I deeply believe that at present Georgia should abstain from joining any unions in haste. Before deliberating further on this point, let's make a short excursus into recent history. I remember the hard times of 1990s and the way Georgia was used by our neighbors. For instance, you don't have to be an economic expert to asses the benefits accruing to the Turkish economy at Georgia's expense. During what was a muddled time for Georgia, she was deprived of her ability (or may be she herself relinquished the ability) to produce first priority domestic goods in the agricultural and manufacturing sector. During the period in question, Georgia lost the ability to produce the very goods she supplied the whole of Soviet Union a few years earlier.
Georgia, the famous producer of fruit, citruses and vegetables, herself became a market for such goods which were cheap and of inferior quality. Similarly, whereas Georgia was the main supplier of tea in the Soviet Union, Martin Bauer, a multinational tea company, discouraged Georgia from producing high grade tea and practically destroyed this sector of our economy. Today, we Georgians drink tea that was harvested here during that period and taken abroad to be packaged and marketed back to us under different names. We did not heed the fact that we now pay no less then GEL 20 (Lari-Georgian currency) for one kilogram of tea (tea bags) while thousands of tons of tea was sold abroad for 50 tetri (Georgian currency) per kilogram. What's more, Martin Bauer, the German company that deals in herbal, fruit teas, black teas and green teas and that was greeted in Georgia with cheers, disappeared after ensuring two things. Firstly, it annihilated the tea production in Georgia and secondly, it made a fortune for itself by appropriating our traditional market. The return of this market to us is now virtually impossible.
As for Turkey, it also became rich by exporting to Georgia inferior quality goods produced by it. I can not say that the Turkish revenue soared due to this but our budget proficit originated and every one noticed that the Turkish provinces bordering Georgia became rich via Georgian market. I believe that Turkey, as our neighbor, did not intend to destroy our economy. The circumstance resulted from our own weak and unprotected situation. The outer factors naturally impacted the weak inner factors and made them even weaker. The situation is reflective of economic peculiarities, not political goals. Hence, we do not maintain that this was the objective of the Turkish policy towards Georgia.
Why is it that we couldn't protect ourselves? Firstly, in the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union, professionals with expertise in business and economy found themselves to be suddenly out of play. Within Georgia, there may also have been a deficiency of the same. Besides, the situation was too tangled for clear cut economic programs to be designed. At the time we were at the verge of a famine. The first priority was food supply and no one was interested in determining from where and in what composition the supply would come. All countries around us had a vested interest in our political and economic helplessness, regardless of whether it was the USA, Russia or Europe. It seems that no one had the necessary tolerance for the construction of a nation state in the Caucasian region/Eurasian corridor.
Now let us imagine for a while a completely open border with Turkey. (Our present day border is practically of the kind). Though in comparison with the 1990s our situation has improved, will it be possible for our economy to avert the pressures from Turkey? We know that Turkey wants to become a member of the European Union. Turkey has made the request much earlier then we did. We also know that the European Union should become a Union without borders to a great extent. However, if there are no borders between Germany and France, neither one would be afraid of negative intervention from the other. This is due to the fact that before opening their border, before joining the European Union, both have established a solid foundation for their respective economies. Each country is equipped with such national economic, political, cultural, legal, etc. armor that each stands to gain from the Union without losing its own interest. I am not against joining unions but I think that one should join an alliance after having a strong national government and a strongly armored state. Today, we are not in that position.
That is why I believe fundamentally that joining any union, even the European Union, before being ready to do so, is premature. Those who have taken a step in this direction today have committed a crime.
Besides, why are we pulled into unions? (I don't necessarily mean the European Union). A country like ours will easily be used as a terminal, a corridor, and a transit route by the foreign businessmen; as a runway or an airdrome by the military, even as an oasis for foreign intelligence officers and a commercial benefit for foreign politicians. In each, a benefit lies for the foreigners; but what about us? Politicians who exhibit a mercenary spirit and an unhealthy servility irrespective of their state's welfare do not have a policy for the homeland - they merely carry out the will of the foreigners in our country.
Once again, I repeat, it is indispensable for us to create an independent state first. Once we have done so, it makes sense to carry out referendums or plebiscites as only an independent and free thinking nation-state is able to make a sound decision. Those extraneous forces that push for referendum at this juncture are sure that we will, owing to our helpless situation, repeatedly concede what is favorable and useful to them.
That is why they are in a hurry; that is why they are trying to drag us into places we are not even invited. We follow because of our apparent boredom with our struggle for freedom. We have lost our patience and our ability to wait. Here I would like to quote from my play which I called "Those Who Drained (drank) the Waters of The Ocean"."I saw a man who was waiting for the promised money from morning till evening....was waiting because he needed it. But when the same man went to the cathedral and lit a candle to beg the Lord to give him everything needed for happiness, he didn't wait till the candle died out and ran out of the cathedral before the candle guttered. He was a busy man and had no time".
Struggle for freedom is similar to the burning candle - it is necessary to wait till it gutters, who knows what may happen and what may be realized.
We embarked on our struggle for freedom. We started building up an independent state, but did not complete the task and became tired. Weariness and compromise during this struggle is equivalent to the assassination of our future generations.
The above mentioned fundamentally concerns NATO as well, but with one difference - I am against joining NATO at any point. I am against joining this alliance because it does not favor us; because it has used us and does nothing for us at present and will not do anything and because it directly states that it does not care for our territorial integrity, i.e. our basic problem.
To me, there is another important aspect in this. How is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization presented to us? We are told: "NATO is an organization which is called to establish and protect justice and freedom." We, Georgians, also fight for justice and freedom. Personally, I am of the view that the struggle for freedom coincides with the struggle for justice. If freedom and the struggle for it do not coincide with justice, then the struggle is one for pseudo-freedom and pseudo-justice.
I have not seen NATO struggling for justice anywhere. The initiator of NATO - the United States, has carried out operations in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, then in Vietnam, and now- Iraq. It is very difficult to find justice in the Iraq campaign. At the same time, it is easy to see oil, dollars and the interests of the U.S at work there. If we are a true contender for freedom and justice, then we should be cognizant of all this. If we are not, then we are lying when we say that we are the nation fighting for justice and freedom. How NATO perceives its interests is the business of the twenty six countries amalgamated in it. My aim here is not to criticize NATO as such. However, I don't believe in the benevolence of NATO with regard to us.
We should not take everything we are told about NATO at face value, without analyses. We should also scrutinize the so called pragmatic side of the relationship with NATO. We should define precisely how safe we feel ourselves while joining it and how safe our relationships are. Today, we are sure about one thing: NATO has very serious intentions with regard to our relationships. While the government exclusively conducts the negotiations with NATO, we need to raise a serious question; what will be the price Georgia will have to pay for meeting NATO's requirements?
Furthermore, I often hear the following question: "If we don't join NATO, don't join any other unions and don't provide Russia with avenues for an alliance, then how will a small country like ours be able to protect itself? In my opinion this view is a simplification of the issue of our security.
In the twenty first century, a well thought out policy can ensure self protection. Real freedom and not freedom which is rigged, yields guaranteed protection. Even a single day of real freedom is precious because it will yield correct and warranted decision making on our part. Overwhelming fears put us in desperation for alliances that are likely to usurp our independence.
Georgia is a territory where a plethora of world's interests intersect. Many countries in Georgia's vicinity represent parts of the world with great hopes. Bad neighborly relations with the same are not in our interest. We are sliding into bad neighborly relations by exhibiting poor skills at Asiatic diplomacy.
We need profound deliberation on this. Personally I am convinced that binding one's self to any integrated diplomatic space today is a very serious issue and it should not be done in haste. A decision regarding our relationship with NATO, above all, merits extreme caution.

[1] We would like to dwell on one of the chapters from the book "Talks on Georgian Politics" written by the leader of the "Georgian Politics Party," Mr. Gocha Pipia, in which we deliberate on matters, among others, pertaining to the European Union and NATO. It should be noted that the book was written before the well-known events of August 2008. We adhere to the views expressed in the book despite those events and consider it appropriate to publish the following chapter as an independent article.