So anxious was Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili for support from the fledgling administration of US President Barack Obama that even though he had not been invited to make a speech, he raced to the annual Munich security conference in February to try to meet the key guest, US Vice President Joe Biden. Witnesses reported that Obama’s deputy initially sought to avoid a handshake or even eye contact, but the Georgian’s bullying won through, obliging Biden to arrange a chat the following day.
Saakashvili followed up this forced encounter by telling journalists: “It is obvious that during all types of negotiations between the United States and Russia, Georgia will be high on the agenda.”
Not so. Obama’s trip to Moscow last month made it clear that last August’s war between Georgia and Russia neither revived the Cold War, nor did it impact on the trend toward greater US-Russian cooperation that Obama promised during his election campaign. Georgia is a sideshow.
The reason is clear. A year on from the five-day war, most European governments as well as the Obama administration agree Saakashvili bears most of the blame.
As Nino Burjanadze, once a close Saakashvili ally, put it: “Saakashvili, deeply unpopular at home, launched a desperate and doomed military adventure in South Ossetia, so providing the Russians with an excuse to reoccupy bases they lost only three years ago.”
Biden’s latest encounter with the Georgian president in Tbilisi last month, reconfirmed the shift of tone from the Bush era. Although Biden made the usual noises about recognizing Georgia’s territorial integrity and rejecting any Russian sphere of influence, no formal agreements were made.
The trip was only arranged to show that Georgia had not been totally forgotten. Unless there were secret agreements as yet unreported, Biden disappointed Saakashvili by giving no clear promise to re-arm Georgia’s battered forces. He told the Georgian parliament the US would modernize the country’s military “with the focus on training, planning and organization.”
Uncoded, that could mean greater US oversight over the army and tighter control over any repetition of last August’s folly.
Biden’s officials also used the visit to deny Saakashvili’s hints that US monitors would soon join the EU team that patrols the Georgian side of the border with the breakaway region of South Ossetia. The EU has confirmed no such plans exist and that the issue will not be discussed until the autumn, if at all. That is welcome news. While Russian officials oppose any US role as “extremely harmful,” that is not the best reason for the EU to reject it. The EU must be able to operate independently of the US and the Georgian mission is a good place to show it can, especially as it was European rather than US mediation that achieved a ceasefire last August.
Biden’s call for democratic reforms and his meeting with opposition politicians in Tbilisi also struck a different note from the Bush era. While Bush pressed for Georgia to enter NATO and turned a blind eye to Saakashvili’s attacks on civil liberties, the new US administration wants an end to repression, while turning a blind eye to Georgia’s NATO aspirations.
The stalemate between Saakashvili and his local opponents continues, and the situation on the ground remains deadlocked. The villages where Georgians once lived inside South Ossetia have been ethnically cleansed and razed. The exodus of Georgians from Akhalgori, the last mixed area, carries on remorselessly. Diplomatically, the Russians have got their way by achieving the withdrawal of the observer mission from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, which used to work in and around South Ossetia, as well as the UN mission that covered Abkhazia, Georgia’s other breakaway region.
In theory, this could raise the risk of border clashes, but for the moment that is out of the question. This post-Soviet conflict is back to being “frozen.” Russia has won all it wanted (short of Saakashvili’s resignation) and has no interest in provoking new clashes. Saakashvili’s forces are too weak to take action.
Can nothing be done to improve matters?
Tom de Waal, a respected analyst of the Caucasus, argues that the West should open links to Abkhazia without recognizing its independence by taking “status-neutral” measures, such as supporting a direct shipping route between Abkhazia and Turkey, and getting Georgia to support it. This would not help Georgia recover Abkhazia, but it would lessen Abkhaz ties to Russia.
Steps of this kind would be useful, but they leave the big picture unchanged. Tens of thousands have lost their homes and hundreds their lives in a war for which Saakashvili — in spite of some slaps on the wrist from Obama and Biden — still has not had to pay a serious price.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with