Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Experienced students of colour revolution technologies should have been dismayed several days ago to observe in Tbilisi an ominous replay of a scenario last witnessed ten years ago in Kiev, when the subversive upheaval that wrecked Ukraine was at its height. Now it seems to be Georgia’s turn to be wrecked if, that is, having learned nothing the Georgian government repeats the ruinous errors of their Ukrainian counterparts and the Georgian people stand idly by as their country is subjected to systematic assault by professional foreign con artists and their local disciples.

The ominous spectacle in question is the invasion of the Georgian capital by a bevy of mostly washed out European Union politicians from Germany, France, Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Sweden and Finland. The purpose of their unsolicited visit was not to enjoy the health benefits of the mineral water springs of Borjomi but to incite the dwindling crowds of gullible Georgian citizens, deluded by the propaganda of Western-funded “NGOs.” They came to harangue the crowds to continue to insist that the results of the free and fair elections recently held in their country be annulled, that the current democratically elected government be overthrown, and that a regime subservient to the collective West, whose interests the visitors represent, should be installed to replace it.

Why did the Georgian government allow those uninvited agitators to disembark in their country’s sovereign territory and to act as if they already owned it, all without hindrance? The obvious and natural question is who controls the Tbilisi airport? Why did the government tolerate the presence of foreign subversives, however high-ranking in their countries of origin, who came for the specific purpose of ultimately destroying it? Why weren’t these agitators detained on arrival at the airport and put aboard the next outbound flight back to where they came from?

These are the logical questions that in 2014 could have been put also to the Ukrainian government of that period that was targeted for destruction by the same hostile foreign interests, using a similar methodology. In both cases, one may speculate concerning the motive for the inexplicable and in the Ukrainian case now demonstrably fatal ineptness that was on display. On any list of probable reasons for this strange conduct, impermissible to a responsible government, the deep-seated inferiority complex that immobilises East European political elites in their dealings with the collective West is a factor that occupies a prominent position.

They are genuinely convinced that their legitimacy derives from aping Western “values.” The deliberately elusive norms that those servile elites have embraced for their guidance are, however, no more than vacuous propaganda slogans manufactured to befuddle indigenous simpletons. But they are hardly at all practiced in the countries which invoke them in order to manipulate yokels who take them at face value. Spell bound by sumptuous mirages, local elites slavishly seek acceptance and confirmation of status from those illusionists.

Anxious to prove themselves by outperforming their unworthy Western models in the practice of “democracy,” native elites resort to misguided mimicry in seeking therapy for their inferiority complex. They overlook as they do that both the fundamental tenets of genuine democracy and the perennial rules of good governance.

In the case at hand, Georgian authorities appear to have forgotten that democracy in its varied expressions (actually, liberty is a more precise and meaningful word for the purpose) is useful only to the extent that its operation secures the freedom and sovereignty of the country and ensures the liberty of Georgian citizens. It does not apply in an absolute sense to intruding foreigners. Citizens of Georgia dissatisfied with their country’s political direction should have the right, within reasonable limits set by law, to express their dissent, to peacefully assemble, and to publicly voice their opinions, even if those run contrary to majority sentiments, as we clearly saw after the recent elections that in Georgia they do. That right, however, does not extend to foreign officials and agitators who come to promote an agenda that is hostile to the programme of the country’s legitimate government and which ultimately seeks that government’s dissolution by violent and revolutionary means.

The tragic Ukrainian experience should serve as a stark lesson to every government facing challenges of this nature.

The Georgian government certainly was on the right track earlier this year when it enacted a foreign agents transparency law which mandates that data pertaining to the financing of the thousands of foreign funded and directed “NGOs” in Georgia must be made publicly available. That is a good and informative start because it identifies foreign agents that loyal citizens ought to shun. However, it will be remembered as no more than an ineffective half measure unless further steps are taken to ensure national sovereignty and the liberty of the Georgian people in the face of foreign encroachment.

Beneficial as it is, the foreign agents transparency law cannot guarantee that deeply indoctrinated sections of the population will make rational use of the data which enforcement of that law places at their disposal. The fruits of such indoctrination and in many cases detachment from reality we have already witnessed in Ukraine. We observe that also in Georgia today, with frenzied crowds succumbing to incitement to demand their country’s political reorientation toward the collapsing European Union and urge hostility to Russia. Unsuspected by these simpletons, the latter of these demands aims, for the sole benefit of their indoctrinators, to organise a military confrontation with Russia, a disaster in which many of them would undoubtedly perish.

The instructive Ukrainian example, which only needs to be heeded for countries to remain unharmed and lives to be saved, demonstrates that given enough brainwashing current minorities can be engineered into becoming majorities, or at least acquiescent bystanders. Dissident citizens must be given an ample opportunity to freely express their views, no matter how erroneous or delusional, but not beyond the point where such expression becomes incompatible with the national interest and the stability of the state which guarantees and protects it.

Good governance promotes the exercise of the widest possible spectrum of liberties, but the practice of those liberties must be tempered, and whenever necessary the wings of the abusers must be clipped, by the rigorous application of the ancient principle which today has lost none of its pertinence: Salus patriae suprema lex.

That is the lesson that the Georgian government would be well advised to take if it is seriously intent on defending its beleaguered country from the designs of its enemies, foreign and domestic.