SAAKASHVILI ''FOOLISH FRIEND (?)''

27/11/2016



 “Better have a wise enemy rather than a foolish friend” Turkish proverb After the Cold War, Pax Americana has started and the United States has been the single weight centre in the international arena. The masters of Potomac have started a process in which they increase their relations with the countries within the Soviet region and draw them to their sides. This was because the final target of the proactive expansion of Washington D.C. was to surround Russia and to be effective and efficient over the Black Sea and the Caucasia. This expansion could enforce the Kremlin after a while to open-door diplomacy. The Red Square which can be seen from the Kremlin could be the place where history ends according to its classical definition and where a new history starts. For that reason, the countries around Russia have taken the top places in the priorities list of the White House. The barriers established with the regime changes near Russia and the “silent blockade” towards Russia has made Ukraine and Georgia different from the other countries of the region. In these two countries, the governments came to power with civic, organized and colourful revolutions via the second domino process of the old continent. How much have these governments which have taken their power from the West adapted to the political, social and institutional structures and operating of their country? Or have they been successful in terms of their country’s” digestion capacity”? We don’t know and I don’t think somebody really knows this. How did the turbulence in Caucasia start and how was it experienced? This crisis has a capacity to make vacuum effect in the region and once Pandora’s Box is opened, a geostrategic earthquake or a Russian tsunami is not far to mind or impossible. The South Ossetia experience whispers to our ears that Georgia will be, in the near future, a laboratory in which a vast geography whose borders are difficult to determine will transform. What is the possibility of Saakashvili’s, who is openly supported by the USA and is a product of the New World Order, carrying out operations to South Ossetia without consulting with the USA? What reflects on the media from the international societies and the world states systematic and what we see from the perspective presented to us from TV screens say that it is “possible.”... The USA owns 12 military bases of which 2 are air bases and 2 are navy bases in Georgia. Also hundreds of military consultants and intelligence personnel of the USA function in this country. There are effective cooperation mechanisms regarding security and defence between the two countries. In this case; how could the operations decisions and preparation be hidden from the USA? How did Saakashvili who gives great importance to bilateral and multilateral relations with the USA have the courage to carry out this undertaking without having done the necessary consultation with its first ally, the USA? “Without being the Devil’s advocate” the following responses can be given from an analytic approach to this issue: “Georgia is an independent country and taking power from the international law its preparation for operations to South Ossetia which is within its borders is regarded ordinary and this did not draw the attention of the American personnel, bases or the satellites. If he consulted with the USA Washington would follow appeasement policy to deter him from this undertaking which is apt to create instability in the region. Saakashvili who wants to be David against Goliath has not informed the USA in advance for that reason.” Let’s suppose this answer is satisfactory. If “new David” has realized “effect ground operation” despite the USA, Saakashvili has created a state of limbo in Caucasia. The instability created with de facto undertaking makes the regional balance in favour of Russia. Because of this sui generis war, by acting as the mistreated country, Saakashvili asks for more help and power from the supporting camp. The USA dances with the musical notes of Saakashvili without looking at the overall picture, questioning the conditions and evaluating the possibilities, and they give him “all support- full support” which Russia does not want. This may not be, for the USA, a useful approach in terms of bilateral, regional and global relations with Russia. If I were an expert working in the kitchen of the foreign and defence policies of the USA, what would I do? First of all, I would not let the USA be a partner of the first major which was done by a foolish friend and which only promises failure and leads to an unexpected journey. I would exclude this undertaking in the first stage for the benefits of the USA. Secondly, I would encourage in the international grounds that the expansion tried by the enfant terrible Saakashvili should be convicted as an attitude which also damages the national policies of Georgia. In the third stage, instead of trying to repair the damaged prestige of Saakashvili, I would support, as soon as the conditions meet, another political leader who will bring a new breath to the country and who will lessen the tension in the region. With these steps which I would follow decisively, I would prevent Russia to gain a determining position under the new conditions. I would not put the USA in a dilemma whether to do or not to do what Russia, which does not want to talk to Saakashvili, says. I would follow a policy “far from emotions and which is totally developed according to the orders of the real policies”. In this way, both in the regional and global grounds I would contribute to the USA to turn the things it could lose as a result of a clash with Russia over Georgia, into new opportunities. However, it is seen that, together with globalism, a new Cold War - or Cold Peace? - is being prepared. I think, as a person who, under Cold Peace conditions, tries to reconcile the benefits and who supports to establish a future on the common denominators, I couldn’t work in the kitchen of such a policy...
porno izlegaziantep escort bayanbrazzers