There are moments when a country must ask itself a simple but painful question: where are we going? For Georgia, this question has never been abstract. We are not a country that can afford geopolitical luxury, strategic confusion, or comfortable neutrality. We are a country with territories occupied by Russia. We are a country whose history is filled with imperial pressure, the struggle for survival, and the repeated return of freedom. That is why Georgian foreign policy is not just the language of diplomacy. It is an instrument of national survival.
For a small state, foreign policy is a compass, which shows the right direction for survival in a ruthless international system, where big states are trying to swallow small states. If the compass breaks, the country may still appear to be moving, but it may be walking toward the edge. Starting from 1999, when Georgia became a member of the Council of Europe, Georgian foreign policy had one undeniable strength: it had direction. That direction may have sometimes been too fast, too emotional, and not always sufficiently institutionalized, but the country was not lost.
Georgia clearly stated that its place was in the European and Euro-Atlantic family, especially after the Rose Revolution. NATO and the European Union were not treated merely as decorations or campaign slogans; they were the central axis of state-building and sustainable development. This tendency continued under the Georgian Dream government after the 2012 elections, however, the picture has changed dramatically in recent years.
There was also a harder strategic lesson: standing on the right side is not enough if strategy is not carefully calculated, patiently implemented, and institutionally rooted. In the face of confrontation with Russia, Georgia needed not only moral truth, but also cold judgment, long-term planning, and national consensus. So the pre-2012 period should neither be romanticized nor erased. Its assessment should be honest: a correct strategic direction, important reforms, a strong Western choice, but also excessive centralization, democratic deficits, and strategic impatience. Still, one thing is clear: Georgia was moving toward the West.
Today, the state appears to be standing on the road, while slowly turning the steering wheel in another direction. Pragmatism and peace are becoming a weapon of propaganda.
The current government often describes its foreign policy as “pragmatism,” “peace preservation,” and “balance.” However, not every “balance” is wisdom. Sometimes balance is simply fear with an attractive name. Sometimes pragmatism is not statecraft, but an escape from responsibility.
The central problem of Georgia’s current foreign policy is that it verbally looks toward Europe, while in practice it moves the country away from Europe and transforms it into a grey zone. This is the most dangerous kind of politics, when declaration says one thing and reality says another.
When the government tells the people that the European path continues, while Western partners say the process has been halted. When the Constitution obliges the state to pursue integration into the EU and NATO, but the actual political course damages precisely that path. This is no longer just a mistake. It is an act of state self-harm.
Georgia cannot be strong if it distances itself from the very space that naturally supports its security, development, and freedom. Georgia cannot be sovereign if it destroys trust with the West while remaining exposed to Russian economic, political, and informational pressure. That is not balance. That is growing vulnerability. The greatest danger is that this policy will slowly lead Georgia into strategic loneliness.
For a small state, strategic loneliness can be catastrophic. We have no right to lose Western support while Russia remains an occupier. We have no right to alienate the European Union while the overwhelming majority of our people still support a European future. We have no right to create the illusion that the West can be replaced by other geographies. Trade, cooperation and partnership can exist with many, but the strategic foundation of the state must be sought where freedom, institutions, security guarantees, and respect for sovereignty exist. This is why the current course is catastrophic. It distances Georgia from its natural allies and leaves it inside the same geographic reality where Russia remains the primary threat. It is a policy that places the country’s future not in the service of the national interest, but in the service of political survival. The state does not exist for the government. The government exists for the state.
What Georgian foreign policy should look like
Georgia needs a calm, strong, dignified, and flexible foreign policy. Not hysterical. Not provincial. Not built on fear. But also not one that erases the country’s historic choice in the name of pragmatism and protection of sovereignty. The main pillar of Georgia’s foreign policy must be Western integration. This is not only a geopolitical choice. It is a civilizational, security, and state-building choice. The European Union means institutions, the rule of law, economic modernization, and the dignity of the citizen. NATO means security, deterrence, and the possibility that Georgia will no longer stand alone in front of an aggressor, however, before that membership, we must think about the establishment of new military alliances with various countries in order to protect our country during the path to the Alliance.
Western integration does not mean ignoring other geographies. On the contrary, a smart state must work with everyone where Georgian national interests exist. We should work with every region or country where Georgia can gain economic, transit, energy, security or political benefit.
However, here is the essential principle: other geographies must complement Georgia’s Western course, not replace it. Georgia should work with all geographies on the principle of mutual benefit. We should not be a closed country. We should be bold and not be afraid of economic ties, new markets, infrastructure projects, the Middle and TRIPP Corridors or transport opportunities. On the contrary, Georgia should become a bridge between Europe and Asia, between the Black Sea and the Caspian space, between the South Caucasus and the wider international system. But every bridge needs a foundation. Georgia’s foundation must be the West. If we destroy the foundation and speak only about bridges, in the end we may lose both the bridge and the security of the country.
How Georgia should achieve its strategic goals
First, Georgia must restore trust with Western partners. This cannot be done through words alone. It requires real political change and return to democratic framework.
Second, foreign policy must become national, not partisan. Georgia’s European and Euro-Atlantic course does not belong to any single party. It belongs to the Georgian people. It is a historic choice that must not change according to the fears, interests, or propaganda needs of any government. Georgia must become a five-cross stronghold of Western civilization.
Third, Georgia needs a new national consensus on foreign policy. We may argue about many issues in domestic politics, but several things should never become bargaining chips: territorial integrity, Western integration, liberation from Russian influence, regional cooperation, and democratic development.
Fourth, we must strengthen economic diplomacy. Georgian foreign policy should not be only about statements. It should create jobs, investment, secure infrastructure, educational opportunities, technological development, and international networks. Western integration must become not only a political idea, but a path toward improving the everyday life of citizens.
Fifth, Georgia must become a dignified partner. A dignified partner is a country that does not beg everyone, but also does not isolate itself. A country that can build friendships, cooperate, speak clearly, and defend its own interests.
And the last and very important, Georgia should be transformed from homeland into a modern nation-state, which means turning emotions into institutions, identity into civil unity, and sovereignty into a daily practice. Georgian citizens must realize that they are not guests in their own country, but are co-owners of their future. Only such a state can protect freedom, preserve identity, overcome fragmentation, unite, and make Georgia not merely a place on the map, but a purposeful, competitive, and dignified political nation.
In the end, the most important thing is that Georgian foreign policy must recover its soul. A country that loves freedom cannot live by a foreign policy of fear. A country whose people have repeatedly proven that dignity matters more than force cannot succeed while its government leaves its future in uncertainty.
Georgia does not need loud adventurism. However, it does need courage. It does not need to artificially multiply enemies, but it must not lose its friends. It does not need provocation, but it does need principle.
We should work with everyone, but we must know where our home is. We should be open to the world, but firm in our identity. We should be pragmatic in economics, but unshakable on freedom.
The main task of Georgian foreign policy is simple, yet historically heavy: to return the country to the path that strengthens it, protects it, and places it proudly among free nations. Georgia needs not drift but direction. Not fear, but strategy. Not submission, but dignified partnership.
Above all, Georgia needs its foreign policy compass again.
OP-ED by Nikoloz Khatiashvili
