NATO aspirant reining in pro-bloc propaganda
The Georgian government is set to fold a media center promoting Western integration into the Foreign Ministry, according to its director.
The Information Center on NATO and EU, based in Tbilisi, was launched in 2005 under then-President Mikhail Saakashvili to build public support for Georgia's membership in both blocs.
An employee at the Center said in a social media post on Wednesday that he had received formal notification indicating the outlet would be closed by July 1. Director Tamara Tsuleiskiri later clarified that the NGO's functions would continue under the Foreign Ministry but that the current legal structure would be dissolved. Georgian officials confirmed the restructuring to the news agency Interpress.
In 2008, NATO designated Georgia and Ukraine as potential future members, despite objections from several European leaders over concerns that the move would antagonize Moscow, which perceives the US-led military bloc as expansionist and hostile.
Months later, Saakashvili launched a military operation against the then-breakaway Georgian region of South Ossetia, during which Russian peacekeepers stationed in the area were killed. Moscow responded swiftly, leading to a military defeat for Georgia, and shortly after recognized the region's independence.
The failed gamble damaged Saakashvili's popularity and paved the way for the rise of the Georgian Dream party, which has taken a more skeptical view of the West. Last August, on the anniversary of the conflict, the party's ruling council issued a statement alleging that Saakashvili's actions 'were not a result of his mental instability, but a result of instructions from the outside and a well-planned betrayal.'
Georgian Dream secured a sweeping victory in parliamentary elections last October. A coalition of pro-Western parties claimed the vote was rigged and launched street protests aimed at forcing the new government to step down. The EU and the US expressed support for the opposition's tactics — actions the Georgian government described as foreign interference.
Georgian officials have accused the opposition of mimicking the strategy used in Ukraine in 2014 during the Western-backed Maidan coup. They have also alleged they are facing foreign pressure for not aligning with Kiev in its conflict with Moscow. Western nations, meanwhile, have accused the current government of 'undermining democracy' by passing legislation that mandates disclosure of foreign grants by domestic political organizations.
Georgia has suspended accession talks with Brussels due to the tensions, but says it still seeks eventual membership in both the EU and NATO.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
11 hours ago
- Russia Today
EU may target Russia's financial reputation
The EU is considering adding Russia to its anti-money laundering 'grey list' in an effort to cause reputational damage and increase financial pressure on Moscow, Financial Times reported on Friday. The blacklist includes countries that Brussels considers to have inadequate regulations against shady financial activity. Inclusion on the list would impose extra compliance requirements on banks and financial institutions dealing with Russian individuals and entities, leading to higher costs in conducting business activity. The European Commission is preparing to adopt a revised list of high-risk third countries next week, after postponing its release at the last minute for 'administrative/procedural reasons,' FT reported. 'There is huge support for putting Russia on the list,' Markus Ferber, a German MEP with the center-right European People's Party, the EU parliament's largest grouping, told the outlet. Typically, the EU aligns its blacklist with decisions from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), a global intergovernmental body that combats money laundering and terrorist financing. Although Russia's FATF membership was suspended in 2023, several countries would likely block any attempt to formally add it to the FATF grey list, leading Brussels to consider unilateral action. Despite its suspension from FATF, Russia continues to engage with the Eurasian Group (EAG), a regional body affiliated with FATF. In 2024, the EAG assessed Russia's progress in strengthening its anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing measures. It acknowledged some improvements but urged further action, particularly in enforcing targeted financial sanctions and increasing transparency around beneficial ownership. Ukraine has repeatedly pushed for Russia to be placed on the FATF blacklist, citing its connections with already blacklisted states and the potential risks it allegedly poses to the global financial system. However, these attempts have failed due to resistance from several FATF member states, including China, India, Saudi Arabia, and South Africa. Despite being suspended, Russia remains obligated to comply with FATF standards and continues to fulfill its financial commitments to the organization.
Russia Today
12 hours ago
- Russia Today
Ukraine's most reckless attack: Was NATO behind it?
While Western headlines celebrated Operation Spider's Web as a daring feat of Ukrainian ingenuity, a closer look reveals something far more calculated – and far less Ukrainian. This wasn't just a strike on Russian airfields. It was a test – one that blended high-tech sabotage, covert infiltration, and satellite-guided timing with the kind of precision that only the world's most advanced intelligence networks can deliver. And it begs the question: who was really pulling the strings? Let's be honest. Ukraine's Main Directorate of Intelligence didn't act alone. It couldn't have. Even if no Western agency was directly involved in the operation itself, the broader picture is clear: Ukraine's Main Directorate of Intelligence, its military, and even its top political leadership rely heavily on Western intelligence feeds. Ukraine is deeply embedded within NATO's intelligence-sharing architecture. The idea of a self-contained Ukrainian intel ecosystem is largely a thing of the past. These days, Kiev draws primarily on NATO-provided data, supplementing it with its own domestic sources where it can. That's the backdrop – a hybrid model that's become standard over the past two years. Now, let's look more closely at Operation Spider's Web itself. We know the planning took roughly 18 months and involved moving drones covertly into Russian territory, hiding them, and then orchestrating coordinated attacks on key airfields. So how likely is it that Western intelligence agencies had a hand in such a complex operation? Start with logistics. It's been reported that 117 drones were prepped for launch inside Russia. Given that numerous private companies in Russia currently manufacture drones for the war effort, it wouldn't have been difficult to assemble the necessary devices under that cover. That's almost certainly what happened. Components were likely purchased domestically under the guise of supplying the 'Special Military Operation.' Still, it's hard to believe Ukraine's Main Directorate of Intelligence could have pulled off this mass procurement and assembly alone. It's highly likely Western intelligence agencies played a quiet but crucial role – especially in securing specialized components. Then there's the explosives. If the operation's command center was located in the Ural region, as some suggest, it's plausible that explosives or components were smuggled in via neighboring CIS countries. That kind of border-hopping precision doesn't happen without outside help. In fact, it mirrors tactics long perfected by intelligence services in both the US and Western Europe. Because make no mistake: this wasn't just the CIA's playground. European services – particularly those in the UK, France, and Germany – possess the same capabilities to execute and conceal such an operation. The NATO intelligence community may have different national flags, but it speaks with one voice in the field. The real giveaway, however, lies in the timing of the strikes. These weren't blind attacks on static targets. Russia's strategic bombers frequently rotate bases. Commercial satellite imagery – updated every few days at best – simply can't track aircraft on the move. And yet these drones struck with exquisite timing. That points to a steady flow of real-time surveillance, likely derived from signals intelligence, radar tracking, and live satellite feeds – all tools in the Western intelligence toolbox. Could Ukraine, on its own, have mustered that kind of persistent, multidomain awareness? Not a chance. That level of situational intelligence is the domain of NATO's most capable agencies – particularly those tasked with monitoring Russian military infrastructure as part of their day job. For years now, Ukraine has been described in Western media as a plucky underdog using low-cost tactics to take on a larger foe. But beneath the David vs. Goliath narrative lies a more uncomfortable truth: Ukraine's intelligence ecosystem is now deeply embedded within NATO's operational architecture. Real-time feeds from US and European satellites, intercepts from British SIGINT stations, operational planning consultations with Western handlers – this is the new normal. Ukraine still has its own sources, but it's no longer running a self-contained intelligence operation. That era ended with the first HIMARS launch. Western officials, of course, deny direct involvement. But Russian investigators are already analyzing mobile traffic around the impact sites. If it turns out that these drones weren't connected to commercial mobile networks – if, instead, they were guided through encrypted, military-grade links – it will be damning. Not only would that confirm foreign operational input, it would expose the full extent of how Western assets operated inside Russia without detection. At that point, no amount of plausible deniability will cover the truth. The question will no longer be whether NATO participated – but how deep that participation ran.
Russia Today
17 hours ago
- Russia Today
EU financing ‘extremism'
Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze has accused the EU of inciting and financing extremism in his country. The claim comes amid a deepening rift between Tbilisi and Brussels over alleged 'democratic backsliding.' Kobakhidze insisted on Thursday that his government has 'indisputable' evidence that Western actors are backing anti-government protests in the country. 'We prove this with facts, videos, and [EU] financing practices. We have direct facts about how these people are financing extremism in our country. We talk to them with facts, but they respond with general phrases, and more often lies. This is sad,' Kobakhidze said, as cited by Rustavi 2. Parliament Speaker Shalva Papuashvili echoed the charge, stating that 'extremism in Georgia is supported and financed from the budgets of the EU.' He added that he had written to EU Ambassador Pawel Herczynski detailing the accusations but had yet to receive a reply. The ruling Georgian Dream party, which secured a decisive parliamentary majority in October 2024, has accused Western powers of interfering in the country's domestic politics under the guise of 'democracy promotion.' Officials in Tbilisi have drawn parallels to the 2014 Maidan uprising in Ukraine and say similar tactics are now being used to destabilize Georgia for refusing to adopt a confrontational stance against Russia in the Ukraine conflict. Following Georgian Dream's victory, a coalition of pro-Western parties alleged fraud and launched protests to force the government's resignation. EU and US officials voiced support for the opposition, which Georgian leaders denounced as foreign meddling. Brussels has also led a coordinated campaign against Georgia's foreign influence transparency law, legislation that requires political organizations to disclose substantial foreign funding. Although similar laws exist across the West, the European External Action Service claimed the legislation in Georgia was 'a serious setback for democracy' and warned it could 'threaten the country's EU path.' Tensions spiked last month when French President Emmanuel Macron, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz issued a joint statement on Georgia's Independence Day, accusing the government of 'democratic backsliding.' Papuashvili dismissed the statement as 'shameful,' saying it disrespected both the state and its people. Georgia was granted EU candidate status in December 2023 but has since suspended accession talks, citing Brussels' increasingly coercive tone. The government, however, insists that it remains committed to eventual EU membership.
