Grigol Katamadze, Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Ambassador of Georgia to Ukraine, finished his another four-year cadence and 20-year diplomatic career. He is one of the few ambassadors accredited in Ukraine, who does not ask for a list of questions for an interview before it’s held. Mr. Katamadze always found answers to all the most sensitive questions. The last interview for The Day was not an exception. Georgian Ambassador spoke about the reasons for the defeat of the party in power in Georgia, who will take his position as an ambassador in Kyiv, and what hinders the development potential of Georgian-Ukrainian relations.
Mr. Katamadze at the end of last year in your interviews with Ukrainian media you have expressed a deep conviction that Georgia will not go back to where it was in the past. And as an argument for this statement you said that the political force that dedicated nine years for implementation of reforms and the new political force, which only came to power through parliamentary elections, will find a common language. What then do you think of the fact that in the recent time there were many monuments to Stalin restored in Georgian cities and villages? And what is your opinion on the amnesty that came into effect on January 13 and was named Cold January of 2013 by mass media? Has Bidzina Ivanishvili really been let out of a bottle by a genie, as some experts say?
“I will not give up the words that I said so sincerely and I truly believe that it will eventually be so because Georgia is the cornerstone of everything. The former government, present opposition, President Mikheil Saakashvili, and Prime Minister Bidzina Ivanishvili all have the same homeland. I am convinced that we all equally love our country. Therefore, we are doomed to find consensus for the sake of this country and for the sake of its future.
“What concerns restoration of monuments to Stalin, it is not the policy of the state and I sure hope, not the policy of the new government to restore monuments to Stalin. In fact, this happened in two places following the initiative of one person or a group of people. We have never denied that in Georgia there are people who worship the memory of Stalin. This defines the diversity of opinions. We have a generation that grew up in that period and it is their right to be able to worship whoever they want and in whatever ways they want.”
What do you think about the amnesty?
“This issue needs to be thoroughly explored. However, I must say that in the past decade I have not heard once that some international institutions dealing with human rights, said that there were political prisoners in Georgia. Suddenly, a decision is made within the country regarding this issue. I don’t know how logical it all is, including the political aspect of the issue. In fact, the amnesty was performed periodically. But this was a large-scale amnesty. If under the guise of political struggle criminals will be set free, it will be a disaster for the country. This is not going back to the past, this is the way to nowhere.
“Here I must say a simple thing. We have spoken many times about the reform of MIA law-enforcement system. When in the 1990s we had Soviet system of police and then in literally just a few months we broke its spine, the system was changed, and people believed in it. Even today we can still see how much confidence people have in patrol service and to this system.
“If even a small crack will appear in it, we will never be able to get back that trust again. If the patrol will take a bribe just once, if law will be disregarded, it will be the end. And there are no more resources left in the country to change everything again. Therefore, the current government has the greater responsibility than those who came in power nine years ago and introduced the reforms. Now they have a good chance to continue the good things that have been achieved and develop them. Georgia will only benefit from it as a country.”
On the day after the Amnesty Law came into effect, when Prime Minister Ivanishvili greeted church clergy, gathered in the Patriarchate, and all Georgians with the Old New Year he said: “We shall reassure the country and continue to live in love.” What do you think about this statement?
“Ivanishvili said this at his first press conference as Prime Minister. I do not usually comment on statements made by the president and the prime minister, but in this case I just want to say something as a man and as a Georgian citizen. Both then and on January 13 Ivanishvili said some very wise things. The cornerstone is the Georgia’s future and future of its people. For 21 years we lived in aggression, whether it was negative aggression, which lasted for quite a long time in the 1990s and the early 2000s, or positive aggression, when in the past nine years we had to be in a constant state of movement: we had to do everything on time, do everything as quickly as possible, to make sure that Georgia is viewed as a decent country and a good place for taking a vacation, pursuing a career, or making investments. This, by the way, was also stressed in the president’s New Year’s speech. I think that when two leaders speak about the same this means we have a good future. This year we will have to be very tolerant while going on the edge, in order not to make an unforgivable mistake, which we will never be able to fix.
“The way it was done in the early 1990s, when because of our excessive emotionality we did not see the danger that threatened us. Then in the local parliament of Abkhazia the representation of Georgia was two MPs short. They, you know, got offended by some issues and left the meeting instead of continuing the fight by political means. We all know well what came out of it. That’s why it is better to engage in a dialogue, it is better to reassure the country, and move along the path of constructive development. We have seen that it is really possible. We used to say that almost every election was historic for us. But now, after for the first time in the modern history of Georgia we have been able to hold elections which resulted in change of power, we have to take the next step: we have to be tolerant until the next elections and hold presidential elections. Let the worthy be the winner in the political struggle. We also have to prove mainly to ourselves and not to the rest of the world that we are a European country, that we follow European values and that we go with them towards Europe.”
Before the parliamentary elections that took place in October 2012 you were also saying that the government should simply work and show the results of its work to people. “Judging from this, the current government of Georgia has good perspective,” you noted back then. In your opinion, what are the reasons for the defeat of Saakashvili’s party? And what lessons should be learnt from it for the future of the party?
“There are several important reasons for this. The first reason is that in any open civil society, where, in fact, there is democracy, nine years of being in power becomes boring for the electorate. The second reason is that the government got very much engaged in infrastructure projects.”
But these things are also necessary for the country…
“That’s right. But here it is difficult to say what the country needed in the first place. It’s great that those projects were implemented. It’s true that they don’t immediately pay dividends, it takes time. However, due to the excessive devotion to infrastructure projects, truly Georgian projects became secondary. Here I mean, for example, projects in the sphere of agriculture, which have been actively developed in the past year almost before the elections. But it is too late to get any significant results.
“Another reason is the intensification of the process of reforming the penitentiary system with emphasis on creating infrastructure. We had prisons built according to the European standards. However, it is not enough to just build a place, one should change the system and it takes time. It is also important to provide an opportunity for the civil society to carefully monitor what is happening in places of detention. We haven’t had it all done yet.”
Defense Minister of Georgia Irakli Alasania in his interview for the 24 Hours said that the previous government, in contrast to the new one, was characterized by authoritarian, one-man and one-party philosophy of governance, and also the use of law-enforcement institutions for political persecution and repression. What is your opinion about this?
“In principle, I would agree with this regarding the multi-party system. However, the fact that the new coalition includes several political parties does not mean anything. It is important how things actually work. Yes, at the present moment, there are several political parties and there is opposition. The question is how the government and the opposition will cooperate and solve difficult issues. So far it does not work quite well.
“What concerns the use of law-enforcement agencies, I could argue with Alasania’s statement.”
Mr. Katamadze, you once said that Georgia should once and for all become a civilized state. And this would be real only if it became a member of NATO and the EU. Ivanishvili says that the EU and NATO are the top priorities for Georgia. Are there any real actions that go along with his statement?
“At present, we have clear declarations from the state authorities that Georgia will not change its foreign policy. However, it is also important that these statements and the course of Euro-Atlantic integration should be followed in domestic politics. In order to do so, we have to continue reforms in the country, we should reform those spheres that have not been reformed or those that have been, but with some possible errors.”
Alasania, in the abovementioned interview, also said that in the long run, Georgia and Russia can become strategic partners. In your opinion, will Ivanishvili’s government be able to achieve this?
“I do not know whether this government would be able to achieve such a goal. I can agree with this statement only in the context that Georgia is, in fact, at the crossroads of interests. It is my deepest conviction that Georgia should have strategic partnership with all its neighbors directly bordering the Georgian territory, as it was recognized by the international community at the time of the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.”
When the head of the Georgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs visited Washington, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made a warning to Georgia not to take the path of Ukraine. Since you are here now, what do you think about this warning made in Washington and is there really such a threat to your country?
“I believe that every country develops as decreed by history. During the time that I worked in Ukraine there were different times, different governments and political parties and when in some situation somebody would try to draw parallels between our countries I tried to say that you cannot draw parallels and try to find analogies in the development of Ukraine and Georgia. The events in Georgia in 2003 were quite different when the new government came in power. The situation in Ukraine was completely different. These two events are similar in some ways, but the underlying issues were still different.
“After meeting with ordinary citizens, I am convinced that Georgia will continue moving towards NATO. Georgia is a mentally European country. Not surprisingly, in different periods educated Georgian leaders searched for a way to Europe and knocked for a long time. In the past 20 years we have made statements and took steps, at first quite feeble, but then more determined and more confident, in this direction.”
Did the change of power in your country affect both political and economic relationship between Georgia and Ukraine?
“In 2010, after the change of power in Ukraine I was also asked about whether the relationship between our countries would change. Then I said that our relations will develop rapidly. The relations between our countries move in a pragmatic direction, which is good. I would use the words of President Saakashvili, who recently said that there has never been such revitalization of the Georgian-Ukrainian relations as it happened in the past two years.
“Now, three months after the elections in Georgia I can say that the relations have not changed. We had a change of government, the government in Ukraine has also pretty much changed, and in order to move forward, the Commission of the Trade and Economic Cooperation should be revamped. Once the meeting of the new Commission takes place, the governments will be able to make a plan for future.
“After working for so many years in Ukraine I know that there is huge untapped potential in economic and business spheres of both countries.”
What prevents its realization?
“I think, one of the factors was the fact that the Commission on Economic Cooperation has not been operating for a long time. The last meeting of the Commission before a long break took place in February 2005, when Yulia Tymoshenko was the Prime Minister. Then the next two meetings were held in 2012 and in 2011. This means that the Commission did not have a meeting in six years.
“Last year we got about 800 million US dollars of trade turnover between our countries. But I am deeply convinced that in three or four years bilateral trade turnover would reach two billion dollars.”
Mr. Katamadze, we know that you are going to finish your career as a diplomat. Could you tell us what were the reasons for making this decision?
“I was appointed to be the ambassador to Ukraine in 2000 by President Eduard Shevardnadze. After the Rose Revolution there was a parade of resignations among diplomats. I have not done so for two reasons. One is that I simply don’t like to run from side to side. And another, maybe it would sound high-flown, I consider myself to be a soldier. I was appointed and I have to carry the responsibility that lies on me until the last minute of fulfilling my duties. I still think that it is wrong to make a decision and retire, especially when you are on the front lines. I think that diplomats work at the forefront.
“In December I did not like one thing: the press reported that there will be changes in the diplomatic corps. I personally made a decision that I presented at the meeting with the Diaspora in Kyiv in the late December. I thanked everyone for cooperation and said that apart from the fact that my four-year cadence in Kyiv has come to an end I made a difficult decision to finish my 20-year diplomatic career. January 22 of this year marks both the end of my cadence of an ambassador in Kyiv and exactly 20 years of my diplomatic career.”
What will be your next step?
“When I announced the decision to end my diplomatic career to my close friend and school class mate Givi Topchishvili, who has been living in New York for a long time and runs a very big business there, he said to me that it is not important what you end, it is more important what you begin. I liked it a lot. Once again I got convinced of the wisdom of the Georgians and especially, in this case, Givi – Georgian Jew. Jews are very wise people. I talk so much not because I do not want to answer your question. I have some very serious plans. I want to go back home and then tell about my plans.”
I hope you will tell us.
“Certainly. One thing I can say for sure – I am going back to Georgia.”
Can you already say who will take your place here in Kyiv?
“There already has been made a political decision regarding this and for me it is very symbolic. This person is a true professional, a career diplomat, a man of great experience.”
Why is it symbolic for you?
“Twenty years ago the man, who will succeed me as an ambassador, insisted that I went to work in the Foreign Ministry instead of the Interior Ministry. This was Mikheil Ukleba, who was the first deputy minister of foreign affairs.”
