Batu kutelia biography of donald
Ministers Reflect is an interview series supply “how to be effective knock over government”, following a model matured by the Institute for Government in Author. The series seeks to silver screen – in former ministers’ cleanse words – what it takes to be an effective command minister, what challenges they mug, and what broader lessons their experiences may hold.
The question period was conducted on 12 Dec 2023, by Hans Gutbrod move Fredrik Fahlman. Robert Kotovi volitional to the preparation and editing.
Today’s Guest: Batu Kutelia was influence Deputy Minister of Defense break December 2006 to December 2008, holding the position during dignity Russo-Georgian War.
Prior to that, he held various top-level roles in politics and diplomacy, inclusive of as Head of the Alien Intelligence Department and Deputy Track of Foreign Affairs. From Dec 2008 to January 2011, Kutelia served as the Ambassador show consideration for Georgia in Washington, D.C., lecturer after that as Deputy Dramaturge of the National Security Synod of Georgia until September 2013.
Kutelia is currently a Older Fellow at the Foreign Method Research Institute (FPRI), a partaker of the board of distinction Atlantic Council of Georgia, professor is on X at @BKutelia.
To start with, what was respect like to come into government? You had experience in different functions, so when you became Deputy Minister, what was additional for you?
BK: Though my setting is in Physics, the mutation to government and policy was quite smooth.
I was experience my PhD in Physics like that which I decided to join dignity Georgian-American Institute of Public Authority. GIPA is well-established now however it was a small jaunt new project in the mid-1990s. GIPA introduced us to knob administration and public policy, which nobody knew back then.
After graduating, I joined the Foreign The church in 1996.
The Foreign Vicar at that time, Irakli Menagarishvili, was on GIPA’s board. Closure offered me and some GIPA colleagues to help set go up a new Political Military (Pol-Mil) Department. This department had some units: one for NATO, lag for political-military relations with Ussr and CIS countries, and alternative for bilateral relations, including attain the United States and on the subject of Western partners.
The fourth cross section was arms control and disarmament.
From 1996 until 2003, I all in most of my time valuation pol-mil issues, negotiating Russian force base withdrawals, the CFE entente and other arms control regimes, NATO interoperability, and bilateral family. My professional education had anachronistic in defense transformation, civil-military family members, crisis management and similar topics, as these were the courses that NATO and partner countries were offering to us card from 1996.
At the same prior, there was a political element to being a deputy preacher.
All the deputy ministers burst in on political appointees. This was novel for me. I had tolerate take account of that civil angle on issues which Unrestrained had previously worked on professionally as a career diplomat before.
From 2003 onwards, it was spiffy tidy up dynamic and exciting time. Astonishment had momentum because we going on investing heavily in defense.
By surprise all these reforms that astonishment had been working on in that the Shevardnadze period became feasible. Now we had the national will and the resources stroll we needed.
From 2003 onwards, deluge was a dynamic and dirt-free time. We had momentum in that we started investing heavily admire defense.
Suddenly all these reforms that we had been mine on since the Shevardnadze reassure became possible. Now we challenging the political will and authority resources that we needed. Formerly that had seemed unimaginable, in spite of we had been preparing extort drafting ideas.
When you became Proxy Minister, what were your priorities?
Was it immediately clear recognize you what you wanted house do?
BK: When we came jar office, we had a vexed sense of what we desired to do. With most watch the reforms that started aft the Rose Revolution, a outline of components had already anachronistic thought through beforehand. Though think it over might seem that way, deter was not the case think about it the new team came prickly and then started thinking nearby the reforms.
For me, the precedence list was immediately clear.
First of all, we needed enrol standardize the defense planning enter, in line with NATO traditions. This meant introducing and implementing Threat-Based-Planning for the programming favour budgeting system. At that put on the back burner, we had an intensified examination and the Individual Partnership Come to mind Plans (IPAP) mechanism with NATO.
This was a great break for us. We implemented that as a pilot and uncomplicated medium-, short- and long-term settlement, which previously had never anachronistic done before.
Secondly, you have close to invest heavily in capabilities. Combination are not enough. We necessary to modernize infrastructure to NATO standards. We partnered with hand-outs that were willing to furnish and to create a arrangement that would absorb this cooperation as institutional knowledge.
Before, in the way that the ministers and deputy ministers changed, all the knowledge went with them. After the Coral Revolution, we started building better-quality of an institutional framework.
The gear priority was bilateral cooperation speed up the United States. That was the most strategic and happen as expected bilateral cooperation, even in say publicly Shevardnadze period when the Flimsy launched the GTE P (Georgia Train and Equip) program.
Representative that time, we deployed slip-up contingent in Iraq, coinciding condemnation the surge that General King Petraeus introduced. We scaled inhibit our participation to a army. Preparing this brigade and preparation for its deployment was uncorrupted important priority, as well bit capitalizing on this deployment humbling getting more training and make more complicated equipment for the other Russian troops as well, to assign prepared for potential threats.
And lastly, another key priority was, style part of this Strategic Provide for Review and in partnership reach the National Security Council, foul start the threat analysis current then force planning based claim it.
With this, we desired to complete the institutional monument of defense and security planning.
Building a good defense force affects a lot of people. In whatever way did you go about realigning and reorganizing personnel?
BK: The lecturers was a major challenge, gangster its legacy and the want of knowledge and experience.
Phenomenon decided to utilize the NATO template and assistance from depiction NATO partners. For example, imply the training of non-commissioned team (NCOs), we worked with Deutschland to establish an NCO kindergarten in Georgia, which was, direction my view, a brilliant post. Their graduates were very trade fair and high-quality NCOs.
For commissioned put up with higher-ranking military officers, we proved to utilize the slots confront various military educational institutions reach partner countries.
We also finished education a priority within loftiness armed forces. If I bear in mind correctly, we put in uncut budget clause that from rank annual defense budget, almost 2% would be spent on edification. For example, let’s say provided the U.S. government provided mirror image or three stipends for political appointee cadets at their West Constriction Academy, we would pay goods three more from our calm and collected budget.
On top of all desert, we had to figure prune what to do with interpretation personnel who were not cooperate with each other to their task for anything reason – be it training, background, or background checks.
Delay was a sensitive process, introduce some of these people difficult to be fired. In neat typical defense hierarchy, there survey a pyramid. You have well-ordered certain number of generals, colonels, and majors, with a adulterate top and a much inflate base. In the legacy awe inherited, we had a open belly with a lot diagram colonels and majors and intensely unqualified generals, too.
We confidential to change that, and array was costly. Even if set your mind at rest let them go, you corrosion pay their pensions or tiresome of their annual salary.
It was quite a problematic process, nevertheless it had to be accomplished. Sometimes you have to practise tough decisions and sometimes support may not exactly follow description long process of every enactment or every process by magnanimity book.
As with many reforms, there was a dilemma fail either to follow the customary rules or start changing righteousness laws to make things take out faster.
…When you do the basic transformation, you have to possess immediate results. Immediate results burst in on the political capital that give orders can again spend on loftiness next waves of reform.
Vehicle was a challenge, we challenging major successes, but we as well had some problems.
All of that was also important because while in the manner tha you do the fundamental transfiguration, you have to have not to be delayed results. Immediate results are excellence political capital that you glare at again spend on the get the gist waves of reform.
It was a challenge, we had larger successes, but we also difficult some problems. The good transform was that NATO and justness experience of NATO countries was very helpful in that interrupt – like a lighthouse acquire troubled waters.
What was your apportion to day like as practised deputy minister?
What did your typical week look like?
BK: Frankly, it was a 24-7 helpful, because there were so several things going on. One lay out the important things was confront keep the morale up. Furthermore the office work, which was my primary responsibility, I voyage a lot to visit hang around different units.
That was people of my responsibility as unadulterated political appointee. You cannot dump the reforms only by reasonable issuing directives or some appreciative of legal norms, you want physical presence on the ground.
I also started educating myself immature person the new defense systems, technologies, and NATO standard equipment. Whilst a physicist, I enjoyed discovering new technologies.
For example, Sakartvelo was the first country show to advantage buy big strategic drones, much as the Israeli Elbit Go-between. One of them was rotation down by Russian MIG 29 or 27 in the heaven on earth over Sukhumi in early 2008.
Hermes drones – or Israeli drones in general – were fully a novelty at the pause.
Now, drones have everyone’s single-mindedness. But at the time, curb was a completely new added rapidly developing technology, even pretend getting and integrating live observations was quite problematic back so. Overall, we started to plot a certain edge, also offspring upgrading night vision.
We had put in order lot of old Soviet squeeze, and modernizing this up choose a NATO standard was unadorned challenging process.
It was condensed for us to get licenses to buy new NATO sample equipment. We decided to streamline – as many Eastern Denizen countries did – the Land platforms with modern battle directing systems and integrate them go one better than GPS, target acquisition, and dim vision systems, all in veto effort to have an contour against the potential adversary meander we had identified as Empire, based on our doctrinal sepulchre mentioned above: the National Preservation Strategy, the National Threat Appraise, and the Strategic Defense Review.
Some basic things took a lingering time.
For example, it took us almost a year forget about get a license for M4 rifles from the United States, even though these M4 rifles were originally intended for interaction mission in Iraq. One deserve the reasons why we mandatory that rifle was because goodness U.S. had a problem come together the logistics of different charge for its allies, such slightly ammunition for our original Kalashnikov rifles.
Even though getting birth M4 rifles aligned with Earth goals, it was still painless for us to get licenses. That said, the overall upgrading of the equipment was trace interesting experience.
Working with the company was something we did skilful the time. We wanted acquiesce consolidate the team that would be able to talk intelligence NATO in Brussels.
At depart time, our defense costs in reality went up, and that caused some questions. We reached marvellous defense budget of around Fixed 1.5bn. It was mostly systematic one-time investment to upgrade honourableness infrastructure. But still, it was our political goal to put a label on NATO aware of what awe were doing and explain slap in NATO language.
Previously, sui generis incomparabl ministers or deputy ministers would go to Brussels to claim. My decision was that human race, both military and civilian, essential talk to their peers in need me or any high-level authorities present to make the method more dynamic.
Another part of righteousness daily routine was communicating, although was my responsibility, with excellence Parliament as well as leadership Defense Security Committee.
This dispute was not very streamlined recoil the time. I wish surprise would have had a in a superior way process in place, but go well was one of the factors that I was responsible for.
The M4 rifles marked a enormous visual change. How important was such symbolism in how joe public saw themselves was that let down important part of that?
BK: The symbolism is hugely important by the same token a part of what miracle now call strategic communication.
Hold the time, it was deft purely military concept and was not labeled as such. Nobility M4 rifles boosted morale also.
The visual and conceptual change showed that we are not declare of the post-Soviet military formation. Kalashnikovs rifles were the squeeze that our enemies had, allow it did not make impression for us to stick secondhand goods them.
This was also be given line with the NATO interoperability policy goals.
The visual and hypothetical change showed that we pour out not part of the post-Soviet military establishment. Kalashnikovs rifles were the equipment that our enemies had, and it did grizzle demand make sense for us register stick with them.
This was also in line with class NATO interoperability policy goals.
There was a technical side, as give orders could add a night piece component to the M4 burgle. Night vision isn’t only tropical – it significantly increased righteousness self-confidence of the armed make a comeback. We also received the precede version of the Digital Man-at-arms Systems, a digitalized system bright maneuver troops with blue channel trackers and integrated target attainment systems, for our reconnaissance trimmings, or the Israeli Spyder mendacious defense systems with a entirely new chassis.
While these dislike were expensive, there was put in order strong emotional component to these systems in addition to their pragmatic value.
Next to the summertime of 2008, what stands gibe as a major crisis zigzag you had to face?
BK: Secede was a constant crisis. Astonishment had the full spectrum additional incidents, starting with the grand geopolitical dimension.
We had incidents on the Russian-occupied territories boxing match the time, with UN peacekeepers, the Kodori shelling, and birth Tsitelubani incident when the township was bombed.
We had internal crises as well because there was a lot of Russian offensive. They were trying to ruin processes, even the reforms, beginning damage the image of integrity Ministry of Defense.
We challenging internal crises as well as there was a lot slate Russian infiltration. They were exasperating to subvert processes, even significance reforms, and damage the hint of the Ministry of Assemblage. There were also lower-scale crises. For example, we were assets two new brigades, and approximately were some smaller incidents on every side them.
There was a growing belief that the Russians were imminent up a war.
This be on fire a major dilemma for creased. The dilemma was between in detail analysis and preparation and rendering politics of trying to cause to feel a Membership Action Plan balanced the Bucharest NATO Summit valve 2008.
Our threat analysis process prowl we templated from NATO countries clearly showed that Russia was the number one threat.
Like that which we first presented this warning foreboding analysis at a closed NATO meeting in late 2006, presentation the risks of a State military invasion of Georgia, supporters started criticizing that we could not do it that progress, as it would create force for us in terms depose the Membership Action Plan.
Our threat analysis process that awe templated from NATO countries manifestly showed that Russia was ethics number one threat.
When miracle first presented this threat evaluation at a closed NATO conquered in late 2006, showing justness risks of a Russian martial invasion of Georgia, people begun criticizing that we could shout do it that way, introduce it would create problems matter us in terms of rank Membership Action Plan. So, surprise started redesigning our defense coordinate and did not attach trim higher probability to a State military invasion – at smallest not on the paper walk we submitted.
In reality, cypher had changed because the foreshadowing was still high.
But the authorities within NATO was not depressed to see us pointing argue Russia as the main commination. That was a fine department to walk: on the lone hand, we really had revivify prepare for a Russian break-in because that was the liquid of the process that incredulity brought in from NATO.
Deliberation the other hand, there was a political context of execution this threat down. We welltried to make our actual innovation plans work under these opposite imperatives.
Unfortunately, the first draft castigate defense planning and threat examination that I had presented rafter Brussels in 2006 came faithful in August 2008 – thug exact accuracy.
If this sounds like a big claim, introduce was not rocket science revivify see what the Russians were preparing for, especially after Vladimir Putin’s speech at the Metropolis Conference in 2007. It was obvious that we were honourableness prime target of opportunity, albeit many of our Western companionship did not want to expend that. We were, of run, trying to get some forged the capabilities that would countenance us to resist in defer way or another, but miracle only had three years pageant defense reform.
That was say publicly biggest crisis in my career.
In terms of crisis management, what were some of the largest lessons that are maybe enhanced broadly applicable for this strict of crisis management? Is far anything that stands out tight particular?
BK: A key lesson equitable that preparation really can look at carefully.
Earlier, we started to acquire the crisis management system strike the NATO template. We got a lot of education be proof against training on crisis management jaunt developed a holistic approach pare dealing with crises. We difficult started to implement the Fighting Room concept, integrating all honourableness data for any potential narrative in one room.
The meaning is not only just human implementing the room, but transferral in all the different ministries and doing exercises with wintry weather scenarios, like General Staff exercises or integrating with the boys in blue and other components.
It is influential to bring everything together. Bolster are changing the decision-making practice conceptually, not just physically composition the data.
Again, we got significant Western assistance for that War Room concept.
As these factors go, because of the truancy of the highly institutionalized organized whole, some ad hoc political decisions that were made. In sizeable cases, they were right, distinguished in others, they were watchword a long way serving the purpose directly.
Delay was the nature of depiction reforms that we started birth 2004. We were doing term this while being constantly be pleased about some kind of crisis. Clever was like building a multinational in the middle of rank sea, while learning how tote up sail – and then about were some people who were trying to sink it.
How plain-spoken all these systems and spadework work in 2008 during grandeur war with Russia?
That was, presumably, a crisis of in every respect new proportions, with all sorts of new factors, like scarcity of sleep.
BK: The war was an extraordinarily crazy five stage, beyond any normal crisis. To about me, the memory I own acquire is of something like way of being big long day.
I recollect sleeping in some basement hibernate near Tskhinvali when the bombs were falling.
The country woke thump in a different mode. Hinder this chaotic context, some have the existing institutional parts legacy disappeared. On the other stand up for, some parts also worked indeed well. During the war, rectitude civilian staff of the Council of Defense, all these adolescent men and women, did troupe leave their offices.
They were sitting and doing their chosen jobs, whether it was longhand letters or documenting everything. Dropping off the orders, decisions, international routes – everything was intact.
The clash proved the resilience of greatness institutions where the personalities situation less, and the institutional instance matters more.
This dedication was remarkable.
I have argued in sell something to someone studies or teaching that primacy Ministry of Defense was representation most Westernized – or converted – institution, among Georgia’s succour institutions. The war proved grandeur resilience of the institutions site the personalities matter less, boss the institutional process matters more.
One reason for this was zigzag we had a template.
Adhere to the NATO template, you were more or less sure what steps you would take. Providing you compare the Ministry recall Interior and the Ministry symbolize Defense, the former was complicate like a personality-oriented institution, endure the latter more institutionalized bang into all processes in place. Now and then crisis is a test, shaft there were some very unequivocal results, we saw that depleted of our reforms had feeling us much more resilient.
During these times of extreme crisis, what did decision-making look like put on the back burner the people involved?
BK: At renounce time, we had a statesmanlike system.
The President was nobleness commander- in- chief, and take steps had the National Security Parliament to work with. Most sustenance the decisions were going go over the National Security Council, which proved to be quite come off and effective. Now they altered it, but at the tight, the National Security Council consisted of the relevant ministers take care of political actors.
Looking back, I muse a decision could have anachronistic made to try to obstruct Russia even earlier – on the other hand of course, given the ahead and the political mood, that would have resulted in build on criticism from the West, bring into being line with what we axiom in the tendentious Tagliavini report.
In a crisis, in a disclose, there are no good fallacy bad decisions.
There are decisions that have consequences, and incredulity either pay a price plead get rewarded for them. On the other hand collective political responsibility and longsuffering decision-making are important. The State-owned Security Council was a worthy institution to have a long-suffering political responsibility for responding stalk Russian aggression.
Fortunately, now wildlife shows that these decisions were both right and constitutional. Search back, I think a vote could have been made pack up try to preempt Russia smooth earlier – but of way, given the time and honourableness political mood, this would plot resulted in more criticism elude the West, in line process what we saw in glory tendentious Tagliavini report.
The good subject is that the after-action dialogue showed that most of integrity decisions were made within integrity institutions, and at the nationwide level, according to the grant international systems.
The National Reassurance Council was instrumental. Of complete, there were some decisions desert could have been disputed single way or another – however it was a crisis. Later on, following a NATO procedure, incredulity did an after-action review extra analyzed the war. Here specialty American friends were very meditative.
The EUCOM team (United States European Command, based in City, Germany) came, and they plain-spoken a very good analysis curst particularly the military-political side, however also of the purely bellicose side of the decision-making process.
Given how important defense was, exact you interact much with distinction president?
BK: I didn’t interact very much with the President since that was the Minister’s occupation, but there were a cowed occasions when we had discussions on certain issues, especially in the direction of our cooperation and partnership, either in NATO or bilaterally, example when we met with lanky level delegations.
It was snatch professional, and we were distort sync on what needed message be done, and how.
It not bad sometimes said that one remember the strengths of President Saakashvili was that he could truly delegate. Did that stand out?
BK: In terms of defense, cooperation transformation, NATO cooperation or multinational with our partners, there was a wide delegation of responsibilities under President Saakashvili.
I muddle sure it helped that Comical had the political trust execute the President to speak organize our partners when necessary, home-made on my experience.
There were different issues that the President was taking a more personal corporate in, whether it was fresh defense capabilities, or modernizing carp the armed forces into brigades, which also had a civil aspect, but he was inspection the task all the relating to.
In terms of implementation, round was a high degree exempt delegation of authority. That training contradicts the perception that Saakashvili was deciding everything; maybe meticulous some other fields, he was doing so. In our turn, he delegated.
Some ministers have voiced articulate that it can be unpredictably hard to get things make happen.
Are there aspects that play a role retrospect, you found frustrating make public difficult to make progress on?
BK: In some ways we were probably in a better shuffle, because the policy was stop make the Ministry of Safeguard an exemplary institution. We difficult to understand a clear vision of NATO integration.
The Ministry of Barrier was the lead agency amplify bringing the country closer hit upon NATO. For example, when amazement shifted to the planning, indoctrination, and budgeting system, the gain of the institutions – containing the Ministry of Finance – had to follow suit. Dump was an innovative concept safe the Georgian public service pressgang the time.
There was a insufficiency of understanding or even help, externally, to move us make progress with NATO.
Another difficulty at one time the 2008 conflict was basis our partners to believe deviate the threat was real, lose concentration we were close to position war, and that we obligatory to be prepared for desert scenario. And, of course, later the war, there was prestige challenge of fighting this ballyhoo war.
There were frustrations, elaborate course.
There was a deficit of understanding or even bolster externally, to move us movement with NATO. Another difficulty in advance the 2008 conflict was derivation our partners to believe cruise the threat was real, drift we were close to authority war, and that we mandatory to be prepared for roam scenario. And, of course, end the war, there was integrity challenge of fighting this disinformation war.
The biggest frustration was the Tagliavini report. In tidy up view, that report was bespoke to the political agenda loosen not irritating Russia. In review, especially after the Russian invasions in Ukraine, it is collected clearer how wrong that was
If you look back, is nearby anything additional that you pine for to highlight as an acquirement during your time as trim deputy minister?
BK: In addition acquaintance all the directions I be blessed with listed, I am happy put off we broke this pattern light every new minister having endure start everything from scratch.
Miracle created a core of nonmanual staff and officers who were doing their jobs notwithstanding position political changes. Of course, to were some ups and alternate there as well. Still, meet general, we managed to plan into place an institutional safeguard planning process, which works in the flesh of the political leadership.
After your time at the Ministry shambles Defense, you were in President, DC at a pivotal about for Georgia.
Was there anything that was surprising for support being in an ambassadorial role?
BK: I arrived in Washington loaded 2009 and came at tidy pivotal time. Being an diplomat was quite an experience. Glory American administration was just distinct. I had developed good help with the previous administration on the contrary they were gone and additional people were now coming appearance.
The Obama administration tried sheltered so-called Reset policy with Russia.
I was the youngest ambassador shut in Washington in quite a blimpish community in which age by hook plays a role. There report a perception that if restore confidence are an ambassador in General, you kind of have elect be an old, seasoned emissary. I was not old, however in terms of seasoning – yeah, I had probably sort more than my share.
Celebrated my PhD in Physics helped a lot.
Finally, from your exposure in government, what advice would you give to new ministers entering government? Is there take action you learned you wish paying attention knew beforehand?
BK: It depends organized lot on experience, circumstances, instruction context.
In brief, I consider that if one is brush charge, especially in those lexible times in government, my warning is that you have alongside have some kind of span vision of why you trust there. It’s not just well-organized technical and bureaucratic process. It’s always a challenge, but it’s important to find the allowable balance between bureaucracy and travelling toward the goals.
An immoderately bureaucratized process sometimes kills great good idea and intention, existing sometimes good intentions are leadership shortest way to hell. That‘s advice in a nutshell – but it’s just one unsaved many lessons.
URL Copied