Georgia's privately owned Imedi television station caused a nationwide panic with its mock news report.
The report had to do with an alleged Russian "invasion," the "assassination" of President Mikheil Saakashvili and the coming to power of "pro-Moscow forces" headed by opposition leaders Nino Burdzhanadze and Zurab Nogaideli.
It appears that all aspects of this shocking episode have already been discussed. President Saakashvili and his spokesperson, the opposition, Russian politicians, Abkhazian and South Ossetian officials have all made their statements.
Nevertheless, a distinct feeling of unreality persists. To understand it, let's try to imagine how this episode would have played in Russia. Let's say a Russian television channel shows a news story about an invasion by either the whole of NATO or China. How would most people react to the news? They would switch channels, watch a beer commercial and feel quite unperturbed.
People would ask themselves what kind of idiot it would take to finance an extremely costly invasion of Russia and its subsequent occupation. Such a military operation seems pointless because no benefit would justify the expenses incurred, even if the nuclear factor is overlooked.
Can a hypothetical invasion be mounted in order to control Russia's natural resources or transport routes linking Europe with Asia? All these far-fetched scenarios were extremely popular in the 1990s. Later Russian analysts realized that 19th century realities should not be applied to the current situation. Horror-story fans occupied a befitting place on the sidelines of politics and journalism.
At any rate, not a single person in Moscow would rush out to buy food, take out cash from an ATM or stage a protest in front of the Ostankino TV center. Most people would say the producers are morons and forget the hoax broadcast in three seconds. This is the only difference between a relatively normal society and the one currently existing in Georgia.
We say "relatively" because each person has his or her own psychiatric diagnosis. Any doctor will tell you that there are no absolutely healthy people. The same can be said about nations.
Think back to Russian developments of the 1990s. According to psychiatrists, an unimaginable number of people requiring medical attention and even hospitalization walked the streets of Moscow. This became clear to any medical professional because of the way they spoke, the look in their eyes and their speech. The doctors said there was nothing like it anywhere in the world.
Manic-depressive psychoses seemed to be the least serious mental disorder diagnosed by them. The human psyche was absolutely unable to cope with the radical changes of the time.
Technically speaking, the mental state of an entire society, as well as its normality and abnormality, are an unstudied sphere. Naturally, war with its destruction and loss of life cannot but affect individual and collective mentalities.
This is true of just about any war, be it the Hundred Years War between England and France or the Times of Trouble in the 17th century Russia.
What these periods had in common was mass hysteria and inadequate behavior of numerous individuals in various situations. This happened at the very end of such upheavals and after they were over. A typical example of this was Joan of Arc, with her visions and her huge following.
During a relatively short period of independence, Georgia has fought and lost two civil wars, which could also be called ethnic conflicts, on its territory or, to be precise, on a territory that had belonged to it for several decades.
Georgia attacked Abkhazia and South Ossetia, committed outrageous atrocities there and was subsequently repelled. Abkhazians and South Ossetians, former citizens of the Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic, feared another Georgian invasion for 15 years. They will not want to live with Georgians in an integral state in the foreseeable future.
Georgia realizes this, regardless of the media-promoted version of events. And the most ardent patriots, who violently deny this state of affairs, also realize this. This implies the collapse of statehood and of a national idea. Such developments always have a psychological effect.
Before 1991, there was a widespread stereotype in the Soviet Union that Georgians were "hot-tempered." In effect, the entire Georgian nation seemed highly emotional against the backdrop of Russians' lyrical despondence. In the long run, most Russians became emotionally detached from other former Soviet republics, which were also marked by the same psychological inadequacy on a mass scale. Most of them do not understand what it's like to be a "hot-tempered" nation and to endure the hardships that befell Georgia.
In the 1990s, before Saakashvili became president, Russians sometimes learned about Georgian media comments about this country. People shrugged their shoulders, called the comments "delirium" and forgot all about it because they had enough delirium at home.
It was not Saakashvili with his team of self-satisfied spin artists that invented all those "Russian plots" against Georgia. It began much earlier. As usual, everyone except the patient himself realized that he was behaving inadequately.
Moscow stopped noticing Georgia at the political level and erected political barriers such as visas, the suspension of air traffic, bans on the import of wine, etc. In some cases, Russia retorted harshly when such delirium became preposterous, including an incident when some UFOs fell on Georgian territory and were instantly destroyed by the ruling regime. Moscow also stopped reacting to persistent accusations as regards reconnaissance flights over Georgia.
Finally, the climax came: Georgia's surprise attack on South Ossetia and Russian peacekeepers in August 2008.
It remains unclear whether Moscow's policy to "forget" Georgia was correct. But, if not, what would have been a better strategy?
Science has not investigated sufficiently the mental state of a nation. Political analysts are only beginning to approach this subject. No one has ever decided who should be held responsible for the outcome of a health disorder. Should the government, the elite, the intellectuals or the entire nation be responsible? Moreover, how would the culprit be punished?
On the most basic human level it would be nice if Georgia got over its illness. And it would certainly be good if someone could help it.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Dmitry Skosyrev) ? On Saturday
