Georgia Beyond “Radical Europeanness”: Undiscovered Directions of Foreign Policy

Georgia’s turn to the West signifi cantly aff ected its geopolitical and foreign policies. The author shares the view expressed by Georgian scholars that the country’s continued commitment to the Western vector is a direct consequence of ideas expressed by political elites (constructivist theory) and their self-identifi cation as “European,” coupled with Western-style liberal democracy as a social order preference (liberal theory). Georgia’s political elites are driven by the concept of “Europeanness” and thus focus primarily on the state’s aspirations to be integrated into the “Western world,” which is pushing the state towards European and North-Atlantic integration. Georgian elites believe that institutional reunifi cation with “European family” under the NATO defence shield will not only deter Moscow but will fi nally put an end to Moscow’s attempts to bring the post-soviet state under its control. Moreover, due to the tensions between the generalized West and Russian Federation, the Kremlin’s aspirations to stop what it perceives as a geopolitical expansion of the West to the east, Georgia’s approach has become even more radical. The paper argues that the concept of “Europeanness” has been transformed into “radical Europeanness,” meaning that the political elites maintain economic cooperation with non-Western countries, but there is no proactive foreign policy beyond that, even with its most important strategic partners, namely Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkey. In spite Tbilisi enjoys trade relations with these countries, the existing level of political and military cooperation between them conceals signifi cant bilateral challenges. Additionally, this approach is perfectly refl ected in Georgia’s relations with China, when the country’s political elites pushed for free trade, without attention to the political and geopolitical aspects of economic cooperation. Thus, Georgia – China relations are also the part of research interest in this paper, as the free trade regime between the two countries is subject to serious scrutiny after the Donald Trump administration made it clear that Washington would not welcome Chinese economic and geopolitical expansion in Georgia.

Georgia, “radical Europeanness”, identity, foreign policy, elites, social order

1. Vasilyeva, Natalya, and Zeinab Bakhturidze. “Characteristics of Entering Former Soviet Republics into the System of International Relations Referencing Georgia as an Example.” [Osobennosti vkhozhdeniya postsovetskikh respublik v sistemu mezhdunarodnykh otnoshenii (na primere Gruzii)] Administrative Consulting, no. 4 (2015): 26–34.] [In Russian]

2. Sikharulidze, Archill. “Russia as a Factor in Georgia’s Domestic Policy.” [Rossiya kak faktor vnutrennei politiki Gruzii] Central Asia, no. 1 (2019): 135–153.] [In Russian]

3. Kakachia, Kornely, and Salome Minesashvili. “Identity Politics: Exploring Georgian Foreign Policy Behavior.” Journal of Eurasian Studies 6, no. 2 (July 11, 2015): 171–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. euras.2015.04.002.

4. Kakachia, Kornely, Salome Minesashvili, and Levan Kakhishvili. “Change and Continuity in the Foreign Policies of Small States: Elite Perceptions and Georgia’s Foreign Policy Towards Russia.” Europe-Asia Studies 70, no. 5 (May 28, 2018): 814–831. https://doi.org/10.1080/0 9668136.2018.1480751.

5. Kakachia, Kornely. “End of Russian Military Bases in Georgia: Social, Political and Security Implications of Withdrawal.” Central Asia and the Caucasus 2, no. 50 (2008): 52–62.

6. Livny, Eric, Mack Ott, and Karine Torosyan. “Impact of Russian Sanctions on the Georgian Economy.” In Georgia in Transition: Experiences and Perspectives, edited by Lorenz King, 175–193. Frankfurt am Main: Lang, 2009.

7. Manchkhashvili, Maia. “Georgian Turkologists.” Turkologiya, no. 2 (2020): 115–119. http://turkologiya. org/saylar/2020-2/8-Turkolji-merkezler.pdf.

8. Markedonov, Sergey M., and Maxim A. Suchkov. “Russia and the United States in the Caucasus: Cooperation and Competition.” Caucasus Survey 8, no. 2 (May 3, 2020): 179–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/2376119 9.2020.1732101.

9. Minesashvili, Salome. “Narrating Identity: Belongingness and Alterity in Georgia’s Foreign Policy.” In Values and Identity as Sources of Foreign Policy in Armenia and Georgia, edited by Kornely Kakachia, Alexander Markarov, 11–34. Tbilisi: Publishing House “Universal,” 2016.

10. Mitchell, Lincoln. Uncertain Democracy: U.S. Foreign Policy and Georgia’s Rose Revolution. Philadelphia, USA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2009.

11. Newnham, Randall. “Oil, Carrots, and Sticks: Russia’s Energy Resources as a Foreign Policy Tool.” Journal of Eurasian Studies 2, no. 2 (July 9, 2011): 134–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euras.2011.03.004.

12. Shiriyev, Zaur, and Kornely Kakachia. Azerbaijan – Georgian Relations. The Foundations and Challenges of the Strategic Alliance. Baku, Azerbaijan: Center for Strategic Studies, 2015.

13. Sikharulidze, Archil, Maia Urushadze, Gela Khmaladze, and Rauf Chichinadze. Islam in Georgia: Policy and Integration. Research Report. Tbilisi, Georgia: The Centre for Cultural Relations – Caucasian House, 2016. http://caucasianhouse.ge/wp-content/ uploads/2017/04/Islam-in-Georgia-ENG.pdf.

14. Trenin, Dmitri. “Russia in the Caucasus: Reversing the Tide.” The Brown Journal of World Aff airs, no. 2 (Spring/Summer 2009): 143–155. https://doi. org/10.2307/24590848.

15. Zviadadze, Sophie, and Davit Jishkariani. Identity Issues among Azerbaijani Population of Kvemo Kartli and Its Political and Social Dimensions. Research Report. Tbilisi, Georgia: The Human Rights Education and Monitoring Center (EMC), December 19, 2018. https://emc.org. ge/uploads/products/pdf/Qvemo-Qartli_mergedeng_1547217506.pdf.