Georgian daydream
The parliamentary elections of Georgia of October 1 played a role of a catalyzer for the political field of Armenia as well. On the next day of elections both the opposition and governmental parties of Armenia couldn’t hide their admiration about the victory of the Georgian pro-Russian political party “Georgian Dream” and have sent their congratulations to its leader Birdzina Ivanishvili. Our oppositionists would connect their thrill with the fact that change of government took place in the neighboring country.
And the thrill of the government wasn’t openly pronounced but it wasn’t hard to assume that their joy was connected with the victory of a pro-Russian party in Georgia. Indeed, the Kremlin would later appreciate their impressions and compliments for the victory of the pro-Russian force. This trend was also in the admiration of many oppositionists as well. However, after yesterday’s statement of Birdzina Ivanishvili many of the admirers of Armenia have started to criticize him with the same zeal.
The occasion was the interview of Ivanishvili to the New York Times, in which he made an incorrect statement – “For example, in Georgia we have Armenians. I am shocked as their fatherland is next-door but they prefer to live in our country.” Later on, Ivanishvili said that he didn’t say this in a negative pretext. He meant that Armenians don’t consider Georgia a foreign country for themselves. But this is not the interesting thing. Yesterday Ivanishvili made another statement, which could make many Armenian politicians express their attitude to the “Georgian Dream” party. After the meeting with the head of NATO representation in Georgia William Lahew, Ivanishvili stated that membership to the NATO remains one of the priorities of Georgian foreign policy.
“We have been once again explained that we have quite solid opportunities to become members of the NATO. We can actually reach Georgia’s fast membership to the NATO,” said the leader of the Georgian Dream. This should have been a cold shower for Armenian politicians, who considered Ivanishvili’s victory the victory of Russia. And this message gets even more enforced in light of the fact that the potential prime minister of Georgia Ivanishvili stated that he’s going to pay his first official visit to Washington D.C.
This comes to prove that the calculations of Armenian think tanks were not so accurate in regard to Ivanishvili. And as many independent pundits are extremely sensitive to anything that contradicts the Russian interests they had to express their negative attitude to Ivanishvili. Only time will show what the political course of Georgia will be after the victory of the Georgian Dream. It is possible that in fact Ivanishvili may conduct a pro-Russian policy with a western packaging or vice versa.
The problem is that the party that legitimately came to power may conduct any kind of policy that incurs from the interests of its citizens. For the Armenian political reality pro-Russian or pro-western orientation is considered more like an obligation than a value or ideological ground. And obligation doesn’t have any limits and requires fighting against the foreign enemy both within and outside the borders.
