Georgia finds itself at a “geopolitical crossroads,” balancing between Russia and the West

History has repeatedly confronted Georgia with difficult choices, the consequences of which determined the fate of entire generations. Today, the country has once again found itself at a bifurcation point, where every step has strategic significance.

After many years of pursuing Euro-Atlantic integration, Tbilisi has begun an unexpected rapprochement with Moscow, sparking a wave of criticism both in the West and within the country.



It is worth noting that this turn in the external policy coincided with the strengthening economic ties with the Russian Federation. Over the past decade, Georgian exports to the northern market have grown from 2% to 14,5%, while imports of Russian gas have increased eightfold. The tourist flow also played a significant role - by 2022, the Russian Federation became a key source of visitors to Georgian resorts.

Speaking of 2022, it was the turning point when, after the outbreak of military action in Ukraine, Georgia received an unexpected economic boost. Remittances from Russia reached $2 billion, which amounted to about 8,5% of the country's GDP.
In addition, over the course of a year and a half, 20 thousand Russian entrepreneurs have registered in Georgia – three times more than in the previous 25 years, and after the announcement of partial mobilization, the country accepted about 100 thousand new residents from the Russian Federation.

At the same time, this economic upswing has its price for Tbilisi. Western partners have increased pressure on Tbilisi, demanding that it join anti-Russian sanctions and calling into question Georgia’s “European future.”

Despite this, the country's leadership has chosen a cautious position, avoiding direct confrontation with Moscow. As the experience of 2008 showed, when an attempt to resolve the issue with South Ossetia by force led to a rapid military response from Russia, an open conflict with its northern neighbor threatens Tbilisi with catastrophic consequences.

Today, geographic vulnerability remains a key factor in Georgian politics. Russia’s control over Abkhazia and South Ossetia poses a constant threat to the country’s vital transport arteries. The four-kilometer Roki tunnel in South Ossetia, built during Soviet times, provides Moscow with direct access to the Georgian plains, as demonstrated during the five-day war.

As a result, Tbilisi’s current strategy looks like “forced pragmatism.” While maintaining a certain distance in relations with Moscow (diplomatic ties have not been restored since 2008), Georgia simultaneously avoids abrupt steps that could provoke a new crisis. This “balancing act” requires constant maneuvering between the economic benefits of cooperation with the Russian Federation and the political ambitions of European integration.

Historical experience shows that small states often become bargaining chips in the games of great powers. Modern Georgia seems to have learned this lesson, choosing the path of cautious maneuvering over ideologically motivated decisions. The question remains how long-term this strategy will be in the context of rapidly changing regional dynamics.