2009

USA & Georgia:

Details of Mutual Strategic Importance
As a connector of Europe and Central Asia, as a single non-pro-Russian and non-proTurkish state, and as the society carrying strong legacy of western civilization, Georgia represents a geopolitical and cultural cornerstone for the US influence in the region. The South Caucasus, in its turn, is a cornerstone to US influence on the continent. This may sound weird for a small country like Georgia, but there are solid facts supporting this argument.

By Andro Barnovi Institute for Strategy and Development 3/26/2009

Main purposes of US influence in Georgia

It goes without saying that Georgia is of central importance to US Eurasian politics. As a connector of Europe and Central Asia, as a single non-pro-Russian and non-pro-Turkish state, and as the society carrying strong legacy of western civilization, Georgia represents a geopolitical and cultural cornerstone for the US influence in the region. The South Caucasus, in its turn, is a cornerstone to US influence on the continent. This may sound weird for a small country like Georgia, but there are solid facts supporting this argument. First of all, these are geostrategic arguments. Georgia is on a crossroad of Turkish and Russian axis. Being locked between Caspian and Black Seas, Georgia decides the balance of the two axes. Whoever of the two controls Georgia, he controls the region. From this point, it is essential for the USA that Russia and Turkey fall short of acquiring complete control over the South Caucasus. Hence, Georgia has role in US game with Europe, Russia, Turkey and Iran.

Russia

Context: Russian control of Georgia is a disastrous perspective not only for this country. If Moscow succeeds in this, then it creates direct link with Armenia, completely isolates Azerbaijan, imposes terms to Iran, controls Central Asia and also Afghanistan, and threatens Turkey. In this case, Turkey is forced to fully restore strategic cooperation with the USA and the EU, but the situation will be deadlocked at this stage and this is more than Cold War scenario. Obviously, neither the USA nor the EU should allow this scenario. In broad terms, it is Russian strategy to expel the USA from Eurasia. Splitting Europe; coming to terms with Turkey and exercising decisive influence in the South Caucasus; and close cooperation with Iran to cut the US access to Afghanistan are the main components of Russian strategy. South Caucasus is a geographical center of the geopolitical chain of southern Eurasia and therefore the center of Russian strategy. Hence, control of the South Caucasus is the first step in Russian counter-strategy against the USA. US Ends: to prevent this, and to ensure that Russia does not exercise full control of the South Caucasus, the United States need to ensure that Russian aggression wont continue in Georgia. US strategy: The question is how to do this. The US toolkit consists of fairly few levers to influence Russia. Russians themselves believe that the US needs Russia more than Russia needs the States. The only thing Moscow demands from Washington is that the latter recognizes the spheres of Russian influence but this is very unlikely given that these spheres are Ukraine, South Caucasus and Central Asia i.e. the very areas of US interest. In this situation, the US clearly needs to draw a red line for Moscow and impose credible threat if the Kremlin shows disobedience. However, the reality is not that simple. The only issue where the US can theoretically threaten Russia directly is escalation in North Caucasus but needless to say, this would be a very ineffective strategy. Once the US cannot act independently, it needs support from its allies, needs new allies and needs a sophisticated diplomacy on all fronts. In other words, this means a shift to cooperation with allies and strengthening their standing in regional policies, with US backing. On the entire Eurasian perimeter, these necessarily include the EU, Turkey, and Iran.

Turkey

Context: If the US loses its influence in Georgia then Turkey and Russia are set to divide South Caucasus between their spheres of influence. If this happens, then not only the USA and the EU cannot dictate their terms to Ankara but now Ankara acquires very significant levers. Bush has severely damaged relations with Ankara. First of all, this was Iraq issue and US-supported Kurds while not allowing Ankara to take control of the neighboring Kurd region. This was a very dangerous policy given that Turkey has found itself free from US and NATO dependence after the Cold War and sought to develop independent policies during the last decade. Turkey knows it is a geopolitical bridge between the East and the West and it also knows that the uses of the bridge could be different. The best option for Ankara is a monopoly on this bridge, the next best is earning money in guarding the bridge, the less is being hired as bridge, and the least is to be a free pass. When there is no threat from Russia, Ankara thinks NATO is a burden. The main reason why Turkey is cautious with this issue is again the USA which controls Turkeys southern flank (Israel, Iraq, Kurd question), but the US vessels in the Black Sea is something above Ankaras patience because it immediately becomes almost a free pass for the USA. For these reasons, Turkey wants close partnership with Russia coupled with NATO membership while denying the South Caucasus to the USA. In other words, Turkey wants to be a NATO member with monopoly on the Black Sea and South Caucasus. As geographically distant power, it is very hard for Washington to directly influence Turkey, all the more so that the USA is now withdrawing from Iraq. US Ends: White House needs to balance Turkey in the region, and achieve Ankaras obedience in strategic issues. US strategy: This situation decides that Georgia and neighboring Iran become desirable targets for the USA. No doubt, partnership with Iran is the best option for Washington but if this policy fails then the war option is also available. The USA needs Iran and Georgia to consolidate presence in Central Asia, achieve success in Afghanistan, shrink Russian diplomacy, and balance Turkey. Hence, it is likely that future months will see much activated diplomacy between Iran and the USA. Turkeys membership in NATO is also a good tool for Washington. As a strategic ally, Turkey needs to cooperate at least in some issues because otherwise it risks isolation and direct confrontation with the world superpower that holds the steering wheel of the chaos on Turkeys southern flank.

Iran

Context: The next issue is Iran. In spite of the fact that the USA tries to restore relations with Iran, it is very dangerous for Washington to do so without preventively balancing Tehran. US strong presence in Georgia is a necessary precondition for Washington to further partner with Iran. According to regional geopolitical logic, there are two big and small triangles in the wider South Caucasus region. This is Russia-Iran-Turkey big triangle and Georgia-Azerbaijan-Armenia small triangle. These two triangles are mutually intertwined so that the angles of the two lay opposite to each other. Catheti of the small triangle create fences between the couples, like: Armenia and Azerbaijan separate Iran from Georgia, Azerbaijan and Georgia divide Russia from Armenia, and Armenia and Georgia split Turkey from Azerbaijan.

Hence, in purely geostrategic logic, be there no US factor for Georgia and be there stronger Iran, it would be entirely in Tbilisis interest to form a strong partnership with Tehran. The reality of the region dictates that Iran would be able to secure Georgias disposition even without Tbilisis willpower: Tehran can trigger conflicts between Azerbaijan and Georgia (there are plenty of scenarios for this) and then play a friends role and pressure and isolate Azerbaijan. Tehrans interest here coincides with that of Russia to kill the regions transit function (isolate Azerbaijan) and here the partnership with Georgia is the same card in Tehrans hands as Armenian friendship for Russia. But as soon as, and if Iran acquires influence in South Caucasus, Russia is no longer its partner because both sides compete on one issue to transit Central Asian resources via their respective territories. Here, being faced with big and strong Russia, it is possible that Iran and Turkey form partnership where the USA will have to separately deal with both players. Not mentioning the threat of further possible Islamization of the entire southern Eurasian politics, strong Iran also means less access to Afghanistan for the USA, and less access to Central Asian resources, and less access to China. In the long run, this means a very complicated strategic stance for the United States in Eurasia with virtually no or meager influence there. In essence, this is a modified scenario of Cold War times: instead of the two poles now there are at least four centers being the West (USA + much of the EU), Islamic world (Turkey, much of Arab world, Iran, Central Asia), Russia (+ part of Central Asia), [India,] and China. Today, when there are talks about normalization of relations between the USA and Iran, there is no way that Washington undertakes this step without maintaining strong influence in Georgia. US Ends: ensure US influence in Georgia; establish as close partnership with Tehran as at all possible. If failed, explore alternative strategies, incl. war scenario; Support independence of Iraqi Kurds; Maintain strong ties with Israel; Pressure Turkey. US strategy: (1) ensure pro-US administration in Georgia, maintain military ties; (2) support pro-Iran energy transit routes as carrots: from Azerbaijan through Armenia-Iran-Turkey/ from Central Asia-Azerbaijan-Georgia-

Turkey/ Central Asia-Iran-Turkey/ Central Asia-Iran-Gulf (lift the embargo) and latently impose war/coup dtat alternative as stick; (3) Use Iran as access route to Afghanistan; (4) consolidate standing in Central Asia; (5) Threaten Turkey by omitting from energy dealings and transiting energy through gulf; (6) Threaten Turkey by Kurd question and simultaneous escalation in Syria by Israel.

Europe

Context: The next issue is Europe. If the USA fails to secure influence in the South Caucasus and Central Asia, then the EU will simply have to accommodate with the new realities and change its behavior with Russia. But it is likely that this wont be a calm process because Russia will try to divide Europe on Germany-Italy axis, give up Central Europe to Berlin and grab the Eastern Part. If the US stance in Poland and Ukraine is weak at this moment, then it is likely that Moscow and Berlin succeed in mentioned policies. There are many other developments that may entail, like Frances interest to strengthen ties with Poland or help the USA in doing so, and the stronger UK-France ties over time, etc but something to really stress in this scenario is that US-EU relations largely depend on US stance in the South Caucasus and Central Asia, and this reality is well understood in DC. Finally, Georgia and especially Iran acquire huge significance for the USA not because of potential threats but because the USA needs to maintain its importance for Europe and South Caucasus is now a key to reinstating this importance. All other issues between the EU and the USA, like strategic partnership incl. with new EU members, NATO expansion, financial crisis, green policies, etc all are peripheral compared to this main goal of reinstating US importance for the EU. US Ends: Stop Russian aggression; Maintain close ties with Europe; Consolidate standing in Central Asia; Keep South Caucasus free from Russian and/or Turkish domination. US strategy: outline of some basic scenarios Stop Russia: (1) Stop talks on Ukraines and Georgias NATO membership; (2) cooperate with Turkey [on Kurd issue]; Halt Turkey: (3) Ensure pro-US administration in Georgia; maintain military ties; (4) Work further with Israel; (5) cooperate with Iran; (6) do not allow Karabakh resolution [with just Turkish-Russian mediation] Defend Europe: (6) Keep close partnership in NATO; (7) indirectly pressure Russia on energy issues; (8) weaken Russia internally Control Europe: (9) keep the EU together; (10) ensure pro-US administrations in Poland and Ukraine; Strengthen Iran: (11) Support pro-Iran energy transit routes as carrots: from Azerbaijan through Armenia-Iran-Turkey/ from Central Asia-Azerbaijan-Georgia-Turkey (limit this route)/ Central Asia-Iran-Turkey/ Central Asia-Iran-Gulf (lift the embargo) Control Iran: (12) Do not allow nukes; (13) latently impose war/coup dtat alternative as stick;

Consolidate standing in Central Asia: (14) Use Iran as access route to Afghanistan; (15) Achieve success in Afghanistan

Conclusion

The USA needs Georgia in all its Eurasian policies because Georgia is a decisive factor in South Caucasus. The South Caucasus, on its turn, is decisive for Eurasian politics at large. Because Iran is relatively weak, Russia and Turkey will attempt to control South Caucasus if the USA fails to control Georgia. On the other hand, because neither Russia nor Turkey is capable of acquiring full control of the region, they will end up with cooperation in the South Caucasus. To prevent the US return, they will split Georgia on spheres of influence with SJ falling to Russians and Adjara falling to Turks. This may not be necessarily the formal and final breakup of Georgia but there will be troops and intelligence operations in place. For Europe, this means at least energy dependence on Russia and now also Turkey, while the worst case scenario also implies splitting of the EU and NATO. US means to maintain influence in Georgia are very diverse. First of all, this is diplomacy with surrounding powers; this is strong intelligence and direct influence on police, army, economy, virtually all state institutions and public opinion. Because of unequivocal support to Saakashvilis regime, the USA has now serious problems with Georgian public opinion. However, the USA is a single credible savior of the country in a disastrous situation it finds itself today not only domestically, as a decisive driving force behind any kind of financial or expert support the country receives but as Georgias very significant partner in international relations as well. It is very important that Georgian society correctly perceives the US role for the country and channels public opinion to the right direction.