Georgia is being used as a strategic linchpin to outmaneuver Russia while sidestepping the constraints of the Minsk Accords. The stakes are high, with pro-Western opposition gaining momentum and tens of thousands rallying for EU membership (trained protestors and recruiters). As the EU leverages Georgia’s economic vulnerabilities and political unrest, it aims to reshape the balance of power in Eastern Europe without firing a shot. This intricate game of influence, reminiscent of George Tenet’s covert strategies, could redefine the geopolitical landscape.
For years, the EU had been bound by the Minsk agreements, negotiated to bring peace to Ukraine following Russia’s annexation of Crimea. However, these accords had only frozen the conflict, keeping Ukraine and the region in turmoil. European leadership had grown impatient, observing Russia’s unchecked assertion of influence in the Black Sea region and the Caucasus. Georgia, with its strategic location, presented a unique opportunity.
The timing couldn’t have been more suitable. Georgia, situated between Russia to the north, Turkey to the south, and Azerbaijan to the east, held a geostrategic position that Europe desperately needed. Its access to the Black Sea meant control over crucial energy pipelines, and more importantly, its proximity to Russia’s southern border gave the EU a unique opportunity to outflank Moscow.
The recent parliamentary elections had been a sham. Giorgi Ivanadze, the newly elected prime minister, was widely regarded as a puppet installed through a fraudulent election process orchestrated by the ruling Georgian Dream party—a political machine bankrolled by oligarch Bidzina Ivanishvili, who had longstanding ties to the West. The EU had remained relatively silent about the corruption, biding its time as it focused on a broader strategy.
About a week ago, the speaker of Georgia’s parliament said on Monday that ruling party lawmakers would move to impeach the pro-Western president ahead of a parliamentary election on Oct. 26, a year after a previous impeachment effort failed.
“Georgia holds the key to rebalancing the entire Black Sea region,” says one source. My source also told me, “We don’t need to confront Russia directly. Instead, we can weave a tighter net around them.”
The situation in Georgia has reached a critical point. Pro-Western opposition leaders are gaining support among the populace, dissatisfied with the current government’s pro-Russian leanings. Tens of thousands of Georgians have flooded the streets of Tbilisi, demanding EU membership. The flags of Europe and Georgia fly side by side, symbolizing the people’s aspirations. The rallying cry of “Georgia chooses the European Union” reverberated through Freedom Square. The protests and marching are all paid and orchestrated by Open Societies.
For the EU, this opportunity was too valuable to ignore.
BUT WHY?
The plan is clear: Georgia’s membership in the EU would be pushed forward despite the delays caused by the ruling party’s authoritarian tendencies. Georgian Dream’s controversial “foreign influence law,” designed to criminalize the work of civil society groups, had caused uproar across Europe. But behind the scenes, Brussels was leveraging this political instability. The longer the Georgian Dream clung to power, the more sanctions Europe and the U.S. imposed on key Georgian officials. The Georgian economy, saddled with IMF debt, was teetering on the brink of collapse, giving the EU even more leverage to push its agenda.
Brussels would effectively create a buffer state by granting Georgia fast-track status in its EU accession process. This would cut off Russia from crucial southern routes while tying Georgia’s economy and military infrastructure to Europe and NATO. In turn, the EU would pump billions of euros into Georgia’s economy, ensuring its loyalty, while covertly bolstering its military defenses along the Black Sea—directly bordering Russia.
This is how you flank Russia. Georgia becomes the back door into Russia’s sphere of influence. Once Georgia is firmly integrated into the EU, NATO will follow, and at that point, Turkey is, at first instance, neutralized, and Russia won’t see it coming until it’s too late.
Georgia’s ruling elite, dependent on Western financial aid, would be coerced into compliance. The country’s massive IMF debts were a stranglehold. The EU would leverage this debt to further push for reforms that would uproot the pro-Russian government and replace it with a pro-European coalition. With enough financial backing, they could secure a new wave of leadership—elected through what the West would call “democratic reforms,” though, in truth, the EU’s hands were deep in the process.
Russia, preoccupied with mitigating the Ukraine situation and constrained by the Minsk Accords, would be in a tough spot to thwart this move until it’s too late. While Russia anticipated EU expansion from the north through Ukraine, the EU’s strategic shift via Georgia places Moscow’s southern borders under direct European influence, challenging Russia’s regional dominance without violating the Minsk framework.
The analysts explored legal workarounds. The Minsk Accords focused on Ukraine and had no bearing on Georgia. This will allow Europe to bypass the diplomatic gridlock that had stalled eastern relations while simultaneously pushing Russia back without military conflict. It was a non-violent takeover driven by economics, diplomacy, and strategic political maneuvering, right?
However, Russia, as any nation would see it, considers this another proxy to instigate war. The EU has been partaking in a proxy battle to accomplish the capture of Georgia. It’s RISK 101.
Georgia’s strategic location is crucial for energy control. The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline traverses Georgian territory, transporting oil from the Caspian Sea to Europe. The EU could weaken Russia’s grip on regional energy supplies by aligning Georgia with Europe. This alignment would significantly diminish Moscow’s ability to pressure Europe with gas cutoffs as alternative routes bypassing Russia became more secure.
It seems to be all about controlling the Black Sea – it’s more than just flanking Russia. It’s getting control of the entire Black Sea Basin.
Tore Maras
In other words, they devised a plan, a masterstroke of diplomacy and economic leverage, that could change the balance of power in Eastern Europe without firing a single shot. The goal was clear: use Georgia as the gateway to challenge Russia’s dominance, sidestepping the delicate constraints of the Minsk Accords that had long kept the EU tied down in Ukraine and using Ukraine as a distraction.
This wasn’t a traditional act of war but rather a game of influence—an ambitious move in modern hybrid warfare, where power wasn’t measured by tanks or bombs but by political sway, economic pressure, and strategic alliances. This is George Tenent’s playbook. The EU would not need armies to march into Georgia. Instead, they would use the country’s IMF debt as a tool to pressure its corrupt leadership, exploiting the fraudulent elections that had installed a pro-Russian puppet government. They put NGOs in there to obtain influence among the people with the help of Open Societies. Yovanovich knows all about that! I wrote about it in this article HERE.
The people of Georgia, trained and recruited by their affinity groups, now look to me as coming out in mass rallies, waving the EU flag and calling for their country’s future to be tied to Europe. Brussels couldn’t afford to miss this opportunity, and the government is trying to remove their leader in a hurry to prevent this!
They knew Russia would see this maneuver as a threat. But this was a subtle incursion, a way to outflank Moscow without violating international law or engaging in direct conflict. The Minsk Accords applied only to Ukraine, and by focusing on Georgia, the EU could expand its influence to Russia’s southern doorstep without stepping on the diplomatic minefield of the ceasefire agreements. The EU would play by the rules, even if their strategy were to undermine Russia’s control of the region while distracting them with Ukraine.
In a sense, this is an ambush—but not one defined by military engagements. The EU’s weapon was soft power, its battleground economic dependency, and its soldiers, the opposition leaders in Georgia who are Western loyalists and paid operators. As they tightened their financial grip on Georgia, aligning the country with European interests, they knew Russia would struggle to respond without escalating to open conflict. And the EU, careful to stay within the bounds of diplomacy, is deploying a plan to give them the upper hand without firing a shot.
This isn’t war, at least not in the traditional sense. It was a geopolitical chess game, and the EU was about to make its next move.
The EU’s plan to use Georgia as a strategic foothold against Russia draws from George Tenet’s playbook—a sophisticated blend of diplomacy, covert influence, and economic pressure mirroring the CIA’s soft power tactics under his leadership. During Tenet’s tenure, the CIA frequently operated in geopolitical gray zones, utilizing covert action to influence outcomes without direct military intervention. The EU’s approach to Georgia, though diplomatic on the surface, bears the hallmarks of this strategic subtlety, emphasizing soft power to achieve complex results.
Much like Tenet’s handling of post-Cold War operations, where the CIA had to outmaneuver adversaries without provoking full-scale conflicts, the EU’s approach aims to erode Russian influence in Georgia without triggering outright war. Tenet understood that power could be wielded through subtle mechanisms—intelligence, economic leverage, and political manipulation. The EU is applying similar tactics: rather than directly confronting Russia, they are using Georgia’s IMF debt and political vulnerabilities as leverage to guide the country toward European integration.
Tenet’s CIA was known for manipulating political currents in foreign governments to secure U.S. interests, sometimes supporting opposition groups or undermining regimes from within. In Georgia, the EU is capitalizing on widespread dissatisfaction with the pro-Russian government, bolstering pro-EU factions within the country. By aligning itself with the Georgian opposition—mirroring how the CIA might have supported insurgent groups or reformist leaders—the EU is facilitating regime change without appearing overtly involved.
Moreover, under Tenet, the CIA mastered the art of using economic pressure as a form of covert warfare. The EU’s reliance on Georgia’s economic fragility—crippled by IMF debt and dependent on European financial aid—mirrors this method. The IMF debt serves as a lever with which the EU subtly controls Georgia’s political fate, much as Tenet’s CIA used economic sanctions or aid dependencies to influence foreign governments in line with U.S. strategic goals.
The EU’s play in Georgia is a classic Tenet-style operation: an indirect but highly effective maneuver that uses soft power to outflank a geopolitical rival. Rather than adopting an aggressive approach, the EU is deploying influence and economic leverage to secure Georgia as a strategic asset while keeping Russia diplomatically cornered. It’s a page from George Tenet’s covert strategy book, executed with the finesse that only soft power can bring. Well, if you would have to guess, his protege, John Owen Brennan, is probably behind all this. Who else would be dumb as rocks to use a known playbook?
This plan seems impressive, but given that I’m writing about it from Ohio without unrestricted access to intelligence data, and I became aware of it years ago, isn’t it likely that countermeasures are already in place? After all, look at the clowns who follow playbooks. Alternatively, could it be designed as an intentional misdirection? The scenario only becomes plausible if China were to attack the United States through Canada, with the true motives of the EU’s actions against Russia obscured by the focus on China’s actions. The latter is what I am INCLINED to say is occurring.
If you like my work, you can tip or support me via TIP ME or subscribe to me on Subscribestar! Follow and subscribe to me on Rumble and Locals, or subscribe to my Substack. I am 100% people-funded.
