The Georgian Parliamentary Speaker demanded an explanation from the US after the security services exposed a USAID-funded regime change plot in the capital of Tbilisi. Three Serbs from CANVAS, the organization responsible for organizing their country’s “Bulldozer Revolution” in 2000, were detained late last week on suspicion of teaching local so-called “activists” how to overthrow the government. They left for abroad after questioning, but the scandal suggested a renewed destabilization effort there.
Prior to this latest incident, Georgia accused Ukraine of plotting unrest against its authorities, which Kiev of course denied. As coincidence would have it, however, Ukrainian parliamentarian Aleksey Goncharenko wrote on Telegram over the weekend that “We are ready to be allies of the USA in all military operations more strongly than Britain.” This followed reports that Ukraine carried out drone strikes against allegedly Russian-backed Sudanese rebels, presumably at the US’ behest if true.
Considering this context, the security services’ claims of Ukrainian complicity in their country’s latest regime change intrigue are credible even though Kiev wasn’t directly implicated in last week’s scandal. The question therefore naturally arises of why Georgia is being targeted in the first place seeing as how it’s a pro-Western country that officially want to join both the EU and NATO. What’s happening nowadays is actually the second phase of the same process that was set into motion half a year ago.
Back in March, the US attempted to overthrow the government there on the grounds that its proposed foreign agents legislation modeled off of America’s own was supposedly indicative of a secret desire to pivot towards Russia. There wasn’t any truth to this claim, but it served to provoke an ultimately failed Color Revolution that was aimed at opening a second proxy war front in the New Cold War. The following analyses detail the strategic machinations at play and expose the false pretext behind that plot:
Georgia’s conservative-nationalist government has a surprisingly pragmatic policy towards Russia in spite of still officially wanting to join the EU and NATO, so much so that they refused to impose sanctions against it or saber-rattle over Abkhazia and South Ossetia. For that reason, the West began preparing their liberal–globalist proxies to revolt as punishment with a view towards either pressuring them into reversing their stance or replacing them with more compliant puppets if they still refuse to do so.
This campaign was forced into action prematurely in response to the government’s impending legislation that would have enabled them to better manage these growing liberal-globalist threats and thus eventually neutralize them with time. The West felt that its window of opportunity for opening a second front against Russia via Georgia was rapidly closing, which is why they gave the order to commence Hybrid War hostilities in March.
That crisis ended almost as soon as it began after the government promptly withdrew the bill and therefore removed the basis upon which those liberal-globalist groups demanded their resignation. The end result was that a ceasefire of sorts entered into place whereby everyone informally agreed to freeze the situation for the time being out of mutual convenience. The reason why everything thawed over the past month has to do with a combination of domestic and regional developments.
On the home front, the conservative-nationalist government started impeachment proceedings against their country’s liberal-globalist president, which the Western-backed opposition regarded as a power play that violated their informal ceasefire from this spring. At the same time, neighboring Armenia’s liberal-globalist government started to decisively pivot away from Russia towards the West, which represented a regional power play that inadvertently ended the Karabakh Conflict as explained below:
Upon the West’s failure to open up a second front against Russia in the South Caucasus via Georgia, this bloc pivoted towards its “Plan B” of attempting to do this via Armenia by provoking another Karabakh Conflict that could have dragged the Kremlin into a regional conflagration had it not been careful. After this plan also failed, the West then immediately fearmongered about “ethnic cleansing” and “genocide”, which served to scare around 100,000 Karabakh Armenians into voluntarily moving to Armenia.
The purpose behind provoking this large-scale population flow was to utilize these so-called “Weapons of Mass Migration” for pressuring the Armenian government into either completing its pro-Western anti-Russian pivot after it appeared to be getting cold feet or replacing it in a Color Revolution if it refuses. That plan is still in progress, but in the event that it’s successfully implemented and not offset by a truly patriotic-multipolar revolution, then Armenia will likely withdraw from the Russian-led CSTO.
Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov already made peace with this scenario after recently describing it as that country’s “sovereign choice”, but the regional consequences will remain manageable so long as NATO doesn’t have reliable access to Armenia in the aftermath. Therein lies Georgia’s renewed strategic importance since its pragmatic conservative-nationalist government is unlikely to facilitate that bloc’s power play, ergo why it’s targeted for removal once again and at this particular time too.
In sum, Armenia’s impending defection from the CSTO will fail to be substantive unless NATO secures reliable access to it via Georgia, but the latter’s incumbent authorities aren’t expected to agree. That’s why another round of Color Revolution unrest is being cooked up on the pretext of “protesting” the liberal-globalist president’s impeachment proceedings. If the West wins, then a second front against Russia could open in the South Caucasus, which is why it’s imperative that this latest power play fails.