“Thunderous Silence” from Brussels – What does it mean? –Aze.Media

However, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken officially announced that in response to the adoption of the “foreign agents” law in Georgia, which Washington considers a tool for repressing opposition and democratic freedoms, the United States was implementing a policy of visa restrictions against the country.

Although there are no immediate plans to impose visa sanctions against specific figures among Georgia’s leaders, the secretary of state said such sanctions could now be implemented. “Anyone who undermines democratic processes or institutions in Georgia, including before, during and after the October 2024 (parliamentary) elections, may be denied a US visa and barred from entering the United States. Immediate family members of these individuals may also be subject to these restrictions,” Blinken’s statement said. The United States also promises a near-total overhaul of bilateral relations with Georgia. The European Union is also considering sanctions – although this information comes from leaks rather than official statements. At least four countries are calling for Georgia’s visa-free status to be revoked. This “visa-free” regime is essentially the only benefit that Tbilisi has received from the EU for its pro-Western orientation, aside from complications in relations with Russia.

However, the tension between Tbilisi and Brussels escalated much more than could have happened in theory with the imposition of sanctions. Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze revealed sensational details of his conversation with a European commissioner: “Even in the midst of prolonged blackmail (from the West), the threat made during a telephone conversation with a European commissioner was shocking . The commissioner listed a series of steps Western partners could take if the veto on the transparency law was overturned, and noted: ‘You saw what happened to Fico, and you should be very careful.’ quoted the press service of the Georgian government, quoting Prime Minister Kobakhidze also added that “the attack on the Slovak Prime Minister shows traces of the special services of a country particularly closely linked to the world war party. “. He did not specify from which country.

This is a sensational claim. The remarks of the anonymous European commissioner were perceived by the Georgian Prime Minister as a “shocking threat”. The outcry over the “Law on Transparency of Foreign Influences” already discredited the EU and represented direct interference in Georgia’s internal affairs, with more of an intention to “put them in their place”, to “show who is the boss,” etc., rather than a genuine concern. for Georgian democracy. But if a European commissioner alludes to an assassination attempt against the prime minister of another country in a conversation with the prime minister of another country, that crosses all imaginable boundaries.

Theoretically, a plausible explanation could be found here: “Our commissioner was misunderstood, he was talking about the risk of worsening internal conflicts in society and, officially, Bratislava is not talking about ‘foreign involvement’ in the attack against his Prime Minister. » This explanation could work – but only if it were officially declared. However, the EU’s response to Kobakhidze’s statement is simply silent.

The silence of European structures can be explained to a certain extent. Journalists know this well: if a statement includes phrases like “one of…” it is usually not officially refuted – it does not seem to concern anyone in particular. But a “shocking threat” in a conversation between a prime minister and an EU commissioner is not a situation in which the EU can afford to remain silent. Perhaps Brussels considers itself almost untouchable, confident that no one will dare accuse it of anything, but this time the questions are too dangerous and shocking for European leaders to remain silent.

Indeed, many people beyond Tbilisi would like to know whether Europe uses such methods against dissident politicians.