On January 27, the Atlantic Council’s Senior Fellows Program hosted a presentation on the South Caucasus by Borut Grgic, Director of the Institute for Strategic Studies, Ljubljana and Atlantic Council non-Resident Senior Fellow, and Colonel Jeffrey Holachek, the Council’s 2005-06 Army War College Senior Fellow.  This event was chaired by Philippa Tucker, Director of the Senior Fellows Program.

Mr. Grgic began the discussion by outlining the European Union’s strategic interests in the South Caucasus, citing energy and the Caucasus’ geographical proximity to the Middle East and Central Asia as the primary rationale for strengthening EU engagement with the region.  However, relations between the EU and the countries of the South Caucasus (Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia) have failed to reach their full potential, due to factors both internal and external to the region.  Mr. Grgic believed that the EU’s approach to the South Caucasus, which was delivered through the EU Neighborhood Policy, was both flawed and excessively bureaucratic, and did little to improve the ambivalence and uncertainty toward the region felt by existing member states still recovering from the shock of enlargement and the rejection of the proposed EU constitution.  He concluded that EU-South Caucasus relations suffered from a lack of dynamism. 

Complicating the relationship further was the sheer complexity of the South Caucasus, a region that was itself ambivalent toward its prospects for a Euro-Atlantic future; continually plagued by frozen conflicts in Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Nagorno-Karabakh; and occupied a geographical and strategic position of interest not only to the powers of the United States, EU and Russia, but also the emerging regional and global powers of Iran, China and India. Taking these issues into account, Mr. Grgic recommended that the EU reinvigorated its political commitment to the South Caucasus by engaging Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan in terms of an ascension agenda, which he argued should replace the flawed New Neighborhood Policy.  This would decrease the political uncertainty that had typified the relationship, diminish the influence of Russia and Iran in the region, and provide the EU with a foothold in the greater Caspian and Central Asia region.  It could also allow the EU to become a shareholder in, rather than a consumer of, Iranian gas futures.

Colonel Holachek, who had recently returned from a visit to the Caucasus, focused his remarks on Georgia and the successes it had enjoyed since the 2003 Rose Revolution.  He cited Georgia’s institution-building, anti-corruption measures, and deployment of 800 soldiers to Iraq as all positive indications of the country’s democratic progress and good relations with the United States.  However, he also mentioned recent trends towards greater centralization of power in the hands of President Saakashvili and a small group of advisors as disturbing indications of a democratic backslide. 

Col. Holacheck saw rising instability in the North Caucasus as a direct threat to Georgia’s security, as well as the frozen conflicts in South Ossetia and Abkhazia within its own borders.  He highlighted the need to resolve the conflict over Abkhazia, and saw the election of Sergey Baghapsh as its de facto president as an opportunity for President Saakashvili to open formal negotiations, with the U.S., NATO and EU acting as facilitators.  He agreed with Mr. Grgic that the EU should do more to engage the countries of the South Caucasus on an individual basis and also recommended that they abandon the European Neighborhood Policy as the primary instrument of engagement.

This event was attended by Council directors, councillors, senior fellows, and members of the corporate, diplomatic and policy community.