Georgia’s approach toward Russia and China represents a “choice of sides” by the government, led by the populist Georgian Dream (GD) party. To understand how and why Tbilisi has opted for joining the Chinese-Russian axis, it is important to mention some important facts.
First of all, GD’s alleged positive stance towards the EU was always contradicted by the statements and political decisions of its leadership. In terms of values and actions, the Georgian government holds a significantly different position from those of the EU Parliament and Commission.
One example is LGBTQ+ rights, with the GD’s posture clearly resembling that of Moscow or Beijing rather than that of Paris or Berlin. The Georgian ruling party’s stance on this issue can be seen in the recently approved “Law on the Protection of Family Values and Minors.”
This legislation imposes several restrictions on freedom of expression and assembly for queer people, bans legal procedures for gender recognition and gender reassignment surgeries, and introduces censorship in media and education.
In addition, the law reaffirms the ban on same-sex marriage, while outlawing alternative forms of civil union among non-heterosexual couples.
Georgia’s shift away from the West was exacerbated by the highly contested parliamentary elections last year, which were marred by independent reports of irregularities and voter intimidation.
The pro-western opposition refused to concede the results, accusing the government of derailing the country’s path to EU membership. Since then, it has started round-the-clock protests on the streets of Tbilisi calling for new elections.
However, the Georgian authorities’ use of draconian new laws — which criminalize even symbolic acts such as “placing stickers on public property” — as well as the Electoral College’s appointment of Mikheil Kavelashvili — famous for his anti-western statements — as the new president of Georgia is a clear signal of GD’s intentions moving forward.
The ruling party’s chosen path is significantly out of step with the Georgian citizens’ interests and desires, as further proved by a National Democratic Institute poll on the country’s accession to the EU, with almost 80 percent of Georgians wanting their country to become part of the EU, regardless of partisan affiliation.
By advancing laws aimed at promoting reactionary politics, Georgia triggered a widely expected negative response from the EU Commission. In October of last year, in fact, the executive arm of the EU decided not to recommend opening EU membership talks with Georgia unless it “changes course.”
As it moves away from the West, the Georgian government aims to advance the country’s strategic partnership with China. As the former Georgian prime minister Irakli Garibashvili said: “Georgia is committing itself to China’s BRI as well as a new security architecture,” referring to the Global Security Initiative proposed by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平).
The strategic partnership document, signed by the parties in 2023, fits into the pattern of non-equal relations between Georgia and China.
On the one hand, it states that “Georgia firmly adheres to the ‘one China’ principle.” On the other hand, it fails to mention Georgia’s sovereignty over the two self-declared states of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
The reason behind this omission is China’s strategic relationship with Russia, the country that invaded Georgia in 2008 before declaring the two regions as sovereign states. While China is leveraging the relationship with Tbilisi for its own purposes, the latter is passively accepting a reality imposed on it by Beijing.
Georgia’s adherence to the “one China” principle, with no relationship between the two sides, was confirmed by then-minister of foreign affairs Joseph Wu (吳釗燮) during an interview with RFE/RL’s Georgian Service in 2023. In that sense, he pointed out that “there is no practical, substantive or real relationship with Georgia.”
Whereas Taipei was determined to “communicate with the help of business leaders or through other channels,” as Wu said, the Georgian government made it clear that “they won’t engage with Taiwan.”
As it distances itself from the EU and the US, Georgia becomes increasingly dependent and vulnerable in its relationship with China. This leads to a situation in which China holds the power to impose its agenda on the South Caucasian state.
Georgia’s policies in many areas, such as the economy, civil rights and diplomacy, are the inevitable evidence of the leadership’s willingness to engage with radically different geopolitical actors to attain short-term goals at the expense of long-standing relations with the West.
Michele Maresca is an analyst at the online international law journal Il Caffe Geopolitico and the think tank Geopol 21.
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
RSS