The assistance provided by China to Georgia is mainly used to promote China itself, unlike the assistance from the USA, on which the existence of Georgia’s military structures entirely depends, believes Kaha Gogolashvili, the director of the Rondeli Foundation’s European studies center.
Five and a half years after the implementation of the free trade agreement, Georgia and China decided to establish a strategic partnership.
A joint statement by the two countries was published about establishing a strategic partnership in four areas:
● political aspect; ● economic aspect; ● interpersonal and cultural connections; ● international dimension.
One part of Georgian society perceived this decision as turning its back on the West, while another part saw it as an additional opportunity for economic development. For many, deepening economic cooperation is acceptable, while the political part of the agreement contains risks.
You can read about what the document on strategic partnership entails here.
Kaha Gogolashvili: “The fact that China shows attention to the ‘Georgian Dream’ team (the ruling party of Georgia — JAMnews) and invites it for inter-party cooperation does not mean that China pays attention to the country.
You cannot compare China’s help to the help of the USA, which amounts to no less than 200 million dollars annually. The existence of our military structures, development depends on the help of the USA, compatibility with NATO entirely depends on American projects and programs.”
China’s aid primarily serves to promote China itself. The Chinese language is taught, but all this is done to promote China in Georgia, not to develop Georgia as a democratic country.
How much does our population need a visa-free regime with China? It gives us absolutely nothing because our citizens cannot find employment in China. In the USA, they manage to find jobs even without a visa-free regime. Anyone who goes to the States will find a job.
But our citizen will not be able to find work in China, and if they do, it will be with a lower salary than here. Therefore, for our population, this is not an advantage.”
