Throughout history, the main national idea in this country has been freedom from the dominance of other nations, the desire to live without external dictates, and the opportunity for independent decision-making—all encapsulated in one sacred, comprehensive word: Sovereignty. It doesn’t take much wisdom or effort to understand that all these desirable achievements have come at a tremendous cost, paid in an ocean of sweat and blood.
From the standpoint of inspiration and values, nothing has changed over the centuries. The Georgian people’s attitude toward national sovereignty remains exactly as it always has been. But the times have changed. Today, national sovereignty is not only the privilege of independent existence and the freedom from the will of others imposed upon our own—it is, first and foremost, a profound responsibility.
Sovereignty is no longer regarded merely as the ability to defend the country from interference. What matters most now is the government’s accountability for both domestic and international affairs. The state is responsible not only for the people’s welfare at home but also for managing complex multilateral relations with the rest of the world. Sovereignty is a heavy national burden to bear, and carrying it with faith and dignity requires immense resources—resources that are often not readily available.
When an economic issue arises within the country, or a diplomatic dilemma presents itself abroad, the government of a sovereign nation like ours must confront it with full responsibility and competence. At the same time, not every formally independent country can function as a truly sovereign regime, because the world has become small and interconnected, governed largely by universally adopted rules and norms.
That is why sovereignty as responsibility puts forth an agenda that guides both national governments and the international community—each with their respective duties. Thus, sovereignty, as responsibility, becomes both a national obligation and a global necessity—an ever-present imperative.
Modern interpretations of national sovereignty also encompass the rise of radical pluralism, the evolution of human rights, and every other humanitarian standard produced by this century—all shaped by contemporary domestic and international responsibilities. Moreover, if internationally recognized legitimacy is not firmly and naturally linked to the well-being, will, values, goals, and aspirations of a country’s own people, then the value of that sovereignty becomes questionable—if not altogether null.
Properly linking sovereignty with responsibility, and practicing both fairly and wisely, becomes a moral and material prerequisite for strengthening and consolidating any nation, whether it is already developed or still on the path to development. Judging by the current state of affairs in this country and its international position, it is clear that Sakartvelo is indeed living within this very kind of national and international reality—presumably being managed in accordance with the current dictates of the world.
So far, so good!
Op-Ed by Nugzar B. Ruhadze
