99Lack of clarityEven though some processes underway – such as the merger of the main TV
stations with media holdings connected to Ivanishvili and the constitutional re-
form which subordinates the institution of the president to the parliament – in-
voke justified fears of excessive concentration of power, Georgia remains an ex-
ception in the South Caucasus. It is the only country
from the region that has managed to sign an Associ-
ation Agreement with the EU as well as an agreement
about the creation of a free trade zone and visa liber-
alisation with countries of the Schengen zone. The
situation is in stark contrast to Armenia (which resigned from the possibility of
EU association in 2013 under pressure from the Kremlin) and Azerbaijan (which
has been trying to balance between Russia and the West in order to avoid any deep-
er integration with either side of the geopolitical gamble).
The positive character of Georgia-EU relations does not mean, however, that
there are no clashes in the relationship. The issue that has been the biggest ob-
stacle in Georgia’s way to the EU and N ATO structures has been the disparity
of interests among the decision-makers in Tbilisi and some of Europe’s leading
capitals. During the whole period, the West has not been able to develop a com-
mon position on the issue of Georgia’s prospects of membership in the EU and
N ATO. The N ATO summit in Bucharest in 2008 can be seen as a symbol of this
struggle. It was in Bucharest when the deeply divided states of N ATO took the
Membership Action Plan off the table and has not been offered since. This example,
although related to the issue of N ATO membership, mirrors the current problem
in Georgian-EU relations.
It is symptomatic that the liberalisation of the visa regime for Georgians only
took place in March this year, nearly one and a half years after Tbilisi met all the
necessary conditions. The delay was due to internal political reasons within the
EU, unrelated to Georgian preparations. It also seems likely that the future of the
Eastern Partnership will be viewed differently in Brussels than Tbilisi. In mid-Ju-
ly, during a conference in Batumi on the Eastern Partnership, Georgia’s ambassa-
dor to the EU, Natalie Sabanadze, clearly noted the existence of disparate percep-
tions. According to her, and contrary to what is claimed in Brussels, participation
in the Eastern Partnership initiative and association with the EU is a geopoliti-
cal choice from the Georgian persective. The Georgian ambassador stressed that
even if EU decision-makers declare that co-operation with Tbilisi is not directed
against the interests of the Russian Federation, it will be perceived as such by the
Kremlin.
The case of Georgia
remains an exception
in the South Caucasus.Visas for Georgians are not enough, Mateusz Kubiak Opinion & Analysis