© REUTERS / Irakli Gedenidze
For many, Mikhail Saakashvili’s return to Georgia came as a surprise. The former president of this country himself has repeatedly declared his intentions to enter Tbilisi on a white horse. But he did it so often that he eventually turned into a fable character – into a boy who shouted “Wolves!”
However, there is no doubt that the “breakthrough of the border” by the adventurer was prepared in advance and agreed with his Western curators. Saakashvili acted according to the same scenario that he implemented in September 2017, when he made his way to Ukraine through Poland. Then he also publicly showed tickets, which he did not use in the end, got on a train on which he did not go anywhere, that is, he constantly threw in fakes, distracting attention from the real scenario. And now the ex-president has shown his ticket to Georgia, stating that he intends to fly to Tbilisi on the evening of October 2, that is, by the end of the local elections there. But on the morning of October 1, he demonstrated his video from Batumi, where he, most likely, made his way by sea.
It is worth recalling that four years ago, on the eve of the breakthrough of the Ukrainian cordon, Saakashvili said that he had secured the support of high-ranking Western leaders. And at the very border he was accompanied by MEPs, one way or another connected with the structures of George Soros, and a number of Ukrainian “grant-eaters” who never take a step without instructions from their patrons.
There is no doubt that even now the chronic border violator could not act so adventurously without the approval of those structures that have supported him since the beginning of the 2003 Rose Revolution. The goal is obvious: to provoke another round of the internal Georgian conflict, a new parliamentary crisis and another “color revolution”. Saakashvili is again used as a battering ram. The authors of the script are outside Georgia and this time they do not hide their involvement in the events. It is safe to say that the current conflict is directly provoked by the actions of the European Union and the United States.
At first glance, the October 2 elections were not a symbolic and significant part of the general political agenda of Georgia – unlike last year’s parliamentary elections (when Saakashvili also promised to return). This time, only mayors and regional authorities were elected. But it was the European Union that turned them de facto into a referendum on a vote of confidence in the authorities, which only threw firewood into the conflict eternally smoldering there.
Considering the fact that after the formation of the parliament in Georgia, another crisis began (opposition parties blocked its work, refusing to attend meetings), the head of the European Council Charles Michel personally intervened in the dispute. After lengthy negotiations with Georgian politicians, an agreement was signed in April this year, which is what everyone calls it to this day: “The Michel Agreement”.
The essence of the document lies in the obligations to carry out new reforms of the electoral legislation (everyone has already somehow forgotten that the previous “reform” came down to Georgians from the West), once again to amnesty the oppositionists who participated in street riots (for one of them the European Union even posted a bail) , and guarantee other trade-offs that are standard for Georgia. But the main point of the agreement is that early parliamentary elections should be held in the country if the ruling Georgian Dream party in the current municipalities gains less than 43% of the votes from party lists. Yes, yes, not 50%, not 40%, but 43% – even Georgian politicians were puzzled by this. The same Saakashvili asked the question: “Do we trade in the market, buy two kilograms of cheese?”
In fact, this very approach doomed Georgia to a programmed round of crisis following the October 2 elections. It is a thankless and subjective task to count the percentages of national parties in minor local elections, during which scattered local campaigns took place. Municipal bodies in Georgia (sakrebulo) are only advisory. A much tougher struggle unfolded for the election of mayors of large cities, primarily the capital. But the European Union was clearly not interested in this. The task was not to achieve the necessary electoral result, but to raise the degree of confrontation in society. For this, at the last moment before the elections, another project “Saakashvili is a border trespasser” was launched.
It should be noted that at first the “Michel Agreement” was refused to be signed by the main opposition party led by the Georgian “Soros” headed by Saakashvili himself – the “United National Movement”. And this did not serve as a reason for any sanctions against her or withdrawal of Western support. But when the ruling Georgian Dream in August announced that it was withdrawing the signature from the agreement (on the grounds that the main opposition force was not participating in it), angry shouts from the West began and demands to punish official Tbilisi. And this is all despite the passionate desire of the Georgian authorities to please America and Europe.
In the opinion of a number of Western analysts, with the departure of Saakashvili, Georgia is pursuing an insufficiently Russophobic course. No matter how she proved her commitment to the West, supporters of the current citizen of Ukraine have always remained the favorite of various State Department and Soros structures. Therefore, there have long been calls to punish the pro-Western Georgian government with sanctions.
And when Georgian Dream announced its withdrawal from the Michel Treaty, it was generally accused of “turning its back on the West” and “pulling Tbilisi into Moscow’s orbit.” Tellingly, while Saakashvili’s party refused to sign this agreement, no one accused her of being “pro-Russian” and did not demand punishment for it.
Special attention should be paid to the fact that individuals openly stand on the side of the Georgian opposition, accusing official Tbilisi of “pro-Russian”. First fiddle here is played by former US Ambassador to Georgia Ian Kelly and former Assistant Secretary of State David Kramer. Both are now lecturing at American universities directly related to various Soros foundations, and Kramer is the initiator of various appeals in support of George Soros. Now he does not leave the screens of the Georgian opposition channels, listing by name the leaders of the “Georgian Dream” who should be subject to Western sanctions.
A man votes during the second round of parliamentary elections at a polling station in Tbilisi
The funniest thing about Georgian politics is that there (as well as in Ukraine) every political force accuses its opponents of “working for the Kremlin.” So, Saakashvili, in his “letter to freedom” accused the Georgian authorities of acting on the instructions of the Russian authorities: “When I left Kiev and came here, I knew that, most likely, I would be arrested on fabricated, false sentences, issued by order of Putin. “
And here is what the chairman of the Georgian Dream Irakli Kobakhidze says: “Saakashvili acted in the interests of Russia for nine years, when he was in power. <…> Then, being in opposition, he continued to do the Russian cause. “
As we can see, nothing changes in Georgia: “Putin’s agents” in the Georgian government are actively fighting against “Putin’s agent” Saakashvili. And both sides swear loyal love for the West. Otherwise, after all, they may be deprived of contentment.
There is nothing surprising in the fact that on Saturday, immediately after the closing of polling stations, the usual exit-poll war unfolded in Georgia. The main goal of both camps was the same barrier set by Michel – 43%. The pro-government Imedi TV channel, of course, reported that Georgian Dream had surpassed the desired mark, gaining 47.6%. And the opposition TV company “Mtavari Archi” predictably announced that the government had fallen short of the cherished milestone, reaching only 38.6%.
Few people initially doubted that the official results of the elections, which the CEC would sum up, would show the necessary result of the “Georgian Dream”. As well as the fact that the opposition political forces will declare this result falsified – absolutely according to the scenario of last year’s parliamentary elections. One might think that the head of the European Council naively assumed a different outcome, forcing the Georgian parties to sign their agreement.
This was the idea of the Western leaders who imposed this scenario. Seeing that the protests in the streets had subsided, an option was thought up that could blow up the situation in the country – a sharp polarization of society during not particularly significant elections. And realizing that the figure of Saakashvili is the best irritant for the Georgians, he was sent there at the most opportune moment. True, the landing in the Bay of Juan, from which Napoleon began his campaign to Paris in 1815, clearly did not work out for the Georgian adventurer. Saakashvili’s jubilant fans did not carry him on their shoulders to the presidential palace in Tbilisi. Even an analogue of his meeting on the Ukrainian border four years ago could not be repeated.
But the fugitive ex-president of Georgia can be sure that the West will toughly demand his release. Actually, similar statements have already been made. And here the Georgian authorities face a serious test. If they succumb to outside pressure and release the already sentenced Saakashvili, this will not just be evidence of Georgia’s dependence on external players, it will be an irreparable blow to the “Georgian Dream” in the eyes of its voters, who are eager for the criminal to answer what he deserves. If they show firmness in keeping him in prison, they will face pressure that the country has not experienced for a long time.
In the current Georgian events, the West once again shows what it is capable of doing not only with opponents, but also with loyal vassals who have fallen out of favor.
A woman votes during the second round of parliamentary elections at a polling station in Tbilisi
Subscribe to us