:00:00. > :00:16.survived. Now on BBC News, Hardtalk.
:00:17. > :00:21.Welcome to HARDtalk, with me, Zeinab Badawi. This week 's Nato Summit in
:00:22. > :00:25.Wales comes against a background of escalating tensions between Russia
:00:26. > :00:29.and Nato over the conflict in Ukraine. With calls for tougher
:00:30. > :00:34.action against Moscow. Russia says it is beefing up its military
:00:35. > :00:37.strategy, because of Nato 's presence in Eastern Europe. How far
:00:38. > :00:43.should Nato go in protecting countries that are not members of
:00:44. > :00:45.the Alliance, like Ukraine? My guest today is President Giorgi
:00:46. > :00:50.Margvelashvili. Of Georgia. A country that was at war with Moscow
:00:51. > :01:19.six years ago. What is his advice to Nato?
:01:20. > :01:24.President Giorgi Margvelashvili, welcome to HARDtalk. Thank you, it
:01:25. > :01:33.is an honour. How should Nato deal with Russia in your view? I think
:01:34. > :01:39.the main thing is to build a solution, rather than confrontation.
:01:40. > :01:46.And, a solution to all of the cases that we are talking about. Nato has,
:01:47. > :01:51.since its existence, been an alliance that was bringing more
:01:52. > :02:00.peace, more prosperity, more stability. To the region, that
:02:01. > :02:05.Georgia and Ukraine members of, to Europe, and Atlantic community. So,
:02:06. > :02:11.I think a solution to existing problems is what Nato should be
:02:12. > :02:16.doing. They should understand that this is a problem not only for
:02:17. > :02:22.Ukraine, not only for Georgia, but those are problems for Europe, and
:02:23. > :02:27.European stability. The solution should be developed. Nato is, at its
:02:28. > :02:30.heart, a military organisation, although also a political alliance.
:02:31. > :02:35.When the former US ambassador to Nato said in July" with the US
:02:36. > :02:39.avoiding any suggestion of military response to Putin' military
:02:40. > :02:43.aggression, Nato is almost, by definition, on the sidelines. Yet,
:02:44. > :02:49.here you are, on the sidelines saying that Nato can agree
:02:50. > :02:55.stability". It is a military and political alliance, at the same
:02:56. > :03:00.time, it is not only military, but shares the same values around its
:03:01. > :03:04.lawyer says. It is on the sidelines. `` alliances. On the sidelines, you
:03:05. > :03:08.are saying it can bring in a key role in bringing stability to
:03:09. > :03:13.Europe? It has brought stability to Europe, it is more complicated a
:03:14. > :03:19.environment, we had the Cold War that was resolved. It brought better
:03:20. > :03:24.peace and prosperity to all nations, which got into Nato, and
:03:25. > :03:28.who were in Nato before. Given that now, President Obama has said
:03:29. > :03:32.consistently in this crisis over Ukraine, and has said it again this
:03:33. > :03:36.week, that there is no military solution forthcoming, that is
:03:37. > :03:41.exactly what he said. It has got to be a political settlement. He is
:03:42. > :03:45.right, isn't he? He is right, that's what we are looking for. The
:03:46. > :03:49.political settlement has to be a unified political attitude to what
:03:50. > :03:53.is happening in Ukraine, and what is happening in Georgia. This is the
:03:54. > :04:00.same case. The events in 2008 in Georgia when we had Russian
:04:01. > :04:03.occupation, and events now, they are part of the same scenario. The same
:04:04. > :04:09.scenario that is talking about Georgia, Ukraine, other ex` Soviet
:04:10. > :04:14.countries, as Russia's backyard. And, Nato has to have a unified
:04:15. > :04:17.approach to those issues. I am not talking about the military approach.
:04:18. > :04:21.I have to pick you up on this, you are saying there is a parallel
:04:22. > :04:25.between what is going on in Ukraine, military aggression by Russia going
:04:26. > :04:30.in, annexing Crimea and as Barack Obama and others have said, Russian
:04:31. > :04:33.military presidents in eastern Ukraine arming separatists, funding
:04:34. > :04:38.and so on, but what happened in 2008 between you and Russia is not
:04:39. > :04:49.comparable, when the war broke out in South Sethi, `` into autonomous
:04:50. > :04:52.regions in Russia, a report in September 2009 blamed Georgia? I
:04:53. > :04:56.don't think they blamed Georgia. First of all, this was not a
:04:57. > :05:00.verdict. Let's go precisely to the case, it was not a verdict, but a
:05:01. > :05:06.fact`finding mission. They described the case, they have different
:05:07. > :05:13.attitudes on all aspects of the case, but the fact is the
:05:14. > :05:18.following, the facts in Georgia and Ukraine are parts of the policy that
:05:19. > :05:25.spoken out by Russia Federation politician. They are talking about
:05:26. > :05:28.the specific right to decide the destiny of independent nations who
:05:29. > :05:32.are very friendly. I would like to finish this situation, we want to
:05:33. > :05:37.talk about Ukraine and Nato, and so on, but finish off what happened in
:05:38. > :05:41.2008, there was a five`day war between you and Russia. This is what
:05:42. > :05:47.that fact`finding mission, headed by a Swiss expert on the Caucasus, she
:05:48. > :05:52.said that Georgian claims of a large`scale presence of Russian
:05:53. > :05:56.armed Forces in the region, prior to the Georgian offensive in August the
:05:57. > :06:00.7th or the eighth, could not be substantiated. It was Georgia which
:06:01. > :06:05.triggered the war. I know a different president was in power at
:06:06. > :06:11.the time, you are from the opposition, but that is... The
:06:12. > :06:15.reason why I saved the situation between Ukraine and Georgia is not
:06:16. > :06:21.comparable. `` why I say. We are talking about details of a fine ``
:06:22. > :06:26.fact`finding mission. Those are concrete details, of who did what
:06:27. > :06:30.By the definition, you cannot start By the definition, you cannot start
:06:31. > :06:38.war on your own territory. Can you start a war in your own territory?
:06:39. > :06:43.It is impossible. There was autonomy during the Soviet era, during the
:06:44. > :06:47.1990s, they declared independence. But anyway... There were mistakes,
:06:48. > :06:50.it does not change the overall picture which was spoken out by
:06:51. > :06:54.Russian politicians who say they can determine the future of Judge, they
:06:55. > :06:59.can determine the future of Ukraine, just because, at some
:07:00. > :07:03.point, we were part of the sub Eugenio `` Georgia. This is the
:07:04. > :07:10.scenario, this is the whole attitude. `` part of the region.
:07:11. > :07:17.These issues go back to the security of Europe, they are not issues only
:07:18. > :07:20.a Georgia or of Ukraine, a more stable eastern Europe is a part of
:07:21. > :07:27.European stability, more than that. It is a part of Russian stability.
:07:28. > :07:33.Russian Federation cannot develop effectively. If, around its borders,
:07:34. > :07:39.it has pockets of this" problematic areas". There should be a solution.
:07:40. > :07:44.Nato wants to ensure that whatever happens now, in Ukraine, Putin
:07:45. > :07:49.understands that he cannot consider future military ventures in his
:07:50. > :07:53.influence. The executive general of Nato outgoings says there should be
:07:54. > :07:58.a military unit on permanent high alert, this force can travel light
:07:59. > :08:02.but strike hard. If needed. Of course, we already know that Nato
:08:03. > :08:06.has a response force that the summit will contest `` but the summit will
:08:07. > :08:12.consider a faster spear troops on a rotating basis, thousands, and they
:08:13. > :08:19.will be supplied by Nato allies, with equipment in critical `` with
:08:20. > :08:23.equipment in critical areas position there. Is it something you will
:08:24. > :08:28.support? We are becoming a part of that force, starting in 2015, we are
:08:29. > :08:37.becoming part of the later quick response force. `` Nato quick
:08:38. > :08:41.response force. We are also looking for more security for our country
:08:42. > :08:45.and region. Can you finish on this force? You think it's a good idea
:08:46. > :08:49.and will be unanimously approved, and it will be something that
:08:50. > :08:56.Georgia is going to be actively supporting and actually contributing
:08:57. > :09:02.to? Georgia is actually one of the biggest contributors to Nato and
:09:03. > :09:07.European led... EU led military operations. We are the biggest
:09:08. > :09:11.country which is a nonmember State to the mission in Afghanistan, our
:09:12. > :09:18.men and women are engaged in that process actively, and we are part of
:09:19. > :09:23.the operation in the Central African Republic. You have been partners
:09:24. > :09:32.with Nato in `` since 1994. We have been engaged in Kosovo, Iraq, we are
:09:33. > :09:36.a very responsible player when we talk about global security. We
:09:37. > :09:39.should be enjoying security in our territory as well. With this
:09:40. > :09:45.proposed force, are you not worried that Russia says it is not happy
:09:46. > :09:49.with it? The editor of Russia and global affairs told BBC radio this
:09:50. > :09:54.week that this new force would be seen by Russia as a profoundly
:09:55. > :09:59.destabilising act, it amounts to the denunciation of the Nato Russia
:10:00. > :10:04.founding act 1997, if the force goes ahead, the re` militarisation of
:10:05. > :10:08.Europe will be on the cards. I think that we all have to prove to
:10:09. > :10:12.politicians in the Russian Federation that there was not a
:10:13. > :10:16.single move from Nato towards Russia that has been aggressive or somehow
:10:17. > :10:21.problematic for the Russian Federation. If we look at the status
:10:22. > :10:26.right now, we consider that Russia has the most secure Borders, the
:10:27. > :10:31.most secure partnership with their of European union and of Nato, you
:10:32. > :10:35.can start demonising any kind of action. But, if you look at the
:10:36. > :10:44.reality, Russia has been partnering with the EU, trading with EU. Nato
:10:45. > :10:50.countries, not only on trade issues, but on military partnership. Why is
:10:51. > :10:54.Nato dangerous? Russia is saying that this force is a denunciation of
:10:55. > :11:00.the Nato Russia founding act, stating that Nato will avoid
:11:01. > :11:03.additional permanent stationing, a substantial combat force. Nato says
:11:04. > :11:06.that not doing that with this proposed new force, they would not
:11:07. > :11:11.be permanently positioned somewhere, but would be able to be deployed, a
:11:12. > :11:15.permanent force which can be deployed at short notice. Russia is
:11:16. > :11:19.saying, that is not good enough for us. We see it as a violation of our
:11:20. > :11:25.understanding. Are you not worried? We are always worried and concerned
:11:26. > :11:32.about Russia being unhappy, but we want to be realistic. We want to be
:11:33. > :11:39.realistic together, with our allies in Nato, together with Russia's...
:11:40. > :11:43.We have to see and look at the facts, that neither the independent
:11:44. > :11:49.states which have suffered from Russia's aggression, nor the Nato
:11:50. > :11:54.states have ever created any kind of problem or confrontation with
:11:55. > :11:59.Russia. This is a fact. Once more again, you can hear declarations
:12:00. > :12:02.that are trying to demonise any kind of activities, but there is not a
:12:03. > :12:09.single case where Ukraine, or Georgia, or Nato allies have created
:12:10. > :12:16.any kind of complications from Russian Federation. They do not see
:12:17. > :12:21.it that way. For example, the Kremlin adviser Popov says Nato is
:12:22. > :12:26.an external threat to Russia, and Nato enlargement is a threat to the
:12:27. > :12:30.Russian security, but here you are, Georgia is saying you want to be a
:12:31. > :12:33.member of Nato, and Russia say that. That puts you in a difficult
:12:34. > :12:38.position? We are in a difficult position, but we have to stick to
:12:39. > :12:46.the main truth that I have already mentioned. Plus, the main goal here
:12:47. > :12:52.is to unite Nato members, and make them understand that not only can
:12:53. > :12:59.you make the Kremlin understand, but make Nato members understand that
:13:00. > :13:03.there is a clear policy towards countries of eastern Europe.
:13:04. > :13:11.Including in Ukraine, including Georgia, making a more safe and
:13:12. > :13:14.stable world. And, trying to explain this... How can it be a safer and
:13:15. > :13:18.more stable world that `` when Russia says it is something that it
:13:19. > :13:38.actively dislikes and doesn't want to happen.
:13:39. > :13:42.point of upsetting Russia? If we are not clear about the countries, the
:13:43. > :13:48.independent countries, around Russia and their future destinies, does
:13:49. > :13:53.this make the world more secure? Does this make the future of Europe
:13:54. > :14:03.more secure? As the Prime Minister of inland, which shares of border
:14:04. > :14:08.with Russia `` Finland, which shares a long border with Russia, there are
:14:09. > :14:13.too many people who want to isolate the Kremlin. I don't think that's
:14:14. > :14:18.the right way forward. You say you don't know why you are upsetting
:14:19. > :14:23.them, they have no right to. That's not isolation. On the contrary, the
:14:24. > :14:27.message we are trying to send to Moscow is that peaceful, prosperous,
:14:28. > :14:33.stable Georgia is an opportunity for Russia, versus a country on their
:14:34. > :14:37.southern borders, which has double magic areas, which has pockets of
:14:38. > :14:44.uncontrolled territories, where you have drugs and trafficking. Those
:14:45. > :14:47.are issues. This is a rational message to Moscow. A rational
:14:48. > :14:52.message to our European partners. That a more stable Georgia and
:14:53. > :14:56.Ukraine isn't a threat but an opportunity to Moscow. They don't
:14:57. > :15:02.want a more stable Georgia. Let me ask you this. Moscow might ask you
:15:03. > :15:06.this. Why do you have to be in the western sphere of influence? You are
:15:07. > :15:10.part of the Soviet Union at one time, you have a lawned history with
:15:11. > :15:16.this part of the world, you do a lot of trade with Soviet republics. Why
:15:17. > :15:23.not say, we are part of the Eurasian union, why do you have to be part of
:15:24. > :15:25.the EU? Originally we were part of European culture and European
:15:26. > :15:30.civilisation and this is our national choice. If you accept the
:15:31. > :15:38.choices, the freedom of choice of the nation, then you have to accept
:15:39. > :15:43.the freedom of choice of Georgia, of Ukraine and of the other independent
:15:44. > :15:50.nations, which have their own vision and their own destiny. If you accept
:15:51. > :15:57.the Russian attitude of the privileged interest areas, then he
:15:58. > :16:04.will get a much on safer world in future. This is one thing. The
:16:05. > :16:09.second thing is, why not? This is not against Russian interests, it is
:16:10. > :16:14.not threatening Moscow, it is creating a better environment for
:16:15. > :16:19.the Russian Federation. Eventually, if we build a safer caucuses, within
:16:20. > :16:25.`` this is within European interests. Resources from the
:16:26. > :16:30.Caspian Sea, resources from the East, they are going to move through
:16:31. > :16:37.the new silk roadway to Europe, securing a better Europe. You say
:16:38. > :16:42.clearly you see yourself as part of Europe, you signed the associated
:16:43. > :16:46.agreement in June and want to be members of the EU, members of Nato.
:16:47. > :16:54.But not everybody sees Georgia that way. Jonathan Giles, a respected
:16:55. > :16:59.analyst from London, says Georgia and Ukraine are different. Georgia
:17:00. > :17:04.is a faraway country. Ukraine is in the of Europe, Georgia has no common
:17:05. > :17:08.borders with the EU. Ukraine shares borders with four EU member states,
:17:09. > :17:12.also members of Nato. What happens in Ukraine is of a different order
:17:13. > :17:19.to what happened in Georgia. Well, then, he doesn't listen to Putin. He
:17:20. > :17:23.doesn't listen to the messages from the Kremlin, he doesn't listen to
:17:24. > :17:29.what the Russian politicians are talking about. They are talking
:17:30. > :17:31.about Georgia, about Ukraine, about the Eastern partnership countries
:17:32. > :17:40.which decided to have their own destiny as nations that don't have
:17:41. > :17:43.the right of their independent choice of the nationstates are an
:17:44. > :17:50.area of Russian special interests. But you have to balance your
:17:51. > :17:53.interests. That's what we are doing. You say you don't it is in your
:17:54. > :17:57.interests to cut relationships with Russia but aren't you doing that by
:17:58. > :18:02.saying you want to be part of the EU and Nato? They would see that as a
:18:03. > :18:07.threat to their interests. That's a wrong confrontational paradigms. If
:18:08. > :18:10.Georgia has a choice towards Europe, towards joining European markets,
:18:11. > :18:17.towards being more secure and stable, if Georgia has more trade
:18:18. > :18:22.and more opportunities of Caspian resources being traded through
:18:23. > :18:28.Georgia to Europe, by the way we have an ocean that unites us with
:18:29. > :18:35.Europe. If Caspian oil and gas goes for a pipeline... Saying this is
:18:36. > :18:40.confrontational to Russia is the wrong way to think. We bring
:18:41. > :18:45.solutions, we don't bring problems. Anyone who thinks that the solution
:18:46. > :18:49.of Russian problems is in Georgia doesn't simply analyse what is
:18:50. > :18:53.happening in Russia. What did you want from this Nato summit in Wales
:18:54. > :18:57.this week? You said obviously you want to see your membership with
:18:58. > :19:03.Nato speeded up somehow, the United States has said that is something
:19:04. > :19:07.they would welcome, but there are several Nato countries, important
:19:08. > :19:13.ones, France, Italy, Germany, others, who say they don't think you
:19:14. > :19:21.should join. It was discussed in 2008. Even now, a French government
:19:22. > :19:24.official has said Nato's actions must not contribute to the tension
:19:25. > :19:29.or worse in the climate around Ukraine. It has flatly ruled out
:19:30. > :19:37.admitting Ukraine or Georgia at this juncture. At this summit we are not
:19:38. > :19:42.joining. At the same time, in 2008, it was said bluntly and repeated
:19:43. > :19:46.several times that nature is eventually open to George. The
:19:47. > :19:52.second thing is that what we want, yes, we want another firm step to
:19:53. > :19:58.Nato membership but at the same time we want better and secure... A
:19:59. > :20:04.secure environment in Georgia, in the caucuses. How? Through
:20:05. > :20:08.increasing partnerships, by engaging more of Georgia in Nato. I mentioned
:20:09. > :20:12.our contribution to Nato missions but we also want more Nato in
:20:13. > :20:18.Georgia. America says they want to do that, they want to help you
:20:19. > :20:22.increase your defence capability. We want more intensive partnerships.
:20:23. > :20:26.That's where we are going. This isn't creating a threat, this is
:20:27. > :20:32.creating great possibilities. Nato members themselves are divided about
:20:33. > :20:34.the wisdom of inviting Georgia and Ukraine to become members of
:20:35. > :20:38.their... That's why we understand that Nato is a military, political
:20:39. > :20:43.alliance and there are differences. There are differences of the
:20:44. > :20:49.concrete cases as well. I understand the conservatism of Nato. Now they
:20:50. > :20:51.are facing a crisis where they have to decide and to think and rebuild
:20:52. > :20:56.actually some of their security systems. I do understand the
:20:57. > :21:01.conservatism of this point but that doesn't change the global attitude.
:21:02. > :21:03.But it's not just conservatism. There are also concerns about
:21:04. > :21:07.governance issues in Georgia and whether your country meets the
:21:08. > :21:13.standards required by the EU and Nato. The Nato official in charge of
:21:14. > :21:18.your region says there are concerns for instance about the independence
:21:19. > :21:22.of your judiciary in Georgia. He isn't the only one to have said
:21:23. > :21:26.that. Catherine Ashton, the EU Foreign Policy Chief, says they are
:21:27. > :21:33.concerned about governance issues in your country. First of all, one of
:21:34. > :21:38.the basic Nato requirements are `` was to build a democratic society
:21:39. > :21:41.and a democratic system. One of the main benchmarks for us was peaceful
:21:42. > :21:44.transfer of power were from one government to another and actually
:21:45. > :21:51.that happened during the three recent elections. Sure I'm a duke
:21:52. > :21:55.came to power. `` and Duchesne. These and achievement on our record.
:21:56. > :22:06.Nobody is talking about the elections. Now we go further. We are
:22:07. > :22:11.a society, a stake in transition. There are some concerns. They are
:22:12. > :22:16.positive steps but there are concerns. Do you know what the one
:22:17. > :22:24.big concern is? I doubt I know. B finished. `` let me finish. Will
:22:25. > :22:32.society transfer more effectively within the EU and Nato structures or
:22:33. > :22:34.left alone? Your government has been accused of the politics of revenge
:22:35. > :22:40.by diplomats who visited your capital after the elections, because
:22:41. > :22:44.the former president and also some former officials have `ish `` you
:22:45. > :22:48.have issued arrest warrants for him and others on allegations of abuse
:22:49. > :22:52.of power and for using excessive force against protesters in 2007.
:22:53. > :22:56.You have attracted a lot of criticism for that. On example,
:22:57. > :23:00.Senator John McCain and three other senators, the pursuit of justice
:23:01. > :23:02.should not become a tool of political recognition and a source
:23:03. > :23:06.of national decision, especially when Georgia has so many pressing
:23:07. > :23:11.challenge is at present. How do you answer your critics? We listened
:23:12. > :23:15.very intensely and tentatively to what we hear around the world of
:23:16. > :23:21.this issue and very important. Is it a vendetta? That's exactly what I'm
:23:22. > :23:28.talking about. More engagement, more comments, that in the comments but
:23:29. > :23:31.engagement of owl Western allies and very respected politicians, is
:23:32. > :23:44.something we are looking for `` our Western allies. The political
:23:45. > :23:55.verdict was the elections, when his power was taken, he was out of
:23:56. > :24:01.governance. Critical vendetta... Political society cannot sustain a
:24:02. > :24:03.vendetta in courts. In court, there are questions not on political
:24:04. > :24:10.issues that on the issue of criminal. In this case, every
:24:11. > :24:16.respected politician, who respect his country, who respects the
:24:17. > :24:19.institutions, has to respond. He does say it is political
:24:20. > :24:22.persecution. We have to leave it there. Thanks very much.