[Rozi Jghamaia]

“By withdrawal of Russian boundary post from the populated area of Perevi the issue as if there was non-fulfillment of  Medvedev-Sarkoz agreement was finally solved”. –  an  official statement was made Sergei Lavrov’s department soon  after the meeting in Dovili, though it was not specified who made the statement.

The addressee did not wait either and responded also from Dovili to the Russian friend: “The Georgian party should take  a responsibility of not utilizing  the force , but Russia must agree the enter of European observers in Abkhazia and South Ossetia”.

Georgia as always, was concerned about the fact. It did not venture to say something to Sarkozi and  chose Russia again. Of coarse,  Georgia  has the reason for that.

“ The statement of Russian Ministry of Foreign  Affairs is a gross breach of international obligations and abuse and disrespect to those partners before whom Russia took   responsibilities:, - this statement was an answer of Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs- Nino Kalandadze - to Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and she reminded to Sarkozi again:

“The agreement will be concluded  with only aggressive side- with Russian Federation”.

In brief, such a “ harmonized” talk was made between Georgia- French parties. We asked Ramaz Sakvarelidze- psychologist and political expert -  to read the subtexts of the dialogue.

We have heard a lot of versions about the reasons of Russia’s agreement to take Russian army away from Perevi.  Though, all versions apparently have   lack of credibility. What do you think about it? What is your version?

–We hear the statements made by the politicians in media. They say that taking away the forces from Perevi is a result of pressure. That time, a little earlier, as per the logic the position was created that Russia would start withdrawal of the forces from Perevi and not only from Perevi. The thing is that today Russia pays money on not only for annexation  of these territories but on people living there. It means that these regions are in fact Russia’s responsibility and as a rule, Russia should not suspend this process.

So that not to become it a dealing topic?

–It is  ruled out not to become it  a dealing topic from the Russia’s side but it will deal with the West and not with Georgia. However, this process itself is the first round of Russian strategy and not a result of pressure. 

Can Perevi topic be regarded as a bargain topic for enrollment in Russian World Trade Organization?

–I still have an impression that Russia does not want to have any business with Georgia and  speaks about this topic directly with America. Russia prefers to compromise an action with America than with Georgia, as there are many aspects Russia can benefit from America and also “trade counter” stands near the USA . Georgia in not worth for that anyway.

We surely  do not know where else the trade line passes. This topic is widely known, but it is not ruled out that the theme  of rocket security system was a play of trick again, or maybe it is a case of Afghanistan or Iran  where Russia made a useful step there. Hence,  Russia ceded Perevi.    So, I don’t think it is a  real fact   that Russia aims   to focus only on the   Trade Organization.

After withdrawal of Russian forces from Perevi the statement was made by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that 6-item agreement was closed by the fact, but very soon, also Sarkozi called it out by the statement: “ Georgia must take a responsibility not to use forces”. Does it mean that the issue was really  closed?”

–Sarkozi really said that Georgia must  have taken a responsibility not to use forces, but  he did not say that the agreement had been  terminated.  Russia made steps convenient for it and proposed its own version, but the version was not agreed by our  side. As for the article about non-aggression, Georgia agreed to sign  it before too, but it did not find it hard to sign it, the problem was the other party.  If the other side would be Abkhazia or South Ossetia it meant that Georgia would recognize their independence. Such indirect declaration was unacceptable for Georgia and that is why it demanded Russia to sign the document.

In other words, what does Sarkozi demand from us? Will Russia agree to sign the agreement?

–Of course, it won’t do it  just to make Georgia admit. This is its tool in fact. Even though, security of Abkhazian and Ossetian people is defended by Russia’s military forces. However, it is not ruled out that if the obstacle is  overcome, the agreement will give the West a chance to influence on Russia- to make Russia withdraw military forces. For this, the agreement will be a guarantee of Abkhazian Ossetioan peoples’ security.

You  mentioned that Russia counts money and keeping these regions under control is far beyond its interests. Then, why is Russia trying to make Georgia recognize their independence? We know in fact that Abkhazia and South Ossetia will never become independent and they will always be under Russia’s protection and responsibility

–I do not know the thoughts of Russia and it is unknown whether it intends to do it. I say this only resulting from logics of the events. The logics of events forecasts this expectation, but Russia  yields to  nothing  unless any form of influence is maintained on it. On the other hand, if we imagine   Russia ceding  to these territories, it does not mean  its permission of entering  the forces there. It is a step showing its dignity not to turn back the process it had started before.  

Russia will not allow to restore Georgia’s territorial integrity in a way Georgia likes to do it, but it is possible that Russia will suggest Georgia the idea that was heard in  Russian expert circles several times. I mean the topic of confederation or federation. Russia may accept  this topic as a renewed state arrangement theme  for Georgia.   It will give you back the areas  not as parts of  Georgia but as the  federation. Russia may suggest us the recognition of these regions on the conditions  of making it as a federal state

 Do you think Georgia will accept such demand?

–I am not sure Georgia is ready for such terms, but I think that such proposal is the only opportunity for Russia. If we take into account that on the one hand Russia does not want to waste money, and  lose its political image on the other hand, the only chance to avoid losing these two aspects is the federation.

Will all these issues be questions to be discussed in a long term prospect regardless the fact that Russia has already began talking about?

–By the way, withdrawal of the  forces from Perevi was an unexpected question, and on this stage, nobody expected Russia to do it. But by making this  step,  Russia showed everybody that it gives the impulse of inoccupation. If it is an occupant and the main task is occupation for it, than all the territories, beginning from Tbilisi  must be taken away by it. But if we judge from Perevi, i.e, that occupation is not the thing. The thing is other more complicated deal. As Russia made such steps, it means that it opened the door slightly and tomorrow it will talk about it with the West but not with Georgia.