August 2008 proved that South Caucasus security is not an abstract notion for EU

Yes, the approaches differ much. Unlike the U.S. which welcomed the 'rose revolution' and labeled Georgia as 'democracy lighthouse', Europe was less enthusiastic and more adequate. A political teenager, Saakashvili stretched for the U.S. where he was met with applause and did not hurry to visit countries which criticized his antidemocratic and authoritative claims. Georgia's foreign policy became bifurcated. Georgia thought that the U.S. republican administration will help while Old Europe will argue about values, problems, risks and will try to set conditions.

On November 29, 2007 the European Parliament adopted a resolution calling on Georgian authorities to carry out a thorough investigation of human rights and freedom of speech violations. The resolution also called to ensure fair and free elections in line with international standards, to secure mass media activities and re-open Imedi TV Channel.

No condition was fulfilled. There was no investigation, since Saakashvili wouldn't punish himself. Imedi was opened for two weeks and was closed again later. I should also mention the report of the International Crisis Group titled “Georgia: sliding down to authoritarianism?” where the query mark is not a stop but a sign of European political correctness.

Europeans do not say exactly what they think. I will not say whether Georgia should be offered MAP or not. But if NATO leaders decided to refrain from this move they should explain their decision. The level of democracy in Georgia is shameful for a NATO aspirant. Furthermore, the process of decision-making is unpredictable in Georgia, what is too dangerous for the Alliance.

Georgia's irresponsible moves caused Russia's disproportionate reaction. The fact is that two authoritative regimes launched a war that they have been preparing for years. As to the democracy index, according to The Economist, both Georgia and Russia were included in the list of so-called hybrid regimes, rating 104 and 107 respectively along with Kenya, Ethiopia, Burundi and Pakistan.

Yes, it was quite obvious that a war will break out. The OSCE observers in South Ossetia did warn about possible escalation but nothing was done to prevent it. This story resembles the OSCE behavior during elections in the South Caucasus. At first, the observers announce that the elections were held in line with international standards. However, some 2 or 3 months later they publish a report to say that the elections were beyond any standards.

The diplomatic language of 'mild' European force is being exhausted. The August war debunked the myth of 'democracy lighthouse', transforming it into Bush's street in Tbilisi, which has become the epicenter of instability mostly conditioned by unpredictability of the Georgian authorities and Russian military presence.

August 2008 proved that security in the South Caucasus is not an abstract notion for EU. Marker deals are pregnant with bloodshed and losses and can't substitute sober decisions.