POLITICS

AUGUST 13 - 19, 2021 POLITICS

7 Some Karabakh-Related Aspects of Georgia’s Regional Positioning. Part 2

ANALYSIS BY VICTOR KIPIANI, GEOCASE CHAIRMAN

Obviously, the fi rst interesting question is Russia’s and Turkey’s roles in the Karabakh confl ict, and the Russian factor, in this case, is a very specifi c one. Since Russia and Armenia maintain close relations through various agreements, whereas Moscow’s links to Azerbaijan follow a more cooperational format, Russia was obliged to maintain a very delicate balance between the two. Basically, neither of the parties to the confl ict was “hostile” towards Russia, and Moscow’s actions should therefore have been more weighed and complex compared to other confl icts and wars in the post-Soviet space. It was this specific factor that supposedly defi ned a certain number of “fl exible” formulations that were included in the ceasefi re agreement and were mentioned above.

Another defi ning and extremely important aspect should also be mentioned: the dyophysite or perhaps even "triphysite" factor of Moscow’s involvement in the confl ict. What is implied here is the general background of Russia-Turkey relations which intersect not only in the South Caucasus but in other points around the world as well.

Despite Moscow’s tactical interests in cooperating with Ankara, Russia did its best to limit Turkey’s role in the postconfl ict period. For example, the agreement of the 10th of November 2020 tries to limit Turkey’s military element in monitoring the ceasefi re agreement. Russia also tried hard to neutralize Turkey’s attempts to widen its role in the Minsk format (as well as those of Azerbaijan).

And let us now use Georgia’s point of view in order to briefl y discuss what attitude Turkey can have towards this issue. Firstly, Turkey is one of Georgia’s main partners. Secondly, Ankara plays a signifi cant role in issues of regional safety and consistently and openly supports Georgia’s NATO membership ambitions.

What is also defi ned in the context of this issue is the presumed specifi city of Georgia-Turkey relations with regards to limiting the spread of Russia’s infl uence in the South Caucasus. Here, we should also mention Ankara's desire to further deepen the country's partnership with Azerbaijan, as well as Turkey’s practical interests in stabilizing relations with Yerevan.

THE SOUTH CAUCASUS AS A TRILATERAL FORMAT?

It is not even worth asking what benefi ts any format of trilateral cooperation would bring to the countries of the South Caucasus. Besides questions of peace and safety, such a partnership within the framework of the emerging new world order would give the Caucasus qualitatively different characteristics and would make the region more interesting and appealing to investments. Unfortunately, the reality of the current situation in the short and medium term does not give much cause for optimism. Overall, the paradigm of the South Caucasus is mostly limited to bilateral relations between Georgia and Armenia and Georgia and Azerbaijan.

Based on that, the quality of cooperation among the South Caucasian triangle is in the foreseeable future defi ned by the quality of cooperation between Tbilisi and Yerevan and Tbilisi and Baku. We must at this stage repeat that this is the current state of the region’s "real politics" and that there seems to be little chance of this reality changing any time soon. These conditions underline Georgia’s most important role as a potential pillar of the South Caucasus’ overall economic space. Consequently, the results of the country’s internal reforms are becoming as important as the quality of Georgia’s integration with international civilized society.

THE ISSUES IN PERSPECTIVE

To discuss processes in the region in the near and medium term, many key issues are being accumulated. The answers to some questions are slowly taking shape with more or less clarity, and some might be made the subject of hypothetical modeling, at this stage, at any rate, and taking existing conditions into consideration.

For example, the quality and durability of Russia and Turkey’s current geopolitical cohabitation in the South Caucasus is questionable, particularly as the two countries come into contact in other parts of the world as well. We cannot exclude that in the so-called arrangement of priorities, the South Caucasus might turn into an essential component of modern mutual compromises.

The basic challenge of the overall task remains the role of the West in the South Caucasus and the projection of Western interests. An unequivocal answer must be found to this question at this stage, especially given the noticeable defi cit of clear geopolitical Western lines with regard to the Black Sea region, one of whose natural components we believe the South Caucasus to be. The most compelling factor of the overall Western vector is the United States of America, whereas globally Washington’s recent zig-zag geopolitical signature unintentionally helps to create the above mentioned problem.

Another very important issue is the overall framework of the new world order that is currently being formed. We believe that there are two fundamental trends that defi ne its basic nature: the fi rst of these is the counterweight parameter between the US and China, as well as how it is refl ected in different geopolitical geographies. Second, in our opinion, the novel understanding of this new world order’s multilateral characteristics, as well as bringing regionalism to the fore. From this point of view, the geopolitical geography of the Black Sea and Caspian Sea, along with the South Caucasus lying in between, are being established as an important regional center of this new world order.

To complete this analysis, I would name the South Caucasus and the Middle East as closely linked issues. Despite differences on the surface, it is a fact that a number of measurable factors are leading these two regions’ geopolitics to increasingly merge.

Of course, the above mentioned questions imply several subsidiary questions and a certain depth of inquiry. We only mentioned those basic lines of thought that will become fields for endless research by analysts over the coming years and will become routine responses for policy makers.

THE FACT IS THAT..

…the South Caucasus is once again at the center of global attention, while the modern structure of relationships between the countries of the region has evolved over the past few years from a bilateral model to a more complex multilayered system. In any case, the collapse of the Soviet Union left a legacy that the three countries of the region are still trying to overcome. Also, it is important to note that the so-called "ethnic confl icts" are primarily related to the shifting sands of geopolitics in the region. The latter point is especially true when speaking about the confl icts in Georgia, whose reduction to the category of "ethnicity" refl ects either a lack of knowledge or an attempt to distort their essence.

As a result, the Caucasian puzzle raises more questions than it provides answers for, which is hardly surprising since the region's importance goes beyond its boundaries and since the diversity of the Caucasus is truly a contributor to the grand design of Eurasian security. In addition to a general toolkit, the South Caucasus is a region that also requires a very tailor-made approach.

13 Years since August War: Russia Says It's ‘Ready to Restore Relations with Georgia’

Continued from page 1

On August 28, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed a decree recognizing South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states. In response, the Georgian government severed diplomatic relations with Russia. Russia only partially fulfi lled its obligations defi ned by the 6-point ceasefire agreement, and its forces remained in the village of Perevi until October 18, 2010.

On October 23, 2008, the Georgian government passed the Law on Occupied Territories, giving the areas the status of occupied territories of Georgia by Russia.

Two Georgian regions, Abkhazia and Tskhinvali, remain occupied by Russia today, and Russia continues discrimination and violence against ethnic Georgians, restrictions on the right of education in the native language, the right to property, and even the right to life. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of IDPs and refugees are prevented from returning to their homes.

Several days before the 13th anniversary of this tragic date in modern Georgian history, Offi cial Moscow released a statement, pointing at the necessity to “make relations between the two countries warmer and friendlier.” Namely, Deputy Director of the Information and Press Department of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Alexander Bikantov, said at a briefi ng on August 5 that Moscow is ready to restore relations with Georgia to the level "at which the Georgian side will be ready."

Commenting on the 13th anniversary of the Russo-Georgian War of August 2008, Bikantov expressed hopes that “common sense will prevail in Tbilisi, and our Georgian partners will begin to build relations with neighbors, taking into account the balance of interests.”

He also spoke about the 13th anniversary of the August war, calling the government of former President Mikheil Saakashvili a "criminal regime." "Russia has never identifi ed the Georgian people with Mikheil Saakashvili's criminal regime," he added.

In response, regarding the resumption of relations between the two countries, the Georgian Foreign Ministry said that the future of good neighborly relations between the two countries goes beyond the de-occupation of Georgian territories and Russia's respect for Georgia's sovereignty and internationally recognized borders.

“A few days before the 13th anniversary of Russia's large-scale military aggression against Georgia, the representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry made an attempt to create another piece of disinformation and propaganda narrative on the so-called new reality and the 2008 August war,” the Ministry announced.

“We would like to remind Russia that there is no parallel reality. The international community and international law are uniform in countering Russia’s aggressive activities, occupation and de-facto annexation. The European Court of Human Rights gave its name to the August 2008 war and established that in effective control of the Georgian regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Russia is responsible for grave human rights violations during the war and following the occupation. The Strasbourg Court held the Russian Federation responsible for ethnic cleansing, putting an accent on Moscow’s failure to comply with the ceasefi re agreement.

“Against such a background, the comment of the Russian Foreign Ministry regarding the anniversary of the 1783 Treaty of Georgievsk is cynical and absolutely unacceptable as it is in breach of this very treaty that Russia started annexation of Georgian territories and capturing lands in the South Caucasus. It is unfortunate that annexing territories of other countries remains Russia’s goal after centuries.

“In the present-day world, which is based on the norms and principles of international law, no-one is going to tolerate Russia’s attempts to undermine the rules-based international order and to forcefully redraw the borders of sovereign states in Europe, nor will they tolerate Moscow’s defi ance of international obligations under the Ceasefi re Agreement.

“If something goes against equal and good-neighborly relations between Russia and Georgia, it is Russia’s aggressive policy, its unlawful occupation of Georgian territories, violation of Georgia’s territorial integrity and breach of inviolability of internationally recognized state borders. A route to the good-neighborly relations between Georgia and Russia lies through de-occupation of Georgian territories and Russia’s respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of our country,” stated the Georgian MFA.

Also in response to the Russian Foreign Ministry, US Ambassador Kelly Degnan said that if Russia wants its statement taken seriously, Russia must fi rst withdraw its troops from the territory of Georgia.

The US Ambassador noted that there is a format in the Geneva Talks for dialogue with Russia. "Georgians have heard such messages from Russia before, but in order for Georgia to take this statement seriously, it is important that Russia, fi rst of all, withdraw its troops from the territories of Georgia. It is important that Russia withdraws its troops from Georgian territory, withdraws recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and opens humanitarian corridors in these regions,” the Ambassador said.

On the 13th anniversary of the August War, President of Georgia Salome Zurabishvili, along with members of the government, paid tribute to the heroes who died in the war, at the Mukhatgverdi Brothers Cemetery, noting that August 8 should be a day of hope, not of mourning.

“We will all see the unifi cation of Georgia. I want this day to be the day of the heroes whose devotion was a devotion to hope,” stated the President.

Local authorities and Georgia’s foreign partners publicly responded to the anniversary, condemning the Russian occupation and calling on the Russian federation to withdraw its troops from Georgian territories.

“August 7 marks 13 years since Russia’s military aggression against Georgia, and the occupation of Georgian regions. Russia must fulfi ll the ceasefi re agreement,” Georgian Foreign Minister Davit Zalkaliani wrote on Twitter.

“Recently, the European Court of Human Rights ruled its verdict on the RussiaGeorgia confl ict and found the Russian Federation exercising effective control responsible for human rights violations in the August 2008 War. Russia must fulfi ll the ceasefi re agreement,” he added.

“Unfortunately, the Russian Federation’s occupation of Georgian territories, and aggressive and destructive policy still continues,” said First Deputy Foreign Minister Lasha Darsalia in the village of Gegutiantkari, near the occupation line, where he met with civil society representatives, local NGOs and non-governmental organizations.

The Deputy FM noted that the Government of Georgia has set up a government commission on de-occupation and the peaceful settlement of the confl ict, with the aim of establishing a common national approach and a unifi ed national vision.

“13 years since Russia’s military aggression against Georgia, 20% of Georgia is occupied,” MEP Viola von Cramon wrote on Twitter.

“Russia is now spreading anti-Georgia & anti-EU disinformation. The European Union is committed to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia and stands with its people until full de-occupation,” she added.

The EU Delegation to Georgia also reiterated its condemnation of Russia’s recognition of and continued military presence in Abkhazia and South Ossetia in violation of both international law and of its commitments under the 12 August 2008 agreement.

Latvia fi rmly supports Georgia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, the Latvian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

The US Embassy in Georgia once again condemned the Russian occupation and “borderization.”

In his video address dedicated to the 13th anniversary of the Russian invasion of Georgia, spokesperson of the US Department of State, Ned Price said, “We stand in solidarity with the people of Georgia and look forward to the day when they will be reunited.”