“How long, O Catiline, will you abuse our patience?“ © Cicero

The UN Security Council failed to make an unambiguous assessment of a recent incident in the sky of Abkhazia. No decision on the fact of Georgian drone flight over the zone of conflict was taken.

Let us recall that last Sunday the Abkhaz Ministry of Defense claimed that the Air Defense of the Republic shot down an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). After its remains were examined it became clear that it is a Georgian drone. Tbilisi immediately denied the incident. Nana Intzkirveli, Chief of the Press Service, the Georgian Ministry of Defense, claimed that no Georgian aircraft flew over the areas controlled by the Abkhazian party.

However, later (perhaps, probably advised from overseas) Tbilisi made a decision to exploit this situation to escalate relation with Moscow. Tbilisi understood that it is impossible to contest the evidence of belonging the reconnaissance drone to the Georgian Air Force. Using the principle of shifted focus, Georgian strategic politicians dreaming of NATO shoulder straps claimed that a Russian MiG fighter was involved in the incident. However, at the UN SC meeting they refrained from demonstration of a video allegedly confirming this version.

Meanwhile, Georgian diplomats in the UN yet succeeded in something. They repeatedly requested to convoke an extraordinary SC meeting to discuss expansion of economic cooperation between Russia and Abkhazia and South Ossetia. It quite possible that the incident of the shot-down drone was just needed to have a pretext for such meeting. Such conclusion is indirectly confirmed by the fact that failing to take a Security Council unanimous decision, the USA, Great Britain, Germany and France issued a joint extra-UN communiqué that supports Georgian in the situation with unrecognized republics. The Georgian Foreign Ministry stated that these countries express concern “over the recent Russian initiatives to establish formal links with actual state authorities of Abkhazia and South Ossetia”. The Georgian Foreign Minister emphasized that the communiqué demonstrates relevancy of the Tbilisi concerns.

Anyhow, we see an expressed demonstration of favorite Georgian tactics: provocations in all spheres of international relations. It starts with a military provocation (illicit reconnaissance drone invasion of the Abkhazia aerospace) that is followed with a political and legal provocation in the Security Council. Tbilisi needs all these provocations to support an image “of a victim suffering from an unjust policy of the big northern neighbor”. And also to stir up permanently the need of NATO defense - in the eyes of Moscow to exploit this incident for political bargain, and in the eyes of Washington to accelerate NATO membership and receive regular financial injections.

In the context of the contemporary geopolitics and current status of the Georgian – Abkhaz relations as an inherent part thereof the epigraph of the Ancient Roma orator to this article is not accidental. The history repeatedly provids lessons to the mankind, and very often looking back to the several-century-old past it is possible to find rather interesting and explanatory coincidences.

A well-known carpetbagger – Lucius Sergius Catilina – yet was a man of a noble family, had a very depraved and violent temper according to his contemporaries. Already in a young age he enjoyed internal wars, murders, looting and civil riots. He was a serpent, weathercock, and liar, avid for other people’s property, prodigal and passional man. He was a good orator but lacked any wisdom.

Surely we do not speak about direct parallels. Contemporary Georgia is not Ancient Roma. But many coincidences in the natures of politicians (and unfortunately not the best ones) are evident. In this particular case the image is rather collective. Catilina strived for unlimited power that spelled collapse of “the empire of equals”. He organized vile conspiracies, gave out, prepared attempts and revolts thus glorifying the art of provocations by his conduct. The Roman Senate was patient for a long time, but finally the end of the conspirator was unenviable.

Possible comparisons are not just literary exercises but an attempt to remind that all existent already happened many times in the past. In different context and with other persons but it is not the point. It is well-known that the history has a spiral nature. And you may find good evidence that transition from the language of political arguments to the language of provocations and senseless arms rattling never resulted in something positive.