The myth of Georgia’s neutrality

On May 4th, The Alliance of Patriots of Georgia, a controversial, self-defined center-right, conservative opposition party, who are well known for their anti-Western and nationalistic attitudes, held a protest at the Sports Palace.

Among the numerous controversial statements, the leaders of the party talked about the geopolitical situation of Georgia. According to MP Giorgi Lomia, who addressed the crowd, “for 28 years, they have told us that the doors of NATO are open and we will become members, of course they were lying and will continue to lie. The only solution now is the neutrality”.

The Facebook page of the alliance reads “[neutrality] means that [Georgia] will not be a part of NATO or any other bloc and other countries will not have military bases and training on the territory of Georgia”.

One of the definitions of a neutral country entails that the country holds itself as permanently neutral in future conflicts, which includes avoiding entering into military alliances such as NATO.

The idea of Georgia’s neutrality has been a subject of discussions with different intensity throughout the years. What remained consistent is the anti-statehood sentiments behind the initiative. The idea of neutrality has been voiced mostly by pro-Russian powers in Georgia.

First of all, it has to be distinguished, that according to the international law and specifically the first article of The Hague Convention (V) of 1907 on The Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers, “the territory of neutral Powers is inviolable”. Therefore a country that has its territories occupied or is in any conflictual situation can not become neutral. Since 20% of Georgia’s territory is still occupied by Russia, which doesn’t put Georgia in the position to declare neutrality.

The idea of neutrality might be appealing for the masses who lack insight into the issue, but the declaration of neutrality is an intensive process and the country has to meet a number of criteria. The main rationale that Georgia’s neutrality promoters put forward is that Georgia can get the occupied territories back if it stops being a threat to Russia by declaring neutrality. This simply is not right and only serves the Kremlin agenda.

Neutrality used by Russia historically to pursue its foreign policy interests. One of the examples from recent history is the case of Moldova. The country established its neutrality in the 1994 constitution. 25 years have passed since then, but Moldova was unable to get back the territories that are practically occupied by Russia. Neutrality hasn’t done anything to change the situation in Moldova regarding Russia’s interests in the country and it certainly wouldn’t do anything for Georgia, even if it became possible somehow.

Another neutral country in the post-Soviet region is Turkmenistan. The policy of neutrality was created in the early 1990s in Turkmenistan. The policy was never articulated very clearly, and to this day it remains vague; but essentially it meant Turkmenistan would not take sides in conflicts, nor would it join any alliances. It is certainly safe to say that it hasn’t worked out in their favor either in terms of their relations with the neighboring countries.

Even if neutrality presented a real possibility for Georgia, it would be naïve to assume that having Russian military bases in the occupied regions not far from Tbilisi and their militarization growing every day, leaves any room for refraining from trying to reinforce the security of the country. It remains up to the society to remain critical and not let the Kremlin-funded politicians try to derails their unequivocal desire to join the North Atlantic Alliance.

With the growth of NATO support for Georgia, the anti-Western powers also grow and try to delegitimize the indisputable need of Georgia to join NATO to reinforce its security and preserve peace. The idea of neutrality serves no one but the Kremlin to disrupt Georgia’s steady movement towards the West.