by Urkhan Seyidov
If the new manuscripts mentioning the existence of a country in Georgia (Colchis), are dated to the XII century BC, so the history of Cuba is considerably young from the discovering the New World by Christopher Columbus in 1492.
One would think what is in common between the countries which are beyond the oceans? We can suppose that likeness between them is the same as between the pyramids of Egypt and civilization of Maya (Indians). In spite of the lifetime of civilizations, some events can be happened and repeated regardless of each other. And the most interesting fact is that it will entail similar consequences.
The “coincidence” must have a reason, therefore an explanation. It becomes more obvious, logical and necessary, when we look back and try to link some “coincidence points”. One can assume that “coincidences” and the reasons of their successive repetitions are not only predictable and similar according to the structure, but also they have significant and identical impact. In a word, if “it” quacks like a duck, swims like a duck and looks like a duck, so it must be a duck. And it means that timely knowledge and information about history and the reasons of the events are always powerful, good and decisive factors, to avoid or stimulate emergence of some changes in the present as well as in the future.
While reading history books, more than once we have come across the similarity of the events, happened at different times and with different nations. Were there any definite rituals or a beginning of new religion with similar precepts; or wars with genocides and catastrophes; or any economic or diplomatic crises; or change of sovereigns, presidents? That is its way. We should have a clue, which will let us chain events, not having anything in common on the face of it. It seems to us that we have found it. Let’s have a good look at this clue at greater length not to stumble over it.
Lessons of History and Traveling Back into Time
Returning to our initial question about common parallels between Georgia – Cuba, the notions “revolution”, “independence war”, “confrontation to the system” come to your mind unconsciously. The current list might be enlarged, but we will sort out some conformity which makes it possible to compare two countries, see the connection between them, and draw a conclusion, if it happens to predict their proceeding in future, reviewing involvement of the USA and Russia in this process.
“Independence” of small countries always depends on the chosen course of political convergence with more powerful states that accounts the orientation of their political activities. The countries chosen by us were not exception. If the revolutionary movement in Cuba launched under the auspices of Kastro was against Batist’s regime which sold the whole economy to the USA and converted Cuba into source of raw materials and pleasure adjunct of the USA, but in Georgia the revolutionaries under the leadership of Saakashvili revolted against Eduard Shevardnadze, accused of pro-Russian policy provoking dissatisfaction among the people, severe economic situation in the country, high level of corruption and impossibility of solution of ethnic problems of many years (Abkhazia and South Ossetia).
Both nations determined to abdicate “patronage” of the neighboring countries referring to practically identical causes of the current situation. In both cases the revolutionary leaders dethroned their “benefactor”, choose absolutely alien and distant country as a partner on ideology, economy, culture and education, considering it like a hope of redemption and answers to all questions. Not only reshuffling of hosts, but also shifting the regime, ideology, principles, and the most important thing - financing the source happen.
The countries choose absolutely naïve political system of ruling the society. In the first case it was Communism, and Socialism, in the second case democracy and Capitalism. Both countries become the portents of serious, sometimes dramatic changes in the region. In this way, after the collapse of the USSR Cuba remains “at loose ends”, but Georgia, considering the absolute failure of the policy lead by the USA in the region (the significant example of the collapse of the policy “export democracy” lead by the USA, could be considered as a fiasco with Ukraine, where the newly elected President Yushenko made an appeal “to restart “ relations with Russia, enabling obvious understanding that the USA plan with Yushenko didn’t work) turns to be an outlaw in the system of international relations. In both countries the newly instituted systems pursued to total crisis in Economy and the social secession. Though neither Cuba representing the only remaining Communist country nor Georgia seeking to present herself the only democracy in the whole expanse of the former Soviet Union, doesn’t acknowledge the erroneously chosen policy.
Another striking resemblance of the two countries is that they turned out the victims of confrontation of the two great powers, the USA and Russia. It goes without saying, Cuba and Georgia were just pawns in political game of Russia and the USA, at times they themselves provoke strained clash of the interests, because each pawn, sometimes could become the queen in potential. Regarding this view point, it is not difficult to observe the parallels between Cuban missile crisis and the events on the Georgian territory in 2008. Of course, in the first case, it was successed to escape the blood-letting, in the second case -the war started, and both cases were crucial ones in the mankind history, because they could provoke the beginning of the World cataclysm. In the first case, the conflict was solved in diplomatic way: the Soviet rockets were disassembled from the territory of Cuba and return order was given to the ships directed to Cuba.
Cuban Missile Crisis lasted 13 days and had extremely important psychological and historic meaning for mankind, for the first time was put it on the brink of self-annihilation. Crisis solution became the crucial point in Cold War and also the start of the international tension lessening.
It was about the same scenario in Georgia, but accurate to vice versa: the American ships went into water area of the Black Sea and directed the rockets to the Russian Military Objectives. In contrast to Cuba, everything turned more tragically. Hundreds of victims, among civilian population, refugees, Russian troops, which virtually entered Tbilisi, strained the flame to such highest degree, that the world could hardly observe events in Georgia and Summer Olympic Games in China. Recognition of the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia by the Russian federation was shock for the international community and especially for the USA that had to refuse future ambitious plans. “Cuban missile crisis opposite” forced the USA to reject the Anti-missile defense placement program in the Czech Republic and Poland. President B.Obama, wishing» to cool” Russia, started “reloading” in relations between the USA and Russia. However the events of 2008 entailed the World Economic Crisis.
All these events showed themselves on the background of raging World Finance Crises. We do not consider that contingencies and coincidences could be autonomous reasonless phenomena; the crisis was the result of the USA original reply to Russia’s Actions on the Caucasus. This crisis, decreased the oil price to record minimum and by that it had to bring Russia “to knees”, to increase the unemployment, cause the dissatisfaction among the population, which would get the revolution moving, demolishing “evil” empire and also depriving from Russia the opportunity to own Siberia-is the incredible unfair of the 20th century all was written in M.Albright’s book.
It is true that by the appearance of economic crisis the United States itself suffered more problems. They had to borrow great credits from Japan, China but hypothecary programme did not resist, people began to lose their houses, unemployment reached the record level, but rehabilitation period took a great deal of time than it was expected. The waves of disagreement caused by the recession of all economics of the countries, emergence of which from the crisis was unnotable, thanks to which Barack Obama came to the power, the first coloured president of the USA. He promised to pull America out of the crises, carry out the reforms demanding their solution, reconsider terms with Russia, and withdraw the troops from Iraq by 2012. It might have been much better if Obama did all what he promised. In one of the answers to the interviewer's question: “Will Obama keep his promise and buy a dog for his daughter after he becomes the president”, Obama made a joke in reply. “You know this is the White House, here all promise but they do not keep it then.” At that time his oral utterance seemed funny, and it underlined the president's good sense of humor, but now this saying makes everybody be more careful.
Let's be not the first to compare Obama with Gorbachev, but the fact of comparison in itself is not occasional. Both of them found the solutions of the problems in the realization of serious reforms. In one of the reforms there was “Perestroika” but in the other there were “Perezagruzka” and anti-crises measures. Being on the top of the power Gorbachev carried out numberless reforms and campaigns which in the long run brought to the market economy, liquidation of monopolist power of CPSS and collapse of USSR. He moved in the direction of the West, to the democratic reforms, sitting at the table of negotiations, refusing the hegemonic role of CPSS, trying to establish by the notes of capitalism, but he failed. But Obama tries to establish a little of socialism within capitalism. He offers reformation of system of pubic health; reduce dimensions of financial institutions of the country and the volume of trading operations thinking that these measures will enable him to keep risks adopted by the banks of his country.
The question arises: If it failed to make a light cocktail “soc-capital” in the first case why must “cap-social” come out with the same ingredients having only difference in sequence of their addition in the second one? It is clear that oil and water can not mix and the summand of amount doesn’t change for rearrangement! Let’s return back to the beginning of the article: if “it” quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, looks like a duck it must be a duck.
All above said follow that “symptomatic” of Cold War and the opposition power continues nowadays. Will the USA be a winner this time? Certainly, there is not to be spoken about the collapse of the USA, but losing its hegemony in the world, losing its prestige and economic leadership is equal to collapse. Will XXI century as XX come under the aegis of the USA? We compared Georgia with Cuba not without purpose; the similarity of the political process appears the same. Can Georgia be the change of portents in the region, if Cuba “urged” the world to change? Can Russia forge ahead? Can Russia overcome her demographic crises, emerge from the power of monopoly and oligarchies, rise above corrupted interests of small groups of people and ensure real competitiveness of the country?! Or has China found a formula of successful cocktail and already approached to the victory while the giant countries were and are competing among themselves? In the given newspaper “W.Post”, the more Americans are sure that XXI will be the time of China which will change the world leading position of the USA which had been leading in the past century.
Thus, 41% participants think that this century will become the century of economic leadership of China, but 43% surveyors suppose that China will go out of the position and the international political sphere. Only 40%-38% respondents announced that the USA maintained the leadership with itself in economic and international relations. The Celestial Empire continues to develop and to modernize its economics at rapid pace, promising to outrun the US soon, even in the sphere of pure energetic. “They don’t have democracy, so they don’t spend time on the debates” – Barack Obama made a joke in one of his speeches in the successive time. There remains only hope that the country which will come up to take place of the leadership of the USA will understand English as far as she does not want very much to learn Chinese.
Urkhan Seyidov
News.Az
0 comments:
Post a Comment