Foreign

Home page

Foreign

American analyst Lincoln A. Mitchell: Russia got what it wanted from the war of 2008 and the Georgian leadership understands that the consequences of another war with Georgia would be much more devastating

11 August 2011 09:10 (UTC +04:00)

Washington. Isabel Levine â€“ APA. â€œThe US and Russia are rivals for influence in the [South Caucasus] region. Cooperation between these two countries in the region is therefore relatively unlikelyâ€, Lincoln A. Mitchell, an expert on the Caucasus at New York’s Columbia University, told in an interview with APAâ€™s Washington DC correspondent.

â€œIt is more likely that Russia and the US will continue to disagree on Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Georgia generally. The question is how much of an obstacle will this be to the overall bilateral relationship between Russia and the US. My sense is that this disagreement, while genuine, is not an overwhelming obstacleâ€, he explains.

Speaking about the stability in the region on the third anniversary of the Russia-Georgia war, the analyst mentioned that there is more stability now than there was in the months immediately following the war.

â€œAll of the regimes have proven themselves to be reasonably resilient as there has been little change to the status quo since late 2008. Moreover, there is little incentive for Russia or Georgia to destabilize the region. Russia got what it wanted from the war of 2008 and the Georgian leadership understands that the consequences of another war with Georgia would be much more devastatingâ€.

Meanwhile, he adds, destabilization is always possible for a range of reasons. â€œEconomic problems could weaken governments in the region. Poor economic times could lead to increased nationalism and instability, but these are unlikely outcomes at least for the short termâ€.

Asked should the South Caucasus countries look for their stability and protection in NATO, Mr. Mitchell pointed out that in the long run, that organization may be Georgiaâ€™s best hope for stability and protection, but the same is not true of Armenia and Azerbaijan who have both built foreign policies that do not rely as heavily on the west.

â€œHowever, NATO membership is, at best, a long term goal for Georgia as there is unlikely to be any movement on Georgiaâ€™s integration into NATO in the near futureâ€.