Executive Summary:
- Otar Romanov-Partskhaladze, a U.S. sanctioned former Georgian prosecutor general based in Russia, has formed the Kremlin-funded Georgievsk battalion to fight in Ukraine, giving Moscow a Georgian face for its war and a potential political proxy in Tbilisi.
- The battalion’s name invokes the 1783 Treaty of Georgievsk, which Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze now praises as having saved Georgia, reversing the Georgian view that the treaty opened the way to the Russian Empire’s annexation.
- Moscow is extending this campaign into religion, naming another unit after a Georgian saint and commissioning joint icons, signaling a rapprochement that reaches beyond policy into historical memory and national identity.
On September 7, Russian media reported that former Georgian Prosecutor General Otar Romanov-Partskhaladze has formed an international volunteer battalion named Georgievsk to fight for Moscow in its war against Ukraine (TASS, September 7). Romanov-Partskhaladze is already under U.S. sanctions for alleged ties to Russian intelligence services and was once considered a close associate of the ruling Georgian Dream party’s Honorary Chairman Bidzina Ivanishvili. The battalion will be funded by the Russian Ministry of Defense. The announcement comes as the Kremlin and Georgian Dream renew their claims that the West is trying to drag Georgia into the war against Ukraine.
Romanov-Partskhaladze’s biography makes him a potential instrument of Russian influence. While he currently resides in Russia, Georgian authorities have charged him in absentia with organizing a murder and placed him on an international wanted list. He added the name of the Russian imperial Romanov dynasty to his surname, claiming descent from the dynasty, and recently joined the Communist Party of Russia (JAM News, September 8). According to Georgian expert Valeri Chechelashvili, Russian intelligence services are building him up as a new political figure, an alternative to the current Georgian government, and a potential candidate for prime minister in the event of a change of power (Interpressnews, September 10).
Romanov-Partskhaladze claims that he previously served for nine months in the Russian Arbat Volunteer Corps (TASS, September 8). As commander of the newly formed battalion, he has also exchanged threats with the Georgian National Legion, a Georgian military unit fighting on Ukraine’s side. The legion has gained widespread recognition through its participation in the war against Ukraine and includes a large number of experienced Georgian servicemen. Russia has designated it a terrorist organization. Romanov-Partskhaladze called members of the Georgian National Legion war criminals and claimed that they would eventually have to stand trial in a Russian court (TASS, September 9). In response to the threats, Georgian National Legion Commander Mamuka Mamulashvili said, “We will respond wherever necessary” (Facebook/TVPirveli, September 10).
The choice of the battalion’s name, Georgievsk, is significant. It refers to the Russian city of Georgievsk, where the Treaty of Georgievsk was signed in 1783 between the Russian Empire and the eastern Georgian kingdom of Kartli-Kakheti. The treaty later became one of the factors that led to the Russian Empire’s occupation and annexation of Georgia (JAM News, September 8). The battalion’s creation also coincided with efforts by Georgia’s ruling elite and the Kremlin to reshape the interpretation of this history in Russia’s favor. On July 24, in Georgievsk, with the assistance of Georgian diaspora representatives in Russia close to the Kremlin, a celebratory event was held to mark the 243rd anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Georgievsk.
Throughout the summer, Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze promoted a narrative according to which the signing of the Treaty of Georgievsk supposedly contributed to the preservation of Georgian statehood, national identity, and the Christian faith. On August 12, Kobakhidze publicly praised the 1783 Treaty of Georgievsk. He declared that the treaty played a crucial role in saving Georgia (Netgazeti, August 12) On August 18, he added that the country had received “fundamental benefits” from the agreement. According to Kobakhidze, Christian Georgia, surrounded by Muslim states, chose Russia, a co-religionist (Netgazeti, August 18). This is precisely how the treaty was characterized in Soviet and Russian historiography. In Georgian historiography, by contrast, the treaty is viewed as one of the key factors that ultimately contributed to the abolition of Georgian statehood, the Russian Empire’s annexation of the country, and the loss of independence.
Kobakhidze’s praise of the Treaty of Georgievsk caused bewilderment in Georgian society. Pro-Western parties accused the government of attempting to rewrite history in Russia’s favor. Russian propaganda outlets, however, welcomed the political messages coming from Tbilisi, publishing the article, “Occupation Is Cancelled: Another Country Has Refused to Consider Russia an Enemy,” citing Kobakhidze’s remarks about the Treaty of Georgievsk (RIA Novosti, August 24).
Russian media connected these historical references to Georgia’s current political direction. Many in Georgia had already regarded it as a painful chapter in the country’s history but now it has suddenly become useful to the Kremlin. Russian media began arguing that Kobakhidze’s references to the reign of King Erekle II in Georgia’s political discourse served not only to reinterpret history but also to justify the Georgian government’s current policy, particularly its increasingly Russia-friendly political stance (RIA Novosti, August 24).
This narrative has also been accompanied by efforts to portray Georgian participation on Russia’s side of the war as broader than the available evidence establishes. In September, Russian media reported the formation of another allegedly Georgian battalion, named after Georgian Orthodox monk and saint Gabriel Urgebadze (RIA Novosti, September 8). Little is known about the unit, including its size, composition, or the identities of those serving in it. Russian media reports claimed that a Georgian delegation led by Besik Danelia, a former member of the pro-Russian political party Democratic Movement – United Georgia, traveled to Russian-occupied Donetsk oblast with humanitarian aid. Russian media presented Danelia as a “philanthropist from Georgia.” Georgian media, however, described him as a pro-Russian activist loyal to the Georgian Dream government. In a video from Donetsk, Danelia calls Russian soldiers “brothers” defending “Orthodoxy, Russia, Georgia, and justice” (Apsny.ge, September 10). The alleged battalion was portrayed as evidence that Georgians are fighting on Russia’s side in the war against Ukraine. Such reporting fits into a broader narrative that Russia is neither isolated nor without support from Georgian citizens.
The use of Georgian religious figures and symbols has reinforced this narrative. The Georgian Orthodox Church (GOC) strongly condemned the use of the name of Saint Gabriel Urgebadze—a monk known for his open resistance to Soviet rule—for a Russian military unit. GOC Archpriest Andria Jaghmaidze, head of the GOC’s Public Relations Service, said that using the name of Saint Gabriel for a military formation was “categorically unacceptable” (Apsny.ge, September 10). In an official statement, Jaghmaidze said, “The Georgian Orthodox Church distances itself from the use of the name of Saint Gabriel for the purpose of justifying or supporting military actions.” He stressed that the unit had been established without any consultation with the GOC or authorities in Tbilisi, and he expressed regret that the initiative had received support from representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) (Facebook/sap.uwyebaNews, September 10). At the same time, the Georgian Patriarchate has remained largely silent on the broader and increasingly speculative use of religious figures and symbols in support of the Kremlin’s geopolitical purposes.
Other initiatives have similarly sought to emphasize religious and historical ties between Russia and Georgia. In late August a project involving the Georgian diaspora in Russia was announced calling for a series of Orthodox icons entitled “The Friendship of the Russian and Georgian Nations.” The icons will depict the Georgian Orthodox saint Gabriel Urgebadze on one side and the Russian saint Seraphim of Sarov on the other. Once completed, the icons are to be exchanged between the ROC and GOC. One batch has reportedly already been produced in Georgia and is ready to be sent to Russia. The organization’s statement said that the initiative would “become a large-scale civilizational response to the challenges of modernity and unite the brotherly peoples of Russia and Georgia on the basis of a shared faith and centuries-old traditions” (Facebook/TVFormula, August 26).
The political dimension of this trend is also visible among pro-Russian Georgian political figures. On July 3, Mamuka Pipia, leader of the pro-Russian Georgian political party Solidarity for Peace and a close associate of Romanov-Partskhaladze, who holds both Georgian and Russian citizenship, published a video address from the Moscow oblast. In the footage, Pipia stands on armored military equipment, holding an assault rifle and wearing a Russian military-tactical vest, stating, “I have not been to the war yet, but if necessary, we will go” (Facebook/MamukaPipiya, July 3).
These developments suggest that Georgia is becoming more involved in the information and political dimensions of the war against Ukraine. Thousands of Georgians have long been fighting on Ukraine’s side, but the Kremlin is now attempting to shape the information environment by creating the impression that Georgians are also fighting on Russia’s side, supposedly to defend family and orthodox values. This effort is accompanied by Georgian Dream’s propaganda campaign, which portrays Russia not as Georgia’s historical adversary but as a country that supposedly helped Georgia preserve its statehood, national identity, and Christian heritage throughout history. The combination of these developments points to a shift that extends beyond current political and foreign policy positions. It also concerns the way Georgia’s history, religious identity, and public understanding of the war against Ukraine are being framed. Georgian Dream previously refused to call Russia an enemy but did not dare to call it a friend. The language coming from Tbilisi is now shifting further in Russia’s favor, with warm epithets about Russia appearing in Georgian political discourse.
The post Kremlin Draws Georgia into its War as Tbilisi Rewrites History in Russia’s Favor appeared first on Jamestown.