we must have political culture and our political terrain must also be stable. In addition, the actuation of pro-Russian forces has obviously thwarted the Government in drawing up well-thought out plans against the aggressors. I will never forget how one of Putin’s slaves announced with an extremely self-contend expression: we cannot sacrifice our morality to the idea of our statehood as if statehood was not a moral phenomenon.

Koba Bendeliani

InterPressNews