Georgian findings
Paths to Peace?
A survey of public attitudes towards potential transformation of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict
Cover image: Seagulls © Ibragim Chkadua Preface ,QVXPPHUUHVHDUFKZDVFRQGXFWHGRQ both sides of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict into public attitudes towards a range of potential steps that could contribute to transforming the Georgian–Abkhaz conflict. The idea to conduct this research arose out of a process of cross-conflict exchange and GLDORJXHIDFLOLWDWHGE\&RQFLOLDWLRQ5HVRXUFHV and its partners. One of the key topics that emerged in the dialogue was the overall lack of progress in the peace process. It was seen as a challenge to introduce even small changes LQSROLF\RUEHKDYLRXUZKLFKZDVFOHDUO\ hampering prospects for development and for building more constructive relationships in future. Some participants in the dialogue often referenced public opinion in trying to explain the lack of progress – attitudes held by the general SXEOLFZHUHDQREVWDFOHKROGLQJEDFNDWWHPSWV by officials and decision-makers to make bolder moves. Having identified this tendency in the dialogue SURFHVVZHGHFLGHGWRWHVWRXUDVVXPSWLRQV and to enquire through a process of focus group discussions and interviews about the opinions of a range of people on both sides of the conflict. :KDWGRSHRSOHUHDOO\WKLQNZKDWKRSHVDQG Footbridge in Abkhazia © Ibragim Chkadua IHDUVGRWKH\KDYHDQGWRZKDWH[WHQWDUH predominant attitudes in the societies presenting understand better the areas that are better left an obstacle to moving forward? How broad is the for a later stage in the process. We wanted to see UDQJHRIRSLQLRQVWKDWH[LVWLQVRFLHW\DQGKRZ whether there was common interest in making have they changed in relation to a dynamic and changes in some specific areas: which are the changing political context? Can we be sure that issues where interests overlap? On which issues we are not basing the discussions in our dialogue are sides too far apart for the dialogue to lead to processes on attitudes that are already out of tangible result at this point? GDWHWKDWZHDUHQRWPLVVLQJWKHQXDQFHLQWKH debate within the societies? Participation in the research provided an opportunity for people to structure their thoughts &RQFLOLDWLRQ5HVRXUFHVɋORFDOSDUWQHUVGHFLGHG on the conflict. The topic is rarely discussed to conduct the research in parallel so that we on either side of the conflict with a view to FRXOGFRPSDUHWKHUHVXOWVWRJHWKHUDQGH[SORUH finding practical and constructive ways forward. to what extent opinions on either side of the Discussions in the focus groups provoked serious conflict converge or diverge. The research WKRXJKWRQWKHLVVXHDQGHQFRXUDJHGSHRSOHWR WHDPVDJUHHGIRFDODUHDVIRUWKHUHVHDUFK think creatively about what might be possible WKRXJKTXHVWLRQVZHUHIRUPXODWHGVHSDUDWHO\DV and whether change could indeed be achieved. appropriate to the distinct contexts. We focused )RUPDQ\WKHDVVXPSWLRQLVWKDWQRWKLQJFDQ on themes that arose frequently over the course be done. Daily life has adopted a pattern that is of the dialogue. What are the obstacles cited now habitual and that makes it hard for people as standing in the way of change? What are the even to imagine that it could look very different possible steps that people see as desirable or if the conflict were resolved. Taking part in the feasible? We wanted the results of the research UHVHDUFKEHJDQWRRSHQXSSRVVLELOLWLHVJLYLQJ to help us to understand which areas may be the people a sense that in fact some steps can be most appropriate for taking first steps and to WDNHQDWWKLVSRLQWLQWLPHDQGWKDWWKHVHPLJKW
Paths to Peace? A survey of public attitudes towards potential transformation of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict ɒ Georgian findings shift the dynamic in a more constructive direction. Most participants identified three areas with 2QWKH*HRUJLDQVLGHDWWKHWLPHWKHUHVHDUFKZDV fairly high potential for confidence building and FRQGXFWHGLQWKLVZDVDLGHGE\WKHUHODWLYHO\ transforming the conflict in a positive way where UHFHQWFKDQJHLQJRYHUQPHQWZKLFKJDYHVRPH progress would be achievable in the short term: people in society a sense that a new approach to 3 Access for Abkhaz (students) to education the conflicts may be possible. Looking back at abroad; this period now that parliamentary elections have 3 DJDLQWDNHQSODFHLQ*HRUJLDLQ2FWREHU Facilitate international engagement to support some today speak of yet another political cycle of development in Abkhazia. missed opportunities; others recognise the small 3 5H HVWDEOLVKELODWHUDOIRUPDWVIRUGLVFXVVLRQ EXWVRPHWLPHVVLJQLILFDQWVWHSVWKDWZHUHPDGH and/or contacts among Georgian and GHVSLWHDQXQVWDEOHSROLWLFDOFRQWH[WWKDWSURYHG Abkhaz officials. more problematic to navigate than many had perhaps expected. Additional issues were also categorized as ‘less FRQWHVWHGɋEXWRSLQLRQVGLIIHUHGZLWKUHJDUGWR The broader context for the research was the potential impact on trust and overall conflict predominantly an overwhelming feeling on dynamics. A number of them require further both sides of the conflict that so much time has clarification: SDVVHGDQGVRPDQ\RSSRUWXQLWLHVKDYHEHHQ 3 5HVWRUDWLRQRIWKH$ENKD]DUFKLYHZDV PLVVHGWKDWLWLVKDUGWRHQYLVDJHZKDWFKDQJH perhaps seen as the least contested action LVSRVVLEOH7KHRXWFRPHVRIWKHUHVHDUFKLQ SRLQWRIDOO+RZHYHUZKLOHWKH$ENKD]IHOW OLJKWRIWKLVZHUHVXUSULVLQJDQGSDUWLFLSDQWVLQ it would have significant impact in terms of the dialogue had mixed responses to the results. SHDFHEXLOGLQJVRPHZLWKLQWKH*HRUJLDQ 6RPHTXHVWLRQHGWKHILQGLQJVDQGGLIIHUHQW group were more sceptical; participants drew different conclusions as to 3 Both groups thought it would be possible to which issues emerged as priorities. come to some agreement over co-operation ,QRQHGLDORJXHVHVVLRQLQ*HRUJLDQDQG on issues of security in the Gal/i region. But Abkhaz participants were asked to place issues the Georgians tended to give this higher that had been explored in the research on a priority in terms of confidence building than grid. They placed the issues according to their the Abkhaz; potential to build confidence across the conflict 3 The Abkhaz group pointed out the significance GLYLGHRQWKHRQHKDQGDQGWKHGHJUHHWRZKLFK of granting UNESCO access to Abkhazia WKH\PLJKWEHFRQWHVWHGRUFRQWURYHUVLDORQWKH in the broader context of preservation of other. Although this exercise proved extremely cultural heritage and building trust. Some FKDOOHQJLQJDQGIUXVWUDWLQJIRUVRPHHYHQWXDOO\ Georgian participants felt they needed more the groups managed to identify a clearer clarification what this type of work may look picture of issues that had the potential to build like in concrete terms; WUXVWDQGOHDGWRORQJWHUPSHDFHDQGWKDW 3 6LPLODUO\ERWKJURXSVFRXOGLPDJLQHWKDW could be prioritised in terms of practical action symbolic steps could be taken to address or and advocacy. DFNQRZOHGJHJULHYDQFHVRIWKHZDU+RZHYHU The research challenged the apparent reluctance this area requires further elaboration DWWKHSROLWLFDOOHYHOWRSXUVXHFKDQJHVDQGWDNH and needs to be fleshed out with more creative steps. Some dialogue participants had concrete ideas. held the view that resistance among the wider Three issues were discussed as potentially populations was holding back initiatives and having a fairly high impact on confidence action at the political level. Others were of the between Georgians and Abkhaz and view that the governments were lagging behind FUHDWLQJORQJWHUPVWDELOLW\EXWSDUWLFLSDQWV their populations in terms of readiness for bold acknowledged it would be difficult to move VWHSV7KHUHVHDUFKSURYRNHGLQWHQVHGHEDWH forward on them in the current political climate: and challenged some of our assumptions. 3 2YHUDOOLWGHPRQVWUDWHGDGHJUHHRIUHDGLQHVV Finding an agreed definition of the status of among some groups in the societies to resolve Gal/i residents and officially recognizing the FHUWDLQLVVXHVDQGWRVHWWOHSUDFWLFDOFRQFUHWH fact of return. TXHVWLRQVHYHQLQWKHDEVHQFHRIDQ\SURJUHVV Although the field research was conducted in toward political settlement. DQGWKHMRLQWFRQFOXVLRQVZHUHGUDZQLQ
4 ɒ Conciliation Resources ZHIHHOWKDWWKHILQGLQJVUHPDLQUHOHYDQW by both societies. We hope that research such and have decided to bring them to the attention as this can help to overcome the sense of inertia of a wider circle of people. The protracted nature VXUURXQGLQJWKHFRQIOLFWDQGFRQWULEXWHWRD RIWKHFRQIOLFWDQGWKHDSSDUHQWODFNRISURJUHVV PRUHREMHFWLYHDVVHVVPHQWRIZKDWLVEHLQJGRQH can result in pessimism regarding prospects for and can be done. FKDQJH,QGHHGHYHQWKHSRVLWLYHVWHSVWKDWDUH The main conclusion we draw is that there is an being taken are not always given the credit they DJHQGDIRUDQRQJRLQJFURVVFRQIOLFWGLDORJXH GHVHUYH7KH*HRUJLDQJRYHUQPHQWɋVFHVVDWLRQ DQGWKHUHDUHWKLQJVWKDWFDQEHGLVFXVVHGDQG of subversive activity in the Gal/i region in recent EROGHUVWHSVWKDWFRXOGEHWDNHQLQRUGHUWR \HDUVIRUH[DPSOHRUWKHGHPRQVWUDWLRQRI make real progress. JRRGZLOORQWKHSDUWRIWKH$ENKD]ZKHQWKH\ agreed to release Georgian prisoners in 2016 as The full reports are available on our website: DUHVXOWRIQHJRWLDWLRQVZHUHODUJHO\RYHUORRNHG www.c-r.org/resources/paths-to-peace
5HVHDUFKPHWKRGRORJ\ We conducted qualitative research with a 1*2UHSUHVHQWDWLYHVXQHPSOR\HGSHRSOHDQG relatively small sample audience. We wanted displaced people and youth. to explore the main tendencies in the initial 2QWKH*HRUJLDQVLGHEHFDXVHRIWKH responses that people had to particular fundamental recent changes in political life in suggestions. We wanted to get a feel for the kind *HRUJLDDWWKHWLPHWKHUHVHDUFKZDVFRQGXFWHG of issues that emerge from a focused discussion respondents fell more or less into two camps RIWKHFRQIOLFWVZLWKDURXJKO\UHSUHVHQWDWLYHRU – those in favour of or in opposition to the new DWOHDVWYDULHGVHOHFWLRQRISHRSOH UHJLPH2QWKH$ENKD]VLGHWKHFRQIOLFWDQG 5HVSRQGHQWVZHUHVHOHFWHGLQUHODWLRQWRWKH WKHTXHVWLRQRIUHODWLRQVZLWK*HRUJLDZDV specificity of the contexts on either side of the DFRQWHQWLRXVVXEMHFWWRUDLVH0DQ\SHRSOH FRQIOLFW2QWKH$ENKD]VLGHLQWHUYLHZV FRQWLQXHWREHKLJKO\GLVWUXVWIXODQGSHRSOHɋV DQGIRFXVJURXSVZHUHFRQGXFWHGPDNLQJ responses to the request to participate varied. a total of 48 respondents. On the Georgian Some were cautious about engaging with VLGHLQWHUYLHZVDQGIRFXVJURXSVZHUH questions about how to improve the relationship FRQGXFWHGLQGLIIHUHQWUHJLRQVPDNLQJDWRWDO with Georgia for fear this was misunderstood as RIUHVSRQGHQWV3HRSOHLQWHUYLHZHGRU DEHWUD\DORIWKH$ENKD]LQWHUHVWRWKHUVZHUHRI participating in focus groups included public the opinion that it is so unlikely that constructive ILJXUHVDQGSROLF\PDNHUVUHSUHVHQWDWLYHVRIWKH steps could be taken there is nothing more to say DXWKRULWLHVDQGRISROLWLFDORSSRVLWLRQH[SHUWV RQWKHLVVXH$VDUHVXOWIHZHUDQGOHVVGLYHUVH DQGUHVHDUFKHUVMRXUQDOLVWVFLYLFDFWLYLVWV respondents took part.
The analysis and conclusions drawn by partners who led on the research on either side of the FRQIOLFWDUHWKHLUVDQGGRQRWQHFHVVDULO\UHIOHFWGLVFXVVLRQVLQRXUGLDORJXHPHHWLQJVRUWKH YLHZVDQGRSLQLRQVRI&RQFLOLDWLRQ5HVRXUFHVRUWKHSXEOLFDWLRQVɋGRQRUV 6LQFHWKLVSXEOLFDWLRQKLJKOLJKWVWKHSHUVSHFWLYHVRI*HRUJLDQLQWHUORFXWRUV*HRUJLDQWHUPLQRORJ\ KDVEHHQXVHGLQFOXGLQJIRUSODFHQDPHV7KHSUHIDFHZULWWHQE\&RQFLOLDWLRQ5HVRXUFHVXVHV wording that reflects the contested nature of this terminology.
Paths to Peace? A survey of public attitudes towards potential transformation of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict ɒ Georgian findings Survey results Tbilisi, 2013
Contents
,QWURGXFWLRQ
1. The new Georgian government and new opportunities for conflict resolution 8
5HFRJQLVLQJ$ENKD]LDDVDSDUW\WRWKHFRQIOLFWELODWHUDOWDONV
$JUHHPHQWRQWKHQRQXVHRIIRUFH
7UDQVIHURIDUFKLYHPDWHULDOVWR$ENKD]LD
5HVXPSWLRQRIUDLOWUDIILFWKURXJK$ENKD]LD
6. Legalising the use of/ reopening the seaport in Abkhazia 16
)UHHGRPRIPRYHPHQW
,QWHUQDWLRQDOWUDYHOIRUUHVLGHQWVRI$ENKD]LD
2SSRUWXQLWLHVIRU\RXQJSHRSOHLQ$ENKD]LDWRVWXG\DW Western universities 20
5HFRJQLWLRQRIWKH$ENKD]LDQSDVVSRUWDVDQLQWHUQDOLGHQWLW\ document within Georgia 21
8. Legal status of the population in the Gali region/Acknowledgement E\*HRUJLDRI,'3VɋUHWXUQWR*DOL
4XHVWLRQVFRQFHUQLQJWKHUHWXUQRIGLVSODFHGSHUVRQV
-RLQWO\UHVROYLQJVHFXULW\UHODWHGLVVXHVLQWKH*DOLUHJLRQ
7KHSRVVLELOLW\RIRSHQLQJD81(6&2UHSUHVHQWDWLRQLQ$ENKD]LD
12. The Abkhazian Government-in-Exile 28
7KHVLJQLILFDQFHRIV\PEROLFJHVWXUHV
$VVHVVPHQWRIWKH ɇ FRQIOLFW
7KHGHLVRODWLRQRI$ENKD]LD
&RQFOXVLRQ SRVVLEOHbILUVWVWHSVWRZDUGVFRQILGHQFHEXLOGLQJ
6 ɒ Conciliation Resources Fishermen in Batumi © Lika Lezhava
Introduction ,QWKHVXPPHURI&RQFLOLDWLRQ5HVRXUFHVɋ The respondents fall roughly into the following partner organisations in Georgia conducted categories: a qualitative sociological survey in Tbilisi and 1. UNM representatives and supporters (current WKUHH*HRUJLDQUHJLRQV $GMDUD.DNKHWLDQG and former government officials; Members of 6DPHJUHOR XVLQJLQGHSWKLQWHUYLHZVDQG Parliament) focus groups. 5HSUHVHQWDWLYHVDQGVXSSRUWHUVRIWKH*' 7KHPDLQREMHFWLYHRIWKHVXUYH\ZDVWRLGHQWLI\ coalition (current government officials; those areas and issues in which the conflicting Members of Parliament) parties could undertake tangible confidence- EXLOGLQJPHDVXUHV1DPHO\WRHVWDEOLVK ([SHUWVDQDO\VWVUHVHDUFKHUV VSHFLILFVWHSVZKLFKLQWKHRSLQLRQRI*HRUJLDQ 4. Journalists VRFLHW\FRXOGEHLPSOHPHQWHGDWWKLVVWDJH without addressing the key political issues 1*2UHSUHVHQWDWLYHV (independence for Abkhazia and restoring 6. Internally displaced persons (IDP)/ Members WHUULWRULDOLQWHJULW\IRU*HRUJLD DQGZKLFKFRXOG RIWKHɊ6\QHUJ\ɋ,'3QHWZRUN FRQWULEXWHWRWKHSDUWLHVɋUDSSURFKHPHQW Paths to Peace? A survey of public attitudes towards potential transformation of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict ɒ Georgian findings 1. The new Georgian government and new opportunities for conflict resolution 5HVSRQGHQWVZHUHDVNHGWKHIROORZLQJ 2VVHWLDDQG5XVVLDLVDPLVWDNHDQGZLOOQRW questions: yield positive results. Only a few individual UNM representatives rated as positive the 3 Do the new government and the new ruling JRYHUQPHQWɋVUHFHQWVWHSVWRVWDUWDGLUHFW political force have any new approaches GLDORJXHZLWK$ENKD]LDDQG6RXWK2VVHWLD WRFRQIOLFWUHVROXWLRQDVGLVWLQFWIURPWKH but they were certain that they are “doomed to previous authorities? failure, since it is Russia that has the final word on 3 Have new opportunities arisen to facilitate the conflict.Ɏ )RUPHUJRYHUQPHQWRIILFLDO810 communication and dialogue between the LQWHUYLHZ7ELOLVL conflicting parties without first addressing the They also criticise the government for its clear NH\SROLWLFDOLVVXHVRI$ENKD]LDɋVVWDWXVDQG aspiration to downplay the negative role of the *HRUJLDɋVWHUULWRULDOLQWHJULW\" 5XVVLDQIDFWRULQWKHFRQIOLFW“It is, essentially, a Russian–Georgian conflict. There are no Georgian- By and large, the majority of respondents Abkhaz or Georgian-Ossetian conflicts. The war think that the new government is was instigated by Russia.” (UNM Member of demonstrating a new approach to conflict 3DUOLDPHQWLQWHUYLHZ7ELOLVL resolution, which has opened up new Some UNM representatives equated that opportunities for addressing some of each DSSURDFKZLWKDEHWUD\DORI*HRUJLDɋVQDWLRQDO sides’ major concerns, though without interests. discussing the key political issues of status and territorial integrity. Respondents The views expressed by experts, analysts thought official rhetoric with regard to and journalists who openly support, or are Russia and the parties to the conflict has associated in the public mind with the UNM changed noticeably. On the whole, UNM were not much different from those of the representatives and their supporters UNM representatives themselves. In their negatively assess the new government’s ZRUGV“the new government does not have any policies, while GD representatives and clear-cut conflict resolution strategy, other than supporters assess them positively. A their declared willingness to enter into a direct positive attitude to the policies of the new dialogue with Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Russia.” government predominated among other -RXUQDOLVWLQWHUYLHZ7ELOLVL categories of respondents. 2QHRIWKHSUR810H[SHUWVHPSKDVLVHGWKDW “the new authorities have only one single ‘asset’ In the view of the UNM representatives and they can use to achieve a degree of success in the supportersWKHQHZJRYHUQPHQWɋVUKHWRULF peace process – the fact that they played no part in has become less confrontational and more the wars in Abkhazia and South Ossetia.” ([SHUW FRQFLOLDWRU\EXWWKH\GRQRWVHHWKLVDVDIDFWRU LQWHUYLHZ7ELOLVL that could improve relations between the parties. The analysts admitted that the new government The UNM representatives said the difference in KDVWRQHGGRZQLWVUKHWRULFDOWKRXJKWKH\ approach between the old and new leadership is VWLOOFRQVLGHU5XVVLDDQRFFXS\LQJSRZHUWKDW SXUHO\ɊFRVPHWLFɋ7KH\HPSKDVLVHGWKDWLQWKHLU invaded Georgian territories. Their opinion was HOHFWLRQPDQLIHVWR*'OHDGHUVKDGSURPLVHG WKDWLIRQHZHUHWREHOLHYHWKHJRYHUQPHQWɋV to revise the Law on the Occupied Territories UKHWRULFLWPD\KDYHGUDIWHGQHZDSSURDFKHV and recognise Abkhazia and South Ossetia as WRLPSURYLQJUHODWLRQVɇILUVWO\ZLWK5XVVLD SDUWLHVWRWKHFRQIOLFW“but after coming to power, and secondly with Abkhazia and South Ossetia they quickly realised that it is hardly possible in – but these approaches do not go beyond conditions of on-going occupation to recognise GHFODUDWLRQVRILQWHQW 8 ɒ Conciliation Resources 6LJQSRVWVLQ7ELOLVLk/LND/HMDYD The GD representatives and supporters factor and human rights than to territory. These offered a completely different interpretation of JURXSVLQWHUSUHWWKHJRYHUQPHQWɋVUKHWRULFDV WKHVDPHLVVXHV8QOLNHWKH810VXSSRUWHUV a complete renunciation of the use of force to they consider the change of rhetoric to be an solve the conflict. From this viewpoint the novelty important factor for successfully establishing of their approach lies in the fact that they are relations with the other conflict party. They ORRNLQJIRUDVROXWLRQQRWMXVWLQWKH:HVWEXWLQD positively rate the readiness of the new GLUHFWGLDORJXHZLWK$ENKD]LDDQG6RXWK2VVHWLD leadership to engage in a direct dialogue with ZKLOHWDNLQJLQWRDFFRXQW5XVVLDDQGLWVLQWHUHVWV $ENKD]LDDQG6RXWK2VVHWLDDQGWRHVWDEOLVK These groups regard the policy as having UHODWLRQVZLWK5XVVLD“The new government is DOUHDG\ERUQHIUXLWɇIRULQVWDQFHWKHVHFXULW\ ready to sit down at the negotiating table with requirements for crossing the administrative Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and discuss issues border with Gali have been simplified. that are of primary importance to them – for instance, freedom of movement, recognising The majority of members of the IDP network Abkhazia and South Ossetia as parties to the ‘Synergy’ and other IDPs from Abkhazia conflict, etc.” (Member of the Supreme Council of participating in the survey agreed that the $GMDUD*'FRDOLWLRQPHPEHULQWHUYLHZ new political reality has contributed to a UDSSURFKHPHQWRIWKHSDUWLHV,QWKLVJURXS Other categories of respondents (journalists, WKHSROLF\RIUDSSURFKHPHQWZLWK5XVVLDWKH experts, analysts and researchers, IDPs attempt to establish direct bilateral contacts young people) who support the change of ZLWK$ENKD]LDDQG6RXWK2VVHWLDWKHHQGWR regime in the country generally share the KRVWLOHUKHWRULFGLUHFWHGDW5XVVLDDQGWKH views of the GD representatives on questions of unambiguous renunciation of the use of force conflict resolution. to resolve the conflict inspire hope that the According to journalists and also young people, new authorities will succeed in creating “new the new authorities have serious potential for opportunities for a dialogue between the sides UHVROYLQJFRQIOLFWVSHDFHIXOO\DQGWKH\YLHZWKHP and new mutually beneficial initiatives.” (IDP from as according greater importance to the human $ENKD]LD7ELOLVLLQWHUYLHZ Paths to Peace? A survey of public attitudes towards potential transformation of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict ɒ Georgian findings The young peopleOLNHPDQ\RWKHUUHVSRQGHQWV Several respondents drew attention to the held the view that the Saakashvili government prevailing mood in Abkhaz society: “Abkhazia’s has totally forfeited the trust of the Georgian reaction has been cautious and low-key so far, and Abkhaz people. They also think that at the as it expects the new Georgian government to FXUUHQWVWDJHGLVFXVVLRQRIVWDWXVDQGWHUULWRU\ continue the old policy with only a few minor should be postponed to focus on the everyday changes – there will be ‘carrots’ instead of problems of ordinary people on both sides of the ‘sticks’. People in Abkhazia understand that conflict divide. Georgian society as a whole is not ready for $WWKHVDPHWLPHDVPDOOJURXSRIUHVSRQGHQWV radical change. But the Abkhaz side, too, is not ZHUHVFHSWLFDODERXWWKHQHZJRYHUQPHQWɋVDELOLW\ yet ready for positive reciprocal steps in the to resolve the frozen conflicts – there were more event of progressive moves, meaning there VFHSWLFVLQWKHFDWHJRULHVRIXQDIILOLDWHGFLWL]HQV is no readiness for mutual compromises. For UHJLRQDO1*2UHSUHVHQWDWLYHVDQGMRXUQDOLVWV that reason, it is crucial to work on the kind of from central and regional media than among proposals that would help to shift to one side the young people and GD supporters. They doubt issue of recognition and territorial integrity, and the government has a concrete strategy and do focus instead on social and economic projects not believe it will achieve positive results; on the beneficial for Abkhazia and South Ossetia, which FRQWUDU\WKH\IHDUWKDWWKHQHZJRYHUQPHQWɋV would be to Georgia’s advantage as well.” (IDP policies could even exacerbate the situation. IURP$ENKD]LD7ELOLVLLQWHUYLHZ 5HFRJQLVLQJ$ENKD]LDDVDSDUW\WRWKHFRQIOLFW bilateral talks 7KHPDMRULW\RIthe UNM representatives and The respondents differed considerably supporters felt recognising Abkhazia and South in their answers to these questions, Ossetia as parties to the conflict would not but the majority (GD representatives contribute in any way to a rapprochement. In their and supporters, and a majority of the RSLQLRQ*HRUJLDIRXJKWDZDUZLWK5XVVLDQRWZLWK respondents in other categories) spoke $ENKD]LDRU6RXWK2VVHWLD WKHUHIRUHRQO\5XVVLD out in favour of a bilateral dialogue and can be considered a party to the conflict. recognising Abkhazia as a party to the “ Russia is referred to as an occupying country in conflict. The UNM supporters opposed all the documents adopted since the 2008 war. For this idea, arguing that recognising that reason there are no grounds for considering Abkhazia and South Ossetia as parties to the territories it occupied as parties to the conflict the conflict is tantamount to recognising – they are simply Georgia’s occupied territories.” their independence, and only Russia would (Former high-ranking government official, UNM benefit from this. member, Tbilisi) ,QWKHFRXUVHRIWKHVXUYH\UHVSRQGHQWVZHUH “ It is not in Georgia’s interest to recognise asked to assess whether it would be expedient Abkhazia and South Ossetia as parties to the for Georgia to recognise Abkhazia and South conflict, because doing so would play down Ossetia as parties to the conflict and start a Russia’s negative role in the conflict.” (UNM direct bilateral dialogue with them. Abkhazia and member, Adjara) South Ossetia have long insisted on such ” Recognising Abkhazia and South Ossetia as UHFRJQLWLRQEXWWKHIRUPHUJRYHUQPHQWUHIXVHG parties to the conflict would mean recognising WRDJUHHWRLWFRQVLGHULQJLWQRWWR*HRUJLDɋV their statehood and give legitimacy to their claims advantage politically. These issues were to independence. This in fact is exactly what the discussed with respondents in the context of the Abkhaz are striving for.” (Expert, Tbilisi) following questions: The GD representatives and supporters (with To what extent can recognition and bilateral a very few exceptions) positively assessed the dialogue contribute to a rapprochement between idea of recognising Abkhazia and South Ossetia the sides and restoring trust between them? DVSDUWLHVWRWKHFRQIOLFWDVLWZRXOGIDFLOLWDWH To what extent is this to the advantage or GLDORJXHDQGUDSSURFKHPHQWWRWKHEHQHILWRIDOO disadvantage of the Georgian and Abkhaz sides? parties. They stressed that recognising Abkhazia 10 ɒ Conciliation Resources and South Ossetia as parties to the conflict [consider Abkhazia] an independent state. It is not in any way equal to recognising their would even have been possible to recognise independence. Several of them called for “not Abkhazia’s independence, but that should shutting one’s eyes to the fact that the war was have been done in the late 1990s, well before between the Abkhaz and the Georgians”. Russia recognised it, and strictly on condition that Abkhazia and Georgia move together “It is crucial to engage in direct talks with towards European integration.” -RXUQDOLVW Abkhazia; direct contact with Abkhazia will reduce LQWHUYLHZb7ELOLVL Russia’s influence. Besides, by constantly blaming Russia and ignoring Abkhazia or even calling it The IDPs were not unanimous in their views ‘Russia’s puppet’, we are insulting the Abkhaz RQWKHLVVXHHLWKHU$FRQVLGHUDEOHQXPEHU people, and demonstrate that we do not take RIWKHPDQGVRPHRIWKHɊ6\QHUJ\ɋPHPEHUV them into account.” (GD Member of the Supreme WKRXJKWWKDWDOOɇ$ENKD]LD6RXWK2VVHWLDDQG Council of Adjara) Georgia alike – would benefit from recognising Abkhazia and South Ossetia as parties to the “In order to start talks with Abkhazia on issues conflict. This would facilitate rapprochement and that are important to us, Georgia should make VWUHQJWKHQPXWXDOWUXVWZKLFKZRXOGHQDEOHWKH this concession and recognise Abkhazia as a party sides to structure relations on a completely new to the conflict – otherwise, nothing will come of it. basis in line with Western standards. In their This should be made clear to Georgian citizens” RSLQLRQWKLVZRXOGPDNHLWSRVVLEOHWR (GD Member of Parliament, IDP) 3 demolish the popular stereotype in Georgian Several GD supporters and representatives took society that the Abkhaz and the Georgians a more cautious approach to this issue. In their have no quarrel among themselves – all that RSLQLRQLWLVFUXFLDOWRWKLQNWKURXJKDQGFRPH LVQHHGHGLVWRUHPRYHWKH5XVVLDQIDFWRU to a clear understanding of what Georgia itself and they will immediately fall into each will gain from recognising Abkhazia and South RWKHUɋVbDUPV; 2VVHWLDDVSDUWLHVWRWKHFRQIOLFWV%HVLGHVVXFK recognition must form part of a comprehensive 3 UDLVH$ENKD]LDɋVVWDWXVDWWKHQHJRWLDWLRQVWR state strategy on conflict resolution. PDNHLWIHHODQHTXDOSDUWQHUZKLFK$ENKD]LD has been trying to achieve for many years; Some of the journalists and experts were inclined to think it is necessary to recognise 3 LPSURYH$ENKD]VRFLHW\ɋVDWWLWXGHWRZDUGV Abkhazia and South Ossetia as parties to the Georgia; FRQIOLFWDQGWKDWWKLVZRXOGQRWDPRXQWWR recognition of their independence or contravene 3 PDNHWKHQHJRWLDWLQJSURFHVVPRUHHIIHFWLYH international standards and documents. Several as the sides would bear equal responsibility respondents linked this issue with the non-use for its outcome; of force agreement: 3 convince the international community that the “ It is crucial not just to recognise Abkhazia as a change of government has truly created a new party to the conflict, but also to sign a non-use political reality in Georgia. of force agreement with Abkhazia. That would $QRWKHUUHODWLYHO\VPDOOJURXSRI,'3V encourage Abkhazia to distance itself from Russia suggested that Abkhazia should be recognised and from Russian influence, and pave the way RQO\DVDSDUW\WRGLDORJXHDQGQRWWRWKH for direct talks between Abkhazia and Georgia as FRQIOLFWVLQFH$ENKD]LDLVIXOO\FRQWUROOHGE\ equal partners.” (Expert, Tbilisi) 0RVFRZDQGIRUWKDWUHDVRQLWLV5XVVLDWKDW 2QHRIWKHMRXUQDOLVWVGHILQHGWKHFRQIOLFWDV is a party to the conflict. Several IDPs pointed DɊELSRODUɋFRQIURQWDWLRQ2QWKHRQHKDQG RXWWKDW“recognising Abkhazia as a party to the LWLVDFRQIOLFWEHWZHHQ*HRUJLDDQG5XVVLD conflict would give Abkhazia greater grounds for considering itself a genuinely independent state.” which occupied Georgian territories; on the RWKHUKDQGLWLVDFRQIOLFWEHWZHHQ*HRUJLD Young people, IRUWKHPRVWSDUWZHUHLQIDYRXU DQG$ENKD]LDLUUHVSHFWLYHRIWKHODWWHUɋV of recognising Abkhazia as a party to the conflict. RIILFLDOVWDWXV7KHUHIRUH“it is essential to It would facilitate dialogue and contribute to improve relations with Abkhazia regardless of conflict transformation. TSU students stressed its legal status, even when Georgia considers that without mutual compromises the sides will it an autonomy… while the Abkhaz themselves be unable to solve conflict-related problems. Paths to Peace? A survey of public attitudes towards potential transformation of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict ɒ Georgian findings Participants of Georgian-Abkhaz youth dialogue it was necessary because it would be a positive and young party activists pointed out that development that can open the door to future recognising Abkhazia and South Ossetia as negotiations and relations. parties to the conflict does not mean ignoring that “ One of the compromises on Georgia’s part could 5XVVLDWRRLVDFRQIOLFWSDUW\$VVHYHUDO\RXQJ be recognising Abkhazia as a party to the conflict. SDUWLFLSDQWVVDLGWKHSDUWLHVKDYHWREHHTXDOLQ Abkhazia would take some steps in return. RUGHUWRHVWDEOLVKIXWXUHUHODWLRQVWUDQVIRUPWKH Nothing will change if both parties are reluctant FRQIOLFWDQGDFNQRZOHGJHWKHLUbPLVWDNHV to make the first step.” (TSU student, Tbilisi) “ It would be wrong to ignore reality and engage in the self-deception that Abkhazia and Georgia 7KHSRVLWLRQRIRUGLQDU\FLWL]HQVMRXUQDOLVWV were never at war and there are no problems.” and representatives of NGOs outside Tbilisi (Georgian-Abkhaz youth dialogue participant, largely coincided with the views cited above. The Tbilisi) percentage ratio of those who came out against recognising Abkhazia as a party to the conflict Although some young participants thought ZDVKLJKHULQWKLVIRFXVJURXSKRZHYHUDQGWKH\ that recognising Abkhazia as a party to the claimed that this would amount to recognition of FRQIOLFWLVRIQRXVHDWWKLVVWDJHWKH\VWLOOIHOW $ENKD]LDɋVLQGHSHQGHQFH $JUHHPHQWRQWKHQRQXVHRIIRUFH The Abkhaz side has repeatedly demanded intend to use force against Abkhazia”.1 In their that Georgia sign an agreement on the non- RSLQLRQ6XNKXPLɋVGHPDQGWKDW*HRUJLDVLJQ XVHRIIRUFH7ELOLVLɋVSRVLWLRQRQWKLVLVVXHKDV such an agreement is directed solely towards DOZD\VEHHQWKDWZLWKUHJDUGWR$ENKD]LDVXFK legitimising its legal status as an independent DGRFXPHQWLVUHGXQGDQWDV*HRUJLDKDVQR state. Such an agreement can be signed only intention of using force to resolve the conflict. ZLWKWKHDFWXDOSDUW\WRWKHFRQIOLFW 5XVVLD $WWKHVDPHWLPHWKH*HRUJLDQDXWKRULWLHVKDYH “ Signing such an agreement with Abkhazia and stressed the need to sign such an agreement South Ossetia would actually destroy the Geneva ZLWK5XVVLDDVWKHFRXQWU\WKDWRFFXSLHG process framework and would mean denying Georgian territories during the 2008 war. Russia’s status as the occupying country.” (Government official, UNM, Tbilisi) Many respondents linked this problem 7KHPDMRULW\RIWKHGD representatives and to the recognition of Abkhazia and South supporters and respondents in other categories Ossetia as parties to the conflict, adducing DJUHHGZLWKWKHQHHGWRVLJQVXFKDQDJUHHPHQW similar arguments for and against such believing that it would help improve relations an agreement. The ratio of supporters to between the parties. A considerable number opponents of an agreement on the non- of the respondents who were certain that use of force was approximately the same such an agreement should be signed stressed as in the case of recognition of Abkhazia that this in no way means recognition of and South Ossetia as parties to conflict. By $ENKD]LDɋVDQG6RXWK2VVHWLDɋVLQGHSHQGHQFH and large, the majority of the respondents 6RPHUHVSRQGHQWVKRZHYHUWKRXJKWWKHUH spoke out in favour of Georgia signing such is no need to sign such an agreement as the an agreement, although several of them Georgian Parliament has already adopted a stressed that Georgia should do so only in relevant resolution. the event of reciprocal concessions from the Abkhaz side. For the UNM representatives and supporters, 5HVSRQGHQWVTXRWHG3UHVLGHQW6DDNDVKYLOLɋVVWDWHPHQWDW signing a non-use of force agreement with WKH(XURSHDQ3DUOLDPHQWVHVVLRQRQ1RYHPEHUWKDW $ENKD]LDDQG6RXWK2VVHWLDZDVMXVWDV Georgia had unilaterally undertaken never to use force. They unacceptable as recognising them as parties to also noted that the Medvedev–Sarkozy Ceasefire Agreement requires the parties to refrain from resuming military the conflict. Several of them did not see any need RSHUDWLRQV,QDGGLWLRQWKHQHZO\HOHFWHGSDUOLDPHQWKDV IRUVXFKDGRFXPHQWEHFDXVH “Georgia does not adopted a special resolution on the issue. 12 ɒ Conciliation Resources Supporters of an agreement think it is necessary may not lead to a final settlement of the conflict. LQDQ\FDVHHYHQWKRXJKWKH$ENKD]DXWKRULWLHV )RUWKHPWKHPRVWLPSRUWDQWWKLQJLVWRHQVXUH and Abkhaz society are convinced that in the new that Abkhazia and Georgia never go to war SROLWLFDOVLWXDWLRQZLWK5XVVLDQWURRSVGHSOR\HG with each other again. The main message of RQ$ENKD]LDɋVERUGHUVDQGWKHDGYHQWWRSRZHU the document is that “there is no alternative to LQ7ELOLVLRIDQHZJRYHUQPHQW*HRUJLDZLOO SHDFHɎDQGWKDWWKHUHVKRXOGQRWEHDUHSHDWRI not resort to force. One of the IDP respondents WKHZDU%HVLGHVWKHUHVSRQGHQWVVDLGE\WDNLQJ SRLQWHGRXWWKDW“the non-use of force agreement this step Georgia would improve its rating in the is of paramount importance to Abkhaz society. That eyes of the Abkhaz public and the international is why signing such an agreement would be widely FRPPXQLW\DQGOD\WKHIRXQGDWLRQIRUIXWXUH interpreted in Abkhazia as a step by Georgia towards contacts and solving common problems. peace”. Some respondents thought the document Some participants of the Georgian-Abkhaz should have the status of an international treaty youth dialogue and young political activists and provide for the imposition of sanctions against were more cautious in their approach than the any party found to be in breach of its obligations TSU students. They focused attention on the under the agreement. legal aspects of the problem. They said the 7KHMRXUQDOLVWVDQGH[SHUWVVWUHVVHGRQFH QHZ3DUOLDPHQWɋVUHVROXWLRQZKLFKLVDLPHGDW again the importance of the human factor in SUHYHQWLQJDUHVXPSWLRQRIKRVWLOLWLHVPDNHVDQ\ comparison with the question of territory and RWKHUGRFXPHQWRQWKHVXEMHFWUHGXQGDQWIURP political status: DOHJDOYLHZSRLQW0RUHRYHULWUHPDLQVXQFOHDU who should sign the document and how the “ No territorial integrity is worth people’s lives. status of the signatories should be determined. Once such an agreement is signed, people in A relatively small number of the respondents Abkhazia and Georgia will feel reassured that in almost every category suggested that there will not be [another] war. Of course the Georgia should agree to sign such a document danger will remain that the treaty will be violated, only in return for a reciprocal concession from but it is better to sign it than for it not to exist $ENKD]LDIRULQVWDQFHWKHUHWXUQRI,'3V6HYHUDO at all. For the past 15 years, the Abkhaz people respondents stressed the text of the treaty should have lived in constant fear of a new war. Even the be drafted in such a way that it does not imply Russian troops could not guarantee this would not UHFRJQLWLRQRI$ENKD]LDɋVLQGHSHQGHQFH happen. For this reason, it would be best for all the three parties to sign such an agreement.” A small number of respondents argued against VXFKDQDJUHHPHQWSRLQWLQJRXWWKDW*HRUJLD (Journalist, Tbilisi) IRXJKWDZDUZLWK5XVVLDQRW$ENKD]LD%HVLGHV 7KHPDMRULW\RIyoung respondents came signing such an agreement would be tantamount out in favour of signing the agreement. The WRUHFRJQLVLQJ$ENKD]LDɋVLQGHSHQGHQFH TSU students supported the idea almost )XUWKHUPRUH*HRUJLDQVRFLHW\LVQRW\HWUHDG\ XQDQLPRXVO\HYHQDOORZLQJIRUWKHIDFWWKDWLW for such a step. 4. Transfer of archive materials to Abkhazia The survey asked whether Georgia should help The majority of respondents were in favour Abkhazia rebuild its archives which were of handing over these archive materials GHVWUR\HGLQDILUHGXULQJWKH ɇ ZDUDQG and documents to Abkhazia in the belief hand over copies of all historical records and that this would help rebuild trust. Almost other documentary materials on Abkhazia that all similarly agreed that Georgia should DUHVWRUHGLQ*HRUJLDɋVUHSRVLWRULHV also help to restore the destroyed Abkhaz Most of the UNM representatives and archives. Several thought that Georgia supportersEDFNHGWKHLGHDZKLFKWKH\ should formally apologise for the burning of considered a humanitarian issue. They were the Sukhumi archives. Only a small number sure that it would contribute to a rapprochement of respondents said that Georgia should only EHWZHHQWKHVLGHV6HYHUDORIWKHPVSHFLILHG agree to hand over archival materials in KRZHYHUWKDWGRFXPHQWVWKDWFRXOGEHXVHG exchange for reciprocal steps by Abkhazia. DJDLQVW*HRUJLDɋVRUWKH,'3VɋLQWHUHVWVRUWR LQFLWHDQHZFRQIOLFWVKRXOGQRWEHKDQGHGRYHU Paths to Peace? A survey of public attitudes towards potential transformation of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict ɒ Georgian findings GD representatives and supporters and of those that contain state secrets or that could respondents in other categories generally be used against Georgia. An ad hoc commission thought Georgia should unconditionally hand should be created to identify such documents, over to the Abkhaz side copies of all related acting in accordance with Georgian legislation.” GRFXPHQWVLQLWVSRVVHVVLRQDQGWKDWWKLVZRXOG *'DFWLYLVWLQWHUYLHZ%DWXPL serve as a positive step in establishing relations. Several young respondents suggested that 5HVXPSWLRQRIUDLOWUDIILFWKURXJK$ENKD]LD The prospect of resuming rail traffic via Abkhazia 2QWKHZKROH GD representatives and has been a periodic topic of discussion in supporters and other respondents were in SROLWLFDODQGVRFLDOFLUFOHVLQ*HRUJLDDVZHOODV favour of the resumption of rail traffic via in the national media. $ENKD]LDDUJXLQJWKDWLWZRXOGIDFLOLWDWH rapprochement between the sides and The majority of respondents, except for the FRQWULEXWHWRWKHLUHFRQRPLFGHYHORSPHQWDQG UNM supporters and representatives, were would do more good than harm. They thought in favour of the resumption of rail traffic all the potential problems and dangers adduced via Abkhazia, although they admitted that by opponents of the proposal could be resolved it could create certain problems. In each through negotiations. category individual respondents questioned the political and economic benefit for “ Of course, many factors – political, economic, Georgia of such a move. As during the social and psychological – must be taken into discussion of other possible initiatives, account. But all this can be monitored, and all the a small number of respondents said that problems can be solved. For instance, one of the Georgia should demand that both Abkhazia major concerns is who would control the customs and Russia cede something in return. checkpoint at the Psou River, on the Russian- Georgian border in Abkhazia. This problem can be resolved through negotiations in which Most UNM representatives and supporters international organisations could participate. I assessed the proposal to resume rail traffic fully support the resumption of rail traffic.” through Abkhazia negatively. They looked at it (GD representative, interview, Adjara) ODUJHO\DVDSROLWLFDOUDWKHUWKDQDQHFRQRPLF LVVXHZKLFKUHTXLUHGWDNLQJLQWRDFFRXQWWKH The journalists and expertsEDFNHGWKHLQLWLDWLYH SROLWLFDOLQWHUHVWVRI$UPHQLD$]HUEDLMDQ5XVVLD QRWLQJWKDW*HRUJLDVKRXOGXVHDOOLWVWUDQVSRUW and other stakeholders. As a consequence they cultural and economic resources to build more see no particular benefit from resuming rail trustful relations with Abkhazia. WUDIILF QHLWKHUIRU*HRUJLDQRUIRUWUDQVIRUPLQJ “ The more intensive the volume of traffic, the more the conflict. Opening up rail traffic involves contacts and the more chances for development.” VHULRXVULVNVDQGIRUWKDWUHDVRQ*HRUJLDVKRXOG (Expert, interview, Tbilisi) abstain from doing so. They also pointed out WKDWLWFRXOGQHJDWLYHO\LPSDFWRQ*HRUJLDɋVSUR “ This railway would make it possible to shift the :HVWHUQFRXUVH%HVLGHVWKHPDMRULW\WKRXJKW focus of the conflict [from the political] to the $ENKD]LDɋVSDUWLFLSDWLRQLQWKHSURMHFWFRXOGEH economic dimension.” (Expert/Psychologist, interpreted as recognition of its independence. interview, Tbilisi) 14 ɒ Conciliation Resources Disused railway tracks in Abkhazia © Ibragim Chkadua One of the arguments against the resumption Armenia would benefit. A third group thought it ZDVWKDW5XVVLDFRXOGXVHWKHUDLOZD\WR would contribute to regional security. transport military equipment to Armenia. “ All countries in the region have specific political Supporters countered that argument by interests, which clash in some cases, but the asserting that Georgia would be able to monitor railway could facilitate economic integration and IUHLJKWWUDQVLWDFURVVLWVWHUULWRU\%HVLGHVPDQ\ bring economic benefits to all. This would create RIWKHPQRWHGWKDW“it is important for Georgia to the potential for bridging political differences. develop trade relations with Russia, and the railway Regional economic integration is not in could be particularly useful in this respect.” (GD contradiction with Georgia’s pro-Western policy.” UHSUHVHQWDWLYHLQWHUYLHZ7ELOLVL (Socialist Party Member, focus group, Tbilisi) The young respondents backed the idea of UHVWRULQJWKHUDLOVHUYLFHYLD$ENKD]LDVD\LQJ “ I think this project would benefit Georgia both that if the Abkhaz side is trying to bring about politically and economically.” (Georgian–Abkhaz WKHRSHQLQJRIWKHUDLOZD\*HRUJLDVKRXOG dialogue participant, focus group, Tbilisi) meet them halfway and demonstrate that its commitment to the de-isolation of Abkhazia goes Some participants warned against overlooking beyond mere words. In their view this would the negative aspects of regional integration. They strengthen trust between Tbilisi and Sukhumi. said the participation of Abkhazia and South Ossetia in integration processes could elevate Participants in the Georgian-Abkhaz dialogue their political status to a certain extent. and activists from political party youth wings FRQVLGHUHGWKHMXGLFLDOSROLWLFDODQGHFRQRPLF Most of the IDPs, ordinary residents, journalists aspects of the issue and discussed its potential and representatives of regional NGOs positive and negative impacts in greater unanimously agreed that the resumption of rail detail than the students. Several viewed the traffic would benefit Georgia both politically and UHVXPSWLRQRIUDLOWUDIILFDVDSROLWLFDOQRWDQ economically and help to establish relations with economic issue. The respondents disagreed over Abkhazia. They said the railway poses no danger which party would benefit most from the railway. WR*HRUJLDSURYLGHGDOOSRWHQWLDOULVNVDQG Some believed that Georgia would be the biggest problems are carefully assessed and the relevant EHQHILFLDU\ RWKHUVWKRXJKWWKDWRQO\5XVVLDDQG agreement details how traffic will be monitored: Paths to Peace? A survey of public attitudes towards potential transformation of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict ɒ Georgian findings “ The railway will facilitate increased people- better for rapprochement between the conflicting to-people contacts, and that is an opportunity parties.” (young person, focus group, Zugdidi) to rebuild trust. It would offer convenient and affordable services to travel to Russia, Armenia, Several respondents stressed that Georgia Abkhazia and elsewhere.” (Unemployed, focus should give its consent only if the benefits group, Kakheti) to the Georgian side from doing so were clearly demonstrated and if it did not mean “ The resumption of this railway service is vitally UHFRJQLWLRQRI$ENKD]LDɋVLQGHSHQGHQFH2QO\D important for the populations of Georgia and small number of respondents said they could Abkhazia. Everyone should have the opportunity not see how Georgia would benefit from the to move freely. The more such opportunities, the railway link. 6. Legalising the use of/ reopening the seaport in Abkhazia 'HVSLWH*HRUJLDɋVUHSHDWHGSURWHVWVWKH $FFRUGLQJWRDQRWKHU810UHSUHVHQWDWLYH 6XNKXPLVHDSRUWFRQWLQXHVWRIXQFWLRQ “the question of Abkhazia’s seaport, as well as DQG7XUNLVKDQG5XVVLDQYHVVHOVFDOOWKHUH its airport, can be resolved through negotiations. regularly. The issue has been raised on True, this would raise numerous legal issues. For numerous occasions in political circles and instance, both the seaport and the airport would WKHPDVVPHGLDLQ*HRUJLD'XULQJWKHVXUYH\ need an international registration code, which respondents were asked to assess whether would immediately put on the agenda the issue of it is expedient to legalise the use of the Abkhazia’s legal status. International mechanisms Sukhumi seaport. would have to be brought into play to safeguard Georgia’s interests.” (Former senior government The majority of respondents, including RIILFLDO810 UNM representatives, supported the idea, Some UNM opponents of the idea argued that but some stressed that Georgia should put by agreeing to legalise the use of the Sukhumi forward certain conditions for legalising the VHDSRUW*HRUJLDZRXOGHIIHFWLYHO\UHFRJQLVH use of the port. $ENKD]LDɋVLQGHSHQGHQFH2WKHUVQRWHGWKDW although Georgia could use the issue as a The UNM representatives and their supporters bargaining chip in its negotiations with Abkhazia had mixed opinions on the issue. But compared DQG5XVVLDLWZDVPRUHOLNHO\WRORVHRXWWKDQWR with other survey topics they took a more benefit from the opening of the seaport. positive view of this question. Most of the UHVSRQGHQWVIRXQGWKHLGHDDFFHSWDEOH 2QHRIWKHH[SHUWVQRWHGWKDW“this issue is easier provided a number of conditions are met. Only to resolve than the railway problem, because in a few respondents came out against it. Those in this case Russia will be formally excluded from favour said this issue would be easier to solve the process, although in reality it will have the than the resumption of rail traffic: “it would opportunity to participate. Nevertheless, its formal be enough for Abkhazia and Georgia to sign a exclusion would still increase the chances of joint memorandum. Besides, the opening of the striking a deal directly with Abkhazia. This is why port would contribute to rapprochement.” (UNM Georgia should make a concession to Abkhazia on Member of Parliament) this issue, as a sign of goodwill and reconciliation, even though it is unlikely to benefit from this move 2QH810UHSUHVHQWDWLYHVWDWHGWKDW “Georgia due to Russia’s behind-the-scenes role”. should promote Abkhazia’s contacts with the outside world and its participation in international The GD representatives and their supporters, projects, and Abkhazia’s seaport could be one journalists, experts and young people were such example. However, opening the seaport generally in favour of legalising the use of the is only permissible in the event that its legal 6XNKXPLVHDSRUWEHLQJFHUWDLQWKDWɇMXVWDV status is clearly determined, a treaty signed in the case of the railway – this initiative would at the international level, and effective control KHOSEULQJWKHVLGHVFORVHU$WWKHVDPHWLPH mechanisms put in place. Russia should not several of them thought it necessary to analyse participate in this process.” (Former senior DOOSRWHQWLDOULVNVEHIRUHKDQGDQGWKDW*HRUJLD official under the UNM government) VKRXOGEHDEOHWRFRQWUROWKHSRUWɋVRSHUDWLRQV 16 ɒ Conciliation Resources Harbour © Ibragim Chkadua “ Both Abkhazia and Georgia would reap political would become a strong and developed country. and economic dividends from freight transit. If the Some stressed that since the port is functioning seaport in Abkhazia contributes to Georgia’s and DQ\ZD\LWLVEHWWHUIRU*HRUJLDWROHJLWLPLVHWKLV Abkhazia’s development, it would help to bring the process and participate in it. parties closer together and promote contacts.” “ The seaport would undoubtedly facilitate (Journalist, interview, Tbilisi) Abkhazia’s development, the development of tourism and the economy, etc. If this helps A number of respondents stressed that Abkhazia become a strong and developed country, legalising the use of the port is acceptable only I would have nothing against that, even if it were LI*HRUJLDɋVSUR:HVWHUQRULHQWDWLRQGRHVQRW an independent state and not a part of Georgia. suffer as a result. Some of them thought Georgia I think that a strong and independent Abkhazia VKRXOGDJUHHWRWKHSRUWɋVRSHQLQJRQO\LQWKH would eventually be a better neighbour for event of reciprocal gestures by the Abkhaz side. Georgia than Abkhazia under Moscow’s control.” Only a small number of respondents (including some who favoured the resumption of rail traffic) (Journalist, interview, Tbilisi) VSRNHRXWDJDLQVWOHJDOLVLQJWKHXVHRIWKHSRUW In the opinion of several younger respondentsLI arguing that this would give Abkhazia greater Georgia is truly not against de-isolating Abkhazia room for manoeuvre and strengthen its claims to and wants to improve relations with the Abkhaz independent status. VLGHLWVKRXOGDJUHHWRRSHQXSWKHSRUWZLWKRXW Those in favour of opening the port thought any preconditions. They said “it is imperative to WKDWDVDIRFXVRIPXWXDOO\EHQHILFLDOFR stop blockading Abkhazia in any shape or form, RSHUDWLRQLWZRXOGFUHDWHIDYRXUDEOHJURXQGV Georgia will achieve far more in this way than by IRUUDSSURFKHPHQWEHWZHHQWKHVLGHVLQFOXGLQJ confrontation. Abkhazia is lost for Georgia anyway, ZLWK5XVVLD$WWKHVDPHWLPHWKH\VSHFLILHGWKDW but taking a step towards building relations could legalisation would in no way mean abandoning bring positive results”. *HRUJLDɋVSUR:HVWHUQRULHQWDWLRQ Among those in favour of opening the port Individual respondents who categorically several suggested that a new port be built as a supported the idea of legalisation as an MRLQWYHQWXUHLQYROYLQJVHYHUDOSDUWQHUV,WFRXOG important part in an overall de-isolation strategy EHFRPHDQLPSRUWDQWWUDQVSRUWKXEXQGHUMRLQW ZHUHHYHQUHDG\WRUHFRJQLVH$ENKD]LDɋV management and a basis for mutually beneficial independence if this meant that the latter co-operation: Paths to Peace? A survey of public attitudes towards potential transformation of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict ɒ Georgian findings “ A joint seaport, with the participation of Abkhazia, use its services. Several IDP respondents also Georgia and international bodies, would preclude proposed organising regular flights from Sukhumi a new war. A shared port would be a peace WR.XWDLVLDQG%DWXPL7KH\VDLG%DWXPLZRXOGEH initiative in its own right. Russia’s interests also particularly attractive as a destination to residents need to be taken into account, and Russia needs RI$ENKD]LDDVLWZRXOGHQDEOHWKHPWRJRRQ to be invited to join the project. This would have VKRSSLQJWULSVDQGYLVLWUHODWLYHVLQ7XUNH\DQG a positive impact on the peace process and co- DOORZWKHGHVFHQGDQWVRI$ENKD]0XNKDGMLUVLQ operation between the sides. The port should be Syria and Turkey to visit Abkhazia. placed under offshore management.” (Expert, The ordinary residents, journalists and interview, Tbilisi) representatives of regional NGOs were generally Although most of the IDPs did not seem cautious about the prospect of legalising the SDUWLFXODUO\LQWHUHVWHGLQWKLVTXHVWLRQD use of the Sukhumi port. Some supported the considerable number nonetheless came out idea with the caveat that Georgia should consent in favour of legalising the use of the Sukhumi only if Abkhazia made some concessions in seaport as an important factor in strengthening return. Those who opposed opening the port trust between the sides. Some respondents IHOWLWFRXOGOHDGWRWKHUHFRJQLWLRQRI$ENKD]LDɋV thought that Georgia should ask for reciprocal independence and that Georgia would be unable concessions from the Abkhaz side in return. WRFRQWUROWKHSRUWɋVRSHUDWLRQV2QO\DVPDOO Several stressed that the Sukhumi port should number of respondents advocated opening the allow Georgian ships from Batumi to dock there port without any preconditions. WRRWRPDNHLWSRVVLEOHIRUWKH*HRUJLDQVWR )UHHGRPRIPRYHPHQW The question of freedom of movement as put The vast majority of respondents, except for to respondents in the course of the survey some UNM representatives and supporters, comprised three main aspects: and a few respondents in other categories, 1. International travel for residents of agreed that residents of Abkhazia have the Abkhazia2 right to complete freedom of movement, 2. The possibility for young people in Abkhazia and young Abkhazians should have the to study at Western universities opportunity to study at foreign universities. UNM supporters and some of the 3. Recognition of the Abkhazian passport as respondents in other categories said that internal identity document within Georgia. as a travel document residents of Abkhazia 7KHPDMRULW\RIUHVSRQGHQWVNQHZYHU\OLWWOH should use Georgian passports or the so- about the different aspects of the freedom of called neutral passports issued by Georgia. PRYHPHQWLVVXH)RULQVWDQFHWKH\KDGQRLGHD Some proposed the idea of a neutral travel what kind of identity or travel documents document issued by an international body. UHVLGHQWVRI$ENKD]LDLQFOXGLQJWKRVHLQWKH*DOL Only very few respondents agreed to the UHJLRQFXUUHQWO\XVH prospect of Abkhazian passports being used as travel documents; while almost all respondents, with the exception of the UNM representatives and supporters, agreed with the idea of recognising them as valid identity documents within Georgia. 5HVLGHQWVRI$ENKD]LDSRVVHVVRUPD\SRVVHVVRQHRU PRUHRIWKHIROORZLQJILYHLGHQWLW\GRFXPHQWV D5XVVLDQ SDVVSRUWLVVXHGRQ5XVVLDQWHUULWRU\ D5XVVLDQSDVVSRUW LVVXHGRQ$ENKD]LDQWHUULWRU\E\WKH5XVVLDQFRQVXODWH an Abkhazian passport; a Georgian passport; the so-called neutral passport introduced by the Saakashvili government and issued by the Georgian authorities. 18 ɒ Conciliation Resources 7.1 International travel for residents of Abkhazia UNM representatives and their supporters DJUHHGWKDW$ENKD]UHVLGHQWVVKRXOGHQMR\ IUHHGRPRIPRYHPHQW$WWKHVDPHWLPH KRZHYHUWKH\FDPHRXWDJDLQVWUHFRJQLWLRQE\ *HRUJLDRI$ENKD]LDQSDVVSRUWVRURI5XVVLDQ passports issued to residents of Abkhazia. In WKHLURSLQLRQLI$ENKD]LDQUHVLGHQWVUHMHFW Georgian passports they should use the neutral passport issued by Georgia. As one UNM PHPEHUVDLGWKHUHLVQRQHHGWRLQYHQWRWKHU types of identity documents for residents of $ENKD]LDDV“no other document is more neutral than the one issued by Georgia.” Another UNM representative argued that an internationally issued neutral passport in practice meant WKH.RVRYRɊPRGHOɋWKDWEHLQJUHFRJQLWLRQRI $ENKD]LDɋVLQGHSHQGHQFH5HVSRQGHQWVWKRXJKW WKDW$ENKD]LDɋVUHMHFWLRQRIWKH*HRUJLDLVVXHG 7RS 5XVVLDQSDVVSRUWLVVXHGDWWKHɊ5XVVLDQ(PEDVV\LQ $ENKD]LDɋ neutral passports was intended to put pressure 0LGGOH 5XVVLDQSDVVSRUWLVVXHGLQWKH5XVVLDQ)HGHUDWLRQ on the international community to recognise Below: Neutral travel document issued by the Georgian $ENKD]LDɋVLQGHSHQGHQFH,QWKHVDPHZD\ authorities WKH\DUJXHGGRHVLWSRVHDWKUHDWWR*HRUJLDɋV interests when the international community DFFHSWV5XVVLDQSDVVSRUWVLVVXHGWR$ENKD]LDQ UHVLGHQWVE\WKH5XVVLDQFRQVXODWHLQ$ENKD]LD Therefore the Georgia-issued neutral passport is the only acceptable option for Georgia. According WR810VXSSRUWHUVWKHLGHDRIWKHQHXWUDO SDVVSRUWVLVDOUHDG\ZRUNLQJLQSUDFWLFHDQG WKH\VD\VRPHUHVLGHQWVRI$ENKD]LDKDYH obtained the neutral passport but prefer to keep LWDVHFUHW*UDGXDOO\PRUHDQGPRUH$ENKD]LDQ residents will accept such documents. Several respondents noted that unilateral concessions to Abkhazia by Georgia on passport- related issues would not advance the peace SURFHVV2QWKHFRQWUDU\WKH\ZRXOGVHUYHWR MXVWLI\WKH5XVVLDQRFFXSDWLRQ*HRUJLDKDV already made a unilateral compromise by RIIHULQJWKHQHXWUDOSDVVSRUWDQGLWLVQRZXSWR Abkhazia to make reciprocal concessions. GD representatives and their supporters, and respondents from all other categories were on the whole in favour of granting residents of Abkhazia full freedom of movement. They said ordinary people living in the conflict zone should not suffer from the wrong decisions and mistakes made by politicians and governments that unleash conflicts and wars. Their rights should be protected in the same way as the rights of other residents of Georgia – they should have what they consider acceptable travel and Paths to Peace? A survey of public attitudes towards potential transformation of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict ɒ Georgian findings LGHQWLW\GRFXPHQWVLQFOXGLQJLIUHTXLUHGDQ opportunities to travel in Europe as Georgian “international passport”. Some respondents citizens do. Let’s stop talking about territories XUJHGFDXWLRQKRZHYHUDQGVXJJHVWHGWKDWWKH and independence. Let’s just open up the world to neutral passport offered by Georgia constitutes a them, and they will respond with reciprocal proper solution for residents of Abkhazia. co-operation.” (Journalist, interview, Tbilisi) A considerable number of respondents said they understand why the Georgia-issued neutral 7.2 Opportunities for young people in passport is unacceptable for residents of Abkhazia to study at Western universities Abkhazia. But at the current stage they see no Because of the problems connected with other concrete solution to the problem except for IUHHGRPRIPRYHPHQWLQSDUWLFXODUWKHSDVVSRUW DQɊLQWHUQDWLRQDOQHXWUDOSDVVSRUWɋ RQHLVVXHG SUREOHP\RXQJSHRSOHIURP$ENKD]LDH[SHULHQFH E\DQLQWHUQDWLRQDOERG\ SURYLGHGWKLVZDVD serious difficulties in enrolling at Western possibility from a legal point of view and did universities. Many foreign countries where they not contravene international law. Several IDPs would like to study will not issue visas on the who backed the idea of an ‘international neutral EDVLVRI5XVVLDQRU$ENKD]LDQSDVVSRUWV SDVVSRUWɋSRLQWHGRXWWKDWɍthere are precedents $FFRUGLQJWRWKHPDMRULW\RIWKHUNM in international practice; such passports are in representatives and their supportersWKHPRUH use in Cyprus, for example.” Several respondents young people from Abkhazia study at Western stressed that this option would be acceptable XQLYHUVLWLHVWKHEHWWHU$WWKHVDPHWLPHDOO RQO\LILWGRHVQRWHQFURDFKRQ*HRUJLDɋV respondents were unanimous that residents sovereignty. RI$ENKD]LDLQFOXGLQJ\RXQJSHRSOHVKRXOG Several respondents agreed to legalise the hold Georgian identity documents. Individual Abkhazian passport as a valid travel document. respondents were categorically against any ,QWKHLURSLQLRQ*HRUJLDɋVLQWHUHVWVZRXOG concessions to Abkhazia in this regard. be better served by allowing residents of “ What I’m saying may sound harsh from a Abkhazia to travel using Abkhazian rather than human rights perspective, but I’m against any 5XVVLDQSDVVSRUWVLQVRIDUDVWKLVZRXOGOHVVHQ concessions to young people. If they want to $ENKD]LDɋVGHSHQGHQFHRQ5XVVLD study at Western universities, they should accept Most of the young respondents unequivocally Georgian passports. It’s not Georgia that requires favoured WKHFRQFHSWRIIUHHGRPRIPRYHPHQW this of them, but international law.” (UNM bearing in mind that some were much better Member of Parliament, interview, Tbilisi) informed about this issue than others. Participants of Georgian–Abkhaz youth dialogue Only one respondent in this category said that initiatives commented that the Saakashvili receiving a decent education is so important that government used the passport issue to Georgia should agree to certain exceptions and ɊEODFNPDLOɋ$ENKD]LD7KHWLPHKDVFRPHWR compromises on travel documents for residents discuss the problem directly with the Abkhaz of Abkhazia. side and reach a mutually acceptable solution. 7KHPDMRULW\RIGD representatives and “ I understand the Abkhaz, their attitude to supporters and respondents from other Georgian passports. It would be good to categories supported the idea of letting discuss with them the question of passports, young people from Abkhazia study at Western independence, etc. Like the Georgians, they universities. They said the Georgian government want to build an independent state. They paid should do everything it can to make this happen: for their independence with their blood; every it should include young Abkhaz in the relevant Abkhaz family was affected. With its approach SURJUDPPHVJUDQWWKHPIUHHGRPRIPRYHPHQW Georgia is pushing Abkhazia closer to Russia. For and use all available international legal mechanisms to give young people from Abkhazia instance, we take a hard line on the problem of the chance to attend Western universities. identity documents and use the ‘passport issue’ to blackmail them, so they respond by saying – we “ All young people should have the chance to do not need your passport.” (Journalist, interview, exercise their right to education.” (Journalist, Tbilisi) focus group, Kakheti) “ The Abkhaz people should not live in isolation. “ The Georgian government should support the It is better for everyone if they have the same young Abkhaz in every way possible, make it 20 ɒ Conciliation Resources 7.3 Recognition of the Abkhazian passport as an internal identity document within Georgia The idea to recognise the Abkhazian passport as a valid identity (ID) document inside Georgia was first put forward in 2011 by then opposition Boys playing football in Abkhazia © Ibragim Chkadua figure Paata Zakareishvili under the previous Paths to Peace? A survey of public attitudes towards potential transformation of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict ɒ Georgian findings JRYHUQPHQW$IWHUWKHFKDQJHRIUHJLPH a valid identity document in Georgia. Given that Zakareishvili was appointed State Minister for residents of Abkhazia refuse to take Georgian 5HLQWHJUDWLRQ UHQDPHGLQ-DQXDU\DV6WDWH SDVVSRUWVDQGEHFDXVHRQWKHLQWHUQDWLRQDOOHYHO 0LQLVWU\IRU5HFRQFLOLDWLRQDQG&LYLF(TXDOLW\ DQG Abkhazia is de jureSDUWRI*HRUJLDQWHUULWRU\LW again floated this proposal for discussion. would be only logical to legalise the Abkhazian passports as valid identity documents in Georgia. The UNM representatives and their supporters Their holders would be entitled to all kinds of KDYHDOZD\VEHHQDJDLQVWWKLVVXJJHVWLRQDQG social benefits available to Georgian citizens. still are. In the words of one survey participant They felt this would contribute to establishing from this group: “If a passport is required personal contacts and building trust. to identify a person, one can use on territory controlled by Georgia either a birth certificate or Only a small number of respondents were a Russian passport. Both those documents are VFHSWLFDODERXWWKHLGHDFDOOLQJLW“legally absurd”. perfectly legitimate. An Abkhazian passport is not suitable for this purpose as it lacks validity.” “ People should not be forced to choose between their principles and getting help. If they are not The GD representatives consider recognising the faced with such a dilemma, i.e. if the Abkhazian Abkhazian passport as a valid identity document passport is recognised as valid in Georgia, they LQ*HRUJLDTXLWHDFFHSWDEOHEXWGRQRWFRQVLGHULW would become more favourably disposed.” necessary as residents of Abkhazia can freely use their Abkhazian ID cards to obtain social benefits (Expert, interview, Tbilisi) LQ*HRUJLD7KHPDMRULW\DOVRWKRXJKWWKDWHYHQLI “ Does it really matter what document they the Georgian authorities recognised Abkhazian have when they cross over to this side? What passports as a valid identity document within information does the passport contain about *HRUJLDWKLVZRXOGLQQRZD\PHDQUHFRJQLVLQJ its holder? Their name and address. Any other $ENKD]LDɋVLQGHSHQGHQFH document would contain the same information. Respondents from all other categories almost What difference does it make? It would be even unanimously gave a positive assessment to the better – we shall know that this person comes proposal to recognise the Abkhazian passport as from Abkhazia.” (IDP, focus group) 8. Legal status of the population in the Gali region/ $FNQRZOHGJHPHQWE\*HRUJLDRI,'3VɋUHWXUQWR*DOL WKHPDUHUHJLVWHUHGDV,'3VLQ*HRUJLDZKLOHLQ Almost all survey participants noted how Abkhazia they are viewed as refugees that have de difficult it is to solve these problems. But a factoUHWXUQHG$FFRUGLQJWRDYDLODEOHGDWDVRPH majority of respondents in all categories, RIWKHPKROGD*HRUJLDQSDVVSRUW FLWL]HQVKLS DV except for the UNM representatives and their ZHOODVDQ$ENKD]LDQRU5XVVLDQSDVVSRUWDQG supporters, believed that Georgia should some have a neutral passport as well. The Abkhaz find an appropriate legal framework to VLGHKDVPRUHWKDQRQFHUHMHFWHGDVXQMXVW acknowledge the return of Georgian IDPs to *HRUJLDɋVDFFXVDWLRQVWKDWWKH$ENKD]LDQ Gali. They said this would facilitate dialogue authorities do not allow IDPs to return to their between the sides and improve the situation of homes. It maintains that a considerable number the Georgian population in Gali. Respondents of IDPs have already returned to Abkhazia with did not have a clear answer with regard to the de factoJRYHUQPHQWɋVDSSURYDOEXW7ELOLVLLV what official status the Georgian residents of unwilling to acknowledge this. Gali should have. Most of them thought these The UNM representatives and supporters people should retain their IDP status for the considered it politically inexpedient for Georgia time being, as it entitles them to certain socio- to recognise Georgian residents of Gali as economic benefits. returned IDPs: “If Georgia agrees with the Abkhaz position and recognises the Georgian residents of Gali as IDPs that have returned, the repatriation $FFRUGLQJWRYDULRXVGLIIHUHQWVRXUFHVVRPH question in general could be considered closed. ɇHWKQLF*HRUJLDQVFXUUHQWO\OLYHLQ That is why it would be wrong to acknowledge the the Gali District of Abkhazia. A large number of return of the IDPs to Gali.” 22 ɒ Conciliation Resources :LWKUHJDUGWRWKH*DOL,'3VɋSDVVSRUWVDQG the Gali region could be an important positive FLWL]HQVKLSUHSUHVHQWDWLYHVDQGVXSSRUWHUVRI strategic step towards dialogue between the the UNM said that they should have Georgian VLGHV%HVLGHVDVVRPHUHVSRQGHQWVQRWHGLW passports and Georgian citizenship. At the would enable the Georgian population of Gali to VDPHWLPHWKH\VWUHVVHGWKDWWKH\FRQVLGHU receive international humanitarian aid. it acceptable for Gali residents to be issued Several respondents cited international norms Abkhazian passports and granted citizenship of to argue that at the current stage Georgian XQUHFRJQLVHG$ENKD]LDDVɍthe main thing is that residents of Gali should not be stripped of their the rights of Georgian IDPs in Gali are not violated.” IDP status; also that they cannot unequivocally “ If the Abkhaz side wants to issue Abkhazian qualify as repatriated IDPs since their return fell passports to Georgian residents of Gali, and if short of international norms and the UN guiding some of the Gali Georgians decide to become principles on internal displacement. Abkhazian [citizens], that’s their business. But the Georgian authorities should not turn their Other respondents argued that Georgia should back on their own citizens by recognising them as recognise the return of Georgian IDPs to Gali citizens of an occupied territory.” (UNM Member only if it is certain that doing so would improve of Parliament, interview, Tbilisi) their situation. In this case Abkhazia needs to assume responsibility for the security of the The UNM representatives explained that under *DOL*HRUJLDQVJXDUDQWHHWKHPGHFHQWOLYLQJ DOOLQWHUQDWLRQDOODZV,'3VKDYHDULJKWWR FRQGLWLRQVDQGDJUHHWRSD\WKHPFRPSHQVDWLRQ UHWXUQDQGWKH$ENKD]LDQDXWKRULWLHVDUHZHOO and so forth. aware of this. That is why they keep saying that Some respondents (mostly IDPs and young they have abided by this law and permitted people) stressed that no one facilitated the WKH,'3VWRUHWXUQWR*DOL,QUHDOLW\WKH,'3V return of Georgians to Gali. They returned on UHWXUQHGRIWKHLURZQDFFRUGDQGWKH$ENKD]LDQ WKHLURZQLQLWLDWLYHDWWKHLURZQULVNZLWKRXWDQ\ authorities simply had to accommodate them. support either from Georgia or from Abkhazia. “But this cannot be regarded as a proper return They were not only faced with serious security because the basic criteria have not been met – the SUREOHPVDQGHFRQRPLFGLIILFXOWLHVEXWKDG repatriation must be safe, dignified, well organised to withstand tremendous moral pressure: in and institutionalised. Besides, the Georgian Georgia they were considered traitors and in residents of Gali did not in fact flee Abkhazia – they $ENKD]LDWKH\ZHUHQɋWWUXVWHG7KHDXWKRULWLHV left their homes for a short time during the war and politicians tried to manipulate them and use and were back a week later.” (Former government them for their own political ends. RIILFLDO8107ELOLVL Paths to Peace? A survey of public attitudes towards potential transformation of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict ɒ Georgian findings Many respondents said the Gali Georgians two sides should work together to try to solve VKRXOGQRWUHMHFW*HRUJLDQFLWL]HQVKLSWKH\ WKHSUREOHPVRIWKH*DOLUHVLGHQWVLQFOXGLQJ should officially have dual citizenship: Abkhazian that of their security. The status of the Georgian and Georgian. They should retain their IDP status population of the Gali region should become at the current stage as otherwise they will not be one of the main items of discussion between able to claim benefits and other social assistance the sides. In order to reach a compromise in IURP*HRUJLD3URFHHGLQJIURPWKLVXQWLODOOWKH WKLVUHJDUGWKHRSLQLRQRIWKH*DOL*HRUJLDQV SROLWLFDOGLVDJUHHPHQWVDUHILQDOO\UHVROYHGWKH themselves needs to be solicited. 4XHVWLRQVFRQFHUQLQJWKHUHWXUQRIGLVSODFHGSHUVRQV 5HVSRQGHQWVZHUHDVNHGZKHWKHU*HRUJLD mechanisms to ensure the IDPs can return to should initiate direct talks with Abkhazia on the their homes. Only when asked a second time to UHWXUQRI,'3VWRDOOUHJLRQVRI$ENKD]LDDQG be more specific and consider whether return whether a discussion of this issue could lead to DVDWRSLFZRXOGFRQWULEXWHWRUDSSURFKHPHQW improved relations between the sides. did they admit that as this is the most sensitive question for Abkhazia it is unlikely to bring Most of the respondents replied that it is about a warming in relations between the sides. inexpedient to put the issue on the agenda The respondents also said they see no prospect at the current stage, because it is one of of the problem being resolved in the near future. the most sensitive issues for both sides. On The GD representatives and their supporters the other hand, many respondents noted and all other respondents also believed that that the issue should remain one of the the return of the IDPs is one of the central most important ones in Georgian–Abkhaz points of disagreement between the Abkhaz relations. and Georgians and it would be absurd to put it forward for discussion as a way to facilitate 5HVSRQGLQJWRWKLVTXHVWLRQWKHPDMRULW\RIWKH rapprochement. It must be clear from the UNM representatives and supporters initially outset that at the present stage such a move confined themselves to general phrases about would only fuel tensions between Sukhumi how Georgia should use all available means and and Tbilisi. 5DLOZD\WUDFNVQHDUDQ,'3VHWWOHPHQWLQ6DPHJUHORUHJLRQk'DWR0HVNKL 24 ɒ Conciliation Resources 10. Jointly resolving security-related issues in the Gali region ,QUHFHQW\HDUVVHFXULW\UHODWHGSUREOHPVLQ bilateral Georgian–Abkhazian monitoring process. Gali have been discussed repeatedly at the If it weren’t for the Russian troops, we would *HQHYDWDONVWKH,QFLGHQW3UHYHQWLRQDQG have settled all the problems ourselves.” (UNM 5HVSRQVH0HFKDQLVP ,350 PHHWLQJVDQG representative, interview, Zugdidi) LQWKH*HRUJLDQPHGLD5HVSRQGHQWVZHUH DVNHGWRFRQVLGHUZKHWKHUMRLQWGLVFXVVLRQRI The GD representatives and supporters, the problems facing local communities in the journalists, experts, young people, IDPs and *DOLUHJLRQMRLQWKXPDQULJKWVPRQLWRULQJDQG ordinary citizens agreed that Abkhazians and MRLQWSODQQLQJRIPHDVXUHVWRDGGUHVVWKHVH *HRUJLDQVVKRXOGMRLQWO\WDFNOHWKHSUREOHPRI problems would contribute to the confidence- security for Gali residents. Some respondents EXLOGLQJSURFHVV:LWKLQWKDWFRQWH[WWKH DGYLVHGDPRUHIOH[LEOHSROLF\JLYHQWKH expediency of allowing free access to Gali for SUHVHQFHRIWKH5XVVLDQWURRSVLQ$ENKD]LD international organisations and observers DQGSURSRVHGORRNLQJIRUZD\VWRLQYROYH5XVVLD ZDVDOVRGLVFXVVHGLQFOXGLQJWKHSRWHQWLDO LQWKHMRLQW*HRUJLDQɇ$ENKD]LDQPRQLWRULQJ consequences of such a step for each of the Individual respondents were against sides of the conflict. 5XVVLDɋVbSDUWLFLSDWLRQ The respondents said they would welcome Almost all respondents supported the idea the deployment of international observers in of jointly resolving problems in the Gali Abkhazia. They said this would benefit both region. Most of them were also in favour Abkhazia and Georgia and would contribute to of granting access to Gali for international establishing relations between the sides. Many organisations and observers. Many emphasised that the presence of international respondents pointed out that Georgia observers would open up new opportunities has always advocated the presence of IRUWKHGHYHORSPHQWRI$ENKD]LDEXWWKDWWKH international observers in Gali, while Abkhaz side would agree to provide access to Abkhazia was against it. international organisations only in the event that their local offices would be independent from their representative missions in Tbilisi. 5HVSRQGHQWVSURSRVHGWKHIROORZLQJPRQLWRULQJ Several respondents considered it necessary to models for the Gali region: WDNH6XNKXPLɋVSRVLWLRQLQWRDFFRXQWDQGILQG 1. Joint Abkhazian–Georgian monitoring/patrols a way to ensure the presence of international organisations that would be acceptable to 2. Joint Abkhazian–Georgian monitoring with the the Abkhazians. participation of international organisations The main arguments in favour of the deployment ,QWHUQDWLRQDOPRQLWRULQJ of international observers in Gali and the rest 4. Joint Abkhazian–Georgian monitoring with of Abkhazia were that this would facilitate the 5XVVLDQSDUWLFLSDWLRQ economic growth and cultural development RI$ENKD]LD SUHVHUYLQJLWVQDWLRQDOLGHQWLW\ The UNM representatives and supporters UHVROYLQJVHFXULW\SUREOHPVDQGGLVWDQFLQJ accused Abkhazia of preventing a positive $ENKD]LDIURP5XVVLD outcome by adopting an uncooperative stance at WKH*HQHYDWDONVDQG,350PHHWLQJV7KH\IXOO\ “ The presence of international missions would supported the idea of international monitoring benefit not only Georgia in defending the rights LQ*DOLDQG$ENKD]LDDVDZKROHEXWVWUHVVHG of its citizens in Abkhazia, but also the Abkhaz that the Abkhaz side will inevitably block themselves. They would have more opportunities such initiatives. Individual respondents in this and a broader choice.” (GD Member of the FDWHJRU\EDFNHGWKHLGHDRIMRLQW$ENKD]LDQɇ Supreme Council of Adjara, interview) Georgian patrols. “ The Abkhaz view international organisations “ Since we’re unable to ensure the security of the as Georgia’s agents, not as neutral mediators. Gali population by ourselves, it’s imperative to We need to help them start to trust Western involve international organisations and organise a organisations. To do that, those organisations Paths to Peace? A survey of public attitudes towards potential transformation of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict ɒ Georgian findings Police station in the Gali region © Olesya Vartanyan should take into account the concerns and Individual respondents argued that there is no interests of the Abkhaz side, inform Abkhaz point in discussing this issue with the Abkhazian society in detail about their tasks and objectives VLGHEHFDXVH$ENKD]LDLVZKROO\SUR5XVVLDQ in Abkhazia, and find a monitoring format that and has no desire for rapprochement with would be acceptable for the Abkhaz.” (Journalist, the West. interview, Tbilisi) Several respondents said international “ The presence of international observers PRQLWRULQJZRXOGPDNHQRGLIIHUHQFHDVLQ in Abkhazia would not only preclude a new practice the observers would not be able to escalation of the conflict, but also facilitate influence events on the ground. Abkhazia’s development.” (Psychologist, interview, When asked about the crime situation in Tbilisi) *DOLVHYHUDOUHVSRQGHQWVGHVFULEHGIUHTXHQW “ The presence of international observers on EXUJODULHVDWWDFNVDQGNLGQDSSLQJV$WWKHVDPH Abkhazian territory is important for Georgia, as time they pointed out that ethnic Georgians their reports would shed light on what is going tend to be involved in such criminal activity on there. It would be beneficial for the Abkhaz as WRJHWKHUZLWKWKH$ENKD]DOWKRXJKWKH*HRUJLDQ well – they, too, want peace and stability in Gali.” side usually tries to offload the blame onto the (IDP, Synergy member) $ENKD]DQGWKH5XVVLDQV 26 ɒ Conciliation Resources 11. The possibility of opening a UNESCO representation in Abkhazia ,QWKHFRQWH[WRILQWHUQDWLRQDORUJDQLVDWLRQVɋ $ENKD]LDWKLQNLQJWKLVZRXOGFRQWULEXWHERWK DFFHVVWR$ENKD]LDUHVSRQGHQWVORRNHGDWWKH WRWKHFRQVHUYDWLRQRIPRQXPHQWVDQGWRWKH SURVSHFWVIRU81(6&2DQRUJDQLVDWLRQWKDW FRQILGHQFHEXLOGLQJSURFHVVDQGZRXOGDOVR IRFXVHVRQFXOWXUDOPRQXPHQWVQRWSROLWLFV PDNHLWSRVVLEOHWR“integrate Abkhazia into the opening an office in Sukhumi. The Georgian Western world.” ,'36\QHUJ\PHPEHU media have repeatedly warned that Georgian Several respondents said that apart from cultural and historic monuments on Abkhazian WKHFRQVHUYDWLRQRIPRQXPHQWV81(6&2ɋV territory are in danger of disappearing. The SUHVHQFH“would remind the Abkhaz of their previous government (UNM) insisted that historical ties with Georgia.” (Focus group of UNESCO could only work in Abkhazia with RUGLQDU\FLWL]HQV%DWXPL 7ELOLVLɋVDSSURYDO ,QFRQWUDVWWRWKH810VXSSRUWHUVWKHVH Most respondents were in favour of respondents did not demand that UNESCO granting UNESCO access to Abkhazia and FRRSHUDWHZLWK$ENKD]LDɍRQO\WKURXJK*HRUJLDɎ thought this would ensure the conservation “ UNESCO could help determine the real condition of cultural monuments and bring the sides of monuments in Abkhazia.” (Journalist, closer together. A relatively small number interview, Tbilisi) of respondents thought that Abkhazia has little interest in this. Few respondents “ UNESCO should have an office in Abkhazia. It’s were sceptical, saying UNESCO’s presence not just about visiting, inspecting and evaluating, in Abkhazia would not impact on the state it means implementing various projects to protect of cultural monuments or on relations cultural heritage. Georgian and Abkhaz experts between the sides. would work shoulder to shoulder together with UNESCO specialists and this would be a step towards rapprochement. Both sides would benefit The UNM representatives and supporters as a result.” (Teacher, focus group, Tbilisi) ZHUHQRWXQDQLPRXVRQWKHLVVXH7KHPDMRULW\ of them focused on the political aspect of the $FFRUGLQJWRRQHH[SHUWWKHSUREOHPRI SUREOHPVXJJHVWLQJWKDWWKH*HRUJLDQVLGH 81(6&2ɋVSUHVHQFHLQ$ENKD]LDOLNHPDQ\ should be able to control and coordinate all RWKHULVVXHVLVRYHUSROLWLFLVHG “We need to UNESCO programmes and activities in Abkhazia. abandon political radicalism and get serious They said the Abkhaz side is trying to ensure about preserving historic monuments. UNESCO’s WKDW81(6&2ZRUNVZLWK$ENKD]LDGLUHFWO\ activities would benefit both sides and bring them VLGHVWHSSLQJ7ELOLVLLQRUGHUWRGHPRQVWUDWH closer together.” once again that it is an independent state. And Many respondents expressed concern over the WKLVWKH\VD\PXVWQRWEHDOORZHG poor state of cultural and historic monuments “ UNESCO can co-operate with Abkhazia only as in Abkhazia as a whole. Individual respondents part of Georgia, not as an independent country. also thought it important to pay attention to It is necessary to preclude any actions at all that the preservation of the Abkhaz language in could be interpreted as international recognition this context: of Abkhazia’s independence.” (Journalist, “ Thought should be given to preserving the interview, Tbilisi) Abkhaz language. A proposal could be submitted Several UNM representatives would agree to the Endangered Languages Fund and to direct bilateral cooperation between qualified experts invited to help develop targeted 81(6&2DQG$ENKD]LDE\SDVVLQJ7ELOLVLRQ programmes to preserve the Abkhaz language, the assumption that it would facilitate conflict which is ranked ninth in the UNESCO list of UHVROXWLRQ+RZHYHUWKH\WKRXJKW$ENKD]LDKDG disappearing languages.” (IDP from Abkhazia, no interest in this. interview) The GD representatives and supporters, A small number of respondents were sceptical and respondents from other categories DERXW81(6&2ɋVDFWLYLWLHV7KH\QRWHGWKDW were in favour of a UNESCO presence in the conservation of historic monuments is a Paths to Peace? A survey of public attitudes towards potential transformation of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict ɒ Georgian findings VHULRXVSUREOHPIRUWKHZKROHRI*HRUJLDEXW ZRQGHULQJ“if UNESCO embarks on direct 81(6&2ɋVSUHVHQFHLQ*HRUJLDKDVGRQHQRWKLQJ cooperation with Abkhazia, bypassing Tbilisi, could to alleviate it. that not be interpreted as recognition of Abkhazia’s independence?” 1*2DFWLYLVW=XJGLGL ,QGLYLGXDO,'3UHVSRQGHQWVH[SUHVVHGFRQFHUQ 12. The Abkhazian Government-in-Exile There has been a long-running debate in The GD representatives and other respondents Georgian political circles and civil society about explained that the government-in-exile has a the functions and activities of the so-called purely symbolic role and lacks real functions. JRYHUQPHQWLQH[LOH*HRUJLDɋVDWWDFKPHQWWR It exists solely to be displayed to international RIILFLDOERGLHVZKLFK*HRUJLDQRIILFLDOVRXUFHV RUJDQLVDWLRQV$FFRUGLQJWRRQHH[SHUWWKLVLV UHIHUWRDVɍWKHOHJLWLPDWHJRYHUQPHQWRI a potentially damaging position for Georgia. $ENKD]LDɎLUULWDWHVWKH$ENKD]VLGH$VSDUW Several respondents questioned the legitimacy RIWKHVXUYH\UHVSRQGHQWVZHUHDVNHGWR RIWKLVLQVWLWXWLRQVWUHVVLQJWKDWWKH,'3V assess whether the continued existence of this were not given a single chance to elect their ɊJRYHUQPHQWɋLVH[SHGLHQW representatives since they were displaced from Abkhazia. Many complained about the fact that The vast majority of the respondents, the government-in-exile receives significant except for the UNM supporters, came out allocations from the Georgian budget while in in favour of disbanding or downgrading fact it fulfils no real functions. the official status of the ‘legitimate “ The Mayor of Sukhumi sits in Tbilisi with nothing government of Abkhazia’. Those who to do, but he receives a handsome salary from the advocated disbanding it cited two main [state] budget.” (IDP, Synergy member) reasons: first, this government is unable to fulfil its functions and, second, it would “ It’s a completely inadequate institution in many be a step towards improving relations with respects. But most importantly, its existence is the Abkhaz. politically disadvantageous. Besides, it’s a heavy burden on the state budget.” (Expert, interview, Tbilisi) The UNM representatives and supporters were firmly opposed to the abolition of the A considerable number of respondents were government-in-exile. They felt this structure unanimous in their desire to see the Supreme plays an important political role and represents Soviet and the government of Abkhazia in residents of Abkhazia in exile – the Georgian H[LOHDEROLVKHGLQVRIDUDVɍthese structures ,'3V%HVLGHVLQWKHLUZRUGVWKHUHVKRXOGEHQR are a mere formality, a fake.” Others proposed unilateral concessions without serious reciprocal downgrading the government to a department steps on the part of the Abkhaz side. and reducing its staff. This would be perfectly DGHTXDWHWRFDWHUIRUWKHQHHGVRIWKH,'3V “ Even if this government does not fulfil its who are the people it is supposed to represent. functions, this does not justify its disbandment, as Some respondents thought that it could survive it plays an important political role. It is a reminder as an advisory board only. Several respondents both to the Abkhaz and to the international (mainly ordinary citizens) suggested that the community that this government was expelled government-in-exile should be preserved in its from Abkhazia.” (UNM Member of Parliament, current form for symbolic purposes. interview, Tbilisi) “ This government should continue to exist until we recover Abkhazia.” (UNM representative, interview, Adjara) 28 ɒ Conciliation Resources 7KHVLJQLILFDQFHRIV\PEROLFJHVWXUHV 5HVSRQGHQWVZHUHDVNHGWRDVVHVVWKHSRWHQWLDO GD representatives and supporters, journalists impact of symbolic moral and psychological and experts, and young people were in favour of steps on confidence-building efforts – using the apologising to war victims and the Abkhaz people H[DPSOHRIWKHɊ6RUU\ɋ&DPSDLJQLQLWLDWHGE\ DQGDFNQRZOHGJLQJ*HRUJLDɋVPLVWDNHV7KH\IHOW 8FKD1DQXDVKYLOLWKHQFKDLUPDQRIWKH+XPDQ this would facilitate dialogue between the sides. 5LJKWV&HQWUHLQ7KHLGHDEHKLQGWKH 5HVSRQGHQWVFLWHGKLVWRULFDOH[DPSOHVDWWHVWLQJ campaign was to offer an apology to those who to the usefulness of such symbolic gestures. had suffered during the war. $WWKHVDPHWLPHWKH\HPSKDVLVHGWKDWVRUU\ FDPSDLJQVPXVWQRWEHLQSUHWHQFHEXWUDWKHU an honest and sincere admission of mistakes. Most of the respondents supported symbolic Otherwise they would yield negative results. Nor initiatives such as the ‘Sorry’ Campaign. At should one expect or demand reciprocal actions. the same time, they stressed the need to establish an appropriate format for such “ I understand that it’s hard to apologise, especially campaigns and hold a broad public debate on for the losing party, but apologising doesn’t the matter beforehand. Some respondents humiliate a person and it brings results. There said it is important that the government are examples of this in history. For traditional too should participate in and support such societies like ours, such gestures are very campaigns. Others were against Georgia important and valuable.” (GD representative, apologising to the Abkhazian side, but interview, Adjara) nonetheless agreed that the events of the “ It’s necessary to apologise, but sincerely, so the 1990s should be impartially assessed and whole thing doesn’t turn into some sort of game, the mistakes and crimes committed should be acknowledged. The theme of symbolic especially not a political game.” (GD Member of steps was closely linked with that of dealing Parliament, interview, Tbilisi) with the past in a broader context. “ I welcome any such initiative. I subscribed to the ‘Sorry’ Campaign too. There is nothing degrading in offering an apology!” (Journalist, interview, The UNM representatives and supporters were Tbilisi) QRWDJDLQVWV\PEROLFJHVWXUHVRQWKHZKROHEXW argued that they should have a clearly defined Journalists and experts suggested launching IUDPHZRUN7KHPDMRULW\ZHUHRSSRVHGWRVRUU\ DEURDGSXEOLFGHEDWHRQWKHPDWWHUILUVW FDPSDLJQVDVWKH\EHOLHYHGVXFKLQLWLDWLYHV since part of Georgian society views apology would not promote reconciliation but on the campaigns as a betrayal of national interests. contrary make Georgia look like the guilty party. In that case the initiative should come from %HVLGHVWKH\VDZQRUHDVRQIRU*HRUJLDWR WKHSHRSOHEXWWKHDXWKRULWLHVVKRXOGDOVR apologise to the Abkhaz side. A small proportion demonstrate political will. The respondents of the respondents supported the idea of an WKRXJKWWKHɊ6RUU\ɋ&DPSDLJQVKRXOGGHILQLWHO\ DSRORJ\RQFRQGLWLRQWKDWLWZDVPXWXDO EHFRQWLQXHGDQGWKHDXWKRULWLHVDQGWKHPHGLD 'LVFXVVLQJZKRVKRXOGRIIHUWKDWDSRORJ\VRPH should support it and not obstruct it the way respondents thought that public organisations or WKH6DDNDVKYLOLJRYHUQPHQWGLG5HVSRQGHQWV LQGLYLGXDOFLWL]HQVFRXOGGRVREXWQRWRIILFLDO thought it would be useful if such campaigns bodies. Others in contrast thought that only the were reflected in the arts scene as well. government is empowered to offer such an “ A lot depends on the authorities; there needs to DSRORJ\6RPHSRLQWHGRXWWKDW“apologies be the political will to do it. When the TV channel should be offered only if there is broad public Rustavi-2 labels everyone who says ‘sorry’ to the consensus on this issue.” 810UHSUHVHQWDWLYH Abkhaz a ‘traitor’, ordinary people will of course LQWHUYLHZb$GMDUD find it hard to embrace the idea. We should launch “ Georgia has nothing to apologise for. An apology a broad public debate on the issue and speak means saying we are guilty, and instead of a openly about past mistakes. The government positive result it will bring about a negative must back this process. As I understand it, the reaction. I would rather support other symbolic new ruling team is divided over this issue. After gestures, for instance the handover of archive all, the Georgian people, including government materials.” (Expert, interview, Tbilisi) representatives, are still living on the myth that Paths to Peace? A survey of public attitudes towards potential transformation of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict ɒ Georgian findings Russia is to blame for everything that happened, NGOs)DQGWKHUHZDVQRXQDQLPLW\DPRQJWKHP that it was a Russian conspiracy against Georgia. 7KHPDMRULW\RIWKHSDUWLFLSDQWVZHUHLQIDYRXU There may be an element of truth in this, but of apologies and symbolic gestures. A small there is also a large element of our mistakes. We QXPEHUZHUHDJDLQVWZKLOHRWKHUVWKRXJKWLW need to realise and acknowledge this.” (Political necessary first to persuade Georgian society of analyst, interview, Tbilisi) their significance. The respondents suggested WKDW*HRUJLDQVRFLHW\LQFOXGLQJWKH,'3VLVQRW “ Apologising verbally isn’t enough. We could, for ready for such gestures. Several of them echoed instance, hand over the remains of the Abkhaz these sentiments: “it is not ordinary people, who died, if there are any, and take other similar but the Georgian and Abkhazian authorities, the steps so they can see we really do care about politicians and presidents of that period who should this.” (Psychologist, interview, Tbilisi) apologise to both nations for having embroiled Many respondents explained that prior to them in the war.” admitting past mistakes and offering an apology “ We must sincerely acknowledge our mistakes and to the Abkhaz people it is necessary to evaluate repent.” (Focus group, Batumi) ZKDWKDSSHQHGLQWKH V*HRUJLDVKRXOG assume moral responsibility for past wrongdoing “ We should offer our condolences to all residents DQGFULPHV5HVSRQGHQWVFLWHGH[DPSOHV of Abkhazia who lost their loved ones.” (Focus of other conflicts in which the parties had group, Kakheti) apologised to one another. “ We must apologise to the Abkhaz people, not the “ We should assume the moral responsibility, and Abkhazian authorities; this can be done either by honestly and impartially rethink our past: the the government or by society as a whole.” (Focus events of the 1990s. The current government group, Kakheti) could assume responsibility for its predecessors’ mistakes. The Serbian President visited Croatia “ Both parties should apologise to one another, and made an apology at the grave of the Croatian since they both committed crimes and there were war victims. It was a very important step.” casualties on both sides.” (Journalist, focus group, Zugdidi) (Participant of Georgian–Abkhaz dialogue, focus group) The opponents of such steps felt that “these standardised, formal apologies won’t lead to “ It’s because we failed to critically assess the anything.” )RFXVJURXS%DWXPL 1992–93 conflict that we ended up in the war of 2008.” (Participant of Georgian-Abkhaz dialogue, focus group) Several suggested that the Abkhaz should offer an apology to the IDPs for having driven them The issue gave rise to heated discussions out of their homes. “I don’t agree that we should in all other focus groups (ordinary citizens, apologise. It is us who suffered most.” (Unaffiliated journalists and representatives of regional SURIHVVLRQDOLQWHUYLHZ7ELOLVL ɒ Conciliation Resources $VVHVVPHQWRIWKH ɇ FRQIOLFW The respondents touched on the question of a history as it might possibly restore trust between FULWLFDODVVHVVPHQWRIWKH ɇ ZDUZKLOH the parties. GLVFXVVLQJWKHLPSRUWDQFHRIV\PEROLFDFWLRQV 7KHPDMRULW\RI GD representatives and and suggested that the two issues should be supporters, as well as other respondents, considered in the same context. ZHUHLQIDYRXURIFDUU\LQJRXWDQREMHFWLYH In the course of the discussion, respondents DVVHVVPHQWRIWKH ɇ FRQIOLFWEXW looked at different aspects of the problem VWUHVVHGWKDWLWZRXOGEHDORQJGLIILFXOW and expressed a wide range of opinions. DQGSDLQIXOSURFHVV1HYHUWKHOHVVWKH\ On the whole, the majority – with the were certain that conflict transformation exception of the UNM representatives LVLPSRVVLEOHZLWKRXWDQREMHFWLYHSROLWLFDO and their supporters – agreed that it is PRUDODQGOHJDODVVHVVPHQWRIWKH ɇ very important for Georgian society to FRQIOLFWDQGWKHSDVWLQJHQHUDO7KH\VDLGLW objectively assess the 1992–93 conflict is important for the healthy development of and August 2008 war (as well as other society and the country as a whole: “One must key events of the 20th century) from a first deal with the past in order to be able to move political, legal and moral point of view. forward”. One member of the IDP network People saw this as a significant step Synergy proposed setting up a commission towards restoring trust between the two of international independent experts to sides. Some respondents thought Georgia HYDOXDWHWKHHYHQWVRI ɇ $WWKHVDPH should impartially evaluate the past and WLPHLQGLYLGXDOUHVSRQGHQWVHFKRHGWKH810 acknowledge its mistakes, irrespective UHSUHVHQWDWLYHVɋFRQFHUQWKDWWKH$ENKD]FRXOG whether or not Abkhazia does likewise. use such assessment against Georgia. Others felt that a critical assessment of “ An objective investigation is needed of what the 1992–93 events, together with the happened during the war and how it started, to acknowledgement of mistakes, should be a make sure it never happens again. This is equally joint effort by both sides. important for the Abkhaz and the Georgians.” (Unaffiliated focus group, Tbilisi) The UNM representatives and their supporters were generally against an evaluation of the “ We, the refugees, have often said that there ɇ FRQIOLFWDQGWKHZDUDQGDGGXFHG should be an assessment of what the Abkhaz did various arguments in their support. Some of to us. But there should also be an assessment of WKHPVDLGVXFKDQDVVHVVPHQWLVXVHOHVVDVLW what the Georgians did. I used to live in Gali and LVXQLYHUVDOO\NQRZQWKDW5XVVLDLVWREODPHIRU I witnessed how – long before the Abkhaz came all the conflicts in Georgia. Others argued that and took everything – marauding Georgian gangs LWLVIRU1*2VDQGQRWWKHJRYHUQPHQWWRFDUU\ ransacked it, plundering Gali and the whole of out such an assessment of the past. Several Samegrelo. Let them apologise to us now. Why respondents feared that in the event of a negative don’t we call them to account?” (IDP, focus group, evaluation – meaning if Georgia admitted its guilt Zugdidi) – this could be used against Georgia. The country could forfeit the support of the West and the Many agreed that the evaluation should be both conflict regions would be lost for good. political and moral and include an admission of SDVWPLVWDNHV+RZHYHUYLHZVGLYHUJHGZKHQ “ If the Georgian side starts talking about all the stupid things the Georgian authorities did in it comes to a legal assessment of the conflict the 1990s and admits that we are to blame for and prosecuting those responsible for starting everything that happened, what would we receive the war and committing war crimes. Some as a result? Most likely, after this the Abkhaz will respondents said it is imperative to punish all go all over the world and push for recognition of those who are guilty; others feared that this [their] independence. I think now is not the time could have dangerous impact on both societies. to do this.” (Former government official, UNM, Some respondents suggested that evaluating interview, Tbilisi) the past and potential apologies should become topics of a broad public debate in Georgia. One respondent in this group agreed that Without this it will be difficult to achieve a *HRUJLDFRXOGSDVVPRUDOMXGJHPHQWRQSDVW positive outcome. Paths to Peace? A survey of public attitudes towards potential transformation of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict ɒ Georgian findings Several respondents thought such an films and so on. Individual respondents (young evaluation requires a broad consensus and SHRSOH,'3V EHOLHYHGLWZRXOGEHYHU\GLIILFXOW close cooperation between all parties involved LILQGHHGLWLVSRVVLEOHWRSDLQWDIXOOSLFWXUHDQG in the conflict. Some suggested such a moral GHWHUPLQHWKHWUXWK0RUHRYHUWKH\WKRXJKWWKH MXGJHPHQWVKRXOGEHUHIOHFWHGLQDUWOLWHUDWXUH society is not yet ready for such an evaluation. 7KHGHLVRODWLRQRI$ENKD]LD One of the central themes of the survey was ZKLFKIRUWKHPPHDQWWKDW“Abkhazia will be WKHGHLVRODWLRQRI$ENKD]LD5HVSRQGHQWVZHUH open to the world, and the world will be open to asked to describe their understanding of de- Abkhazia”, which would help Abkhazia to develop LVRODWLRQWKHLUDWWLWXGHWRZDUGVWKHSURVSHFWRI and become stronger. The respondents saw GHLVRODWLRQDQGWRDVVHVVLWVVLJQLILFDQFHIRU QRGDQJHUIRU*HRUJLDLQWKLV2QWKHFRQWUDU\ the sides and for establishing relations between they believed the de-isolation of Abkhazia would Abkhaz and Georgians. facilitate rapprochement and establishing relations between the sides. They pointed out There was quite a broad range of WKDW*HRUJLDɋVLVRODWLRQRI$ENKD]LDRQO\GUDZV opinion on this issue. A significant LWFORVHUWR5XVVLDZKLOHGHLVRODWLRQZRXOG number of respondents (mostly the GD lessen its dependence on Moscow. Individual representatives and supporters) were in respondents thought Georgia should examine all favour of the de-isolation of Abkhazia, while the pros and cons of de-isolation before agreeing a relatively small number (mainly, the UNM to go ahead with it. representatives and supporters, some of “ An isolated, economically backward Abkhazia the IDPs and some of the ordinary citizens) will disappear from the map, it will not be able to came out against it. Some respondents withstand Russia’s expansionism. De-isolation said that they would agree to de-isolation only if it benefited Georgia as well. During means that Abkhazia will be open to the world the discussion some respondents focused and, vice versa, the world will be open to Abkhazia on the political aspects of the problem, in terms of culture, trade, etc. De-isolation would while others highlighted its human or mean freedom of movement. It’s a real way for humanitarian dimension. Abkhazia and Georgia to develop. If in future Georgia and Abkhazia achieve a sufficiently high level of development and become part of Europe, The UNM representatives and supporters were it’s possible they may decide to unite, or at least PRVWO\DJDLQVWWKHGHLVRODWLRQRI$ENKD]LD establish normal relations. Georgia should not seeing it as dangerous for Georgia. In their be afraid of Abkhazia becoming stronger, of the view the de-isolation of Abkhazia means in the opening of the Sukhumi seaport, etc. All this ILUVWLQVWDQFHUHFRJQLVLQJLWVLQGHSHQGHQFH is good for Georgia too.” (GD Member of the rather than an opportunity for rapprochement. Supreme Council of Adjara, interview) Several respondents considered the very term “ I’m for open borders in general. Closed territories “de-isolation” inappropriate. They thought are doomed to perish. De-isolation is vital for it made sense to talk about integration and Abkhazia, and we must support it.” (GD Member LWVPHFKDQLVPVVXFKDVKXPDQLWDULDQ of Parliament) SURJUDPPHVGHYHORSLQJWUDGHDQGHFRQRPLFFR RSHUDWLRQDQGVRRQ Several journalists and experts said in order to EUHDNIUHHIURP5XVVLDɋVLQIOXHQFHDQGFRQWURO “ Georgia will gain nothing from the de-isolation of Abkhazia needs to become integrated into the Abkhazia. Russia will not withdraw from Abkhazia. global community and establish direct contacts It will simply exchange the uniform of an occupier with foreign states. An appropriate model needs for the mask of a friend, which is dangerous for WREHIRXQGEDVHGRQLQWHUQDWLRQDOH[SHULHQFH Georgia.” (UNM Member of Parliament, interview, $WWKHVDPHWLPHVHYHUDOUHVSRQGHQWVWKRXJKW Tbilisi) that Abkhazia should not break away from The GD representatives and supporters, Georgia. journalists, experts and young respondents, for “ I’m against the isolation of Abkhazia; I’m for WKHPRVWSDUWVXSSRUWHG$ENKD]LDɋVGHLVRODWLRQ its integration into the global community. To be ɒ Conciliation Resources Paths to Peace? A survey of public attitudes towards potential transformation of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict ɒ Georgian findings 7KH%ODFN6HDk&RQFLOLDWLRQ5HVRXUFHV Conclusion: possible first steps towards confidence building The survey shows that there exists within 3 An agreement on the non-use of force Georgian society a high degree of readiness WRGLVFXVVRSHQO\FRQIOLFWUHODWHGWRSLFVERWK 3 Assessment of the 1992–93 conflict internally and in a dialogue with the Abkhaz. 3 Symbolic gestures When asked to specify the areas that should be discussed first in the framework of a 3 Resumption of rail traffic through Abkhazia *HRUJLDQɇ$ENKD]GLDORJXHWKHUHVSRQGHQWV 3 Opening of the Sukhumi sea port almost unanimously chose education, health care, culture, and economy. As to the rest of 3 Jointly resolving security-related issues in WKHLVVXHVFRYHUHGE\WKHVXUYH\WKHPDMRULW\RI the Gali region WKHUHVSRQGHQWVZHUHFRQILGHQWWKDWZLWKWKH Several topics would be difficult for Georgians H[FHSWLRQRIWKH,'3VɋUHWXUQDOORIWKHPFRXOG DQG$ENKD]WRGLVFXVVZLWKRQHDQRWKHUDV be brought to the negotiation table and could there is no consensus about them even within mark the beginning of a rapprochement between Georgian society and little information available. the sides within the framework of adequately +RZHYHUWKHPDMRULW\RIWKHUHVSRQGHQWVDJUHHG facilitated talks. that they are as vital to improving relations as It is difficult to list the issues discussed in the other issues. WKHRUGHURISULRULW\VLQFHGLIIHUHQWJURXSVRI 3 Legal status of the population of the Gali respondents used different criteria to assess region / Acknowledgement by Georgia of the importance of a particular issue. All the IDPs’ return to Gali VDPHWKHVXUYH\WRSLFVFDQEHGLYLGHGLQWRWKRVH that are considered more or less critical for 3 Freedom of movement *HRUJLDQɇ$ENKD]UHODWLRQVDQGWKDWDUHIDLUO\ 3 De-isolation of Abkhazia HDV\RUE\FRQWUDVWKDUGWRUHVROYH With the exception of the representatives The following issues are regarded by the DQGVXSSRUWHUVRIWKH810WKHPDMRULW\RI respondents as less critical and relatively easy UHVSRQGHQWVH[SUHVVHGUHDGLQHVVDQGFRQVLGHU to tackle: LWQHFHVVDU\WRGLVFXVVDOPRVWDOOWKHDERYH 3 Transfer of archive materials to Abkhazia PHQWLRQHGWRSLFVDQGFRQVLGHUWKHPLPSRUWDQW potential steps toward improving relations 3 Reorganisation or abolition of the Abkhazian between Georgians and Abkhaz. Most respondents government-in-exile realise that the return of IDPs is too sensitive an The following issues (listed in no particular issue and is unlikely to facilitate rapprochement in order) are perceived as more critical and harder WKHFXUUHQWFOLPDWH)RUWKDWUHDVRQLQWKHFRQWH[W WRGHDOZLWKEXWDWWKHVDPHWLPHLPSRUWDQWIRU RI*HRUJLDQɇ$ENKD]WDONVLWVKRXOGEHSXWDVLGH starting a dialogue: for the time being. Some respondents pointed out WKHQHHGWRGLVFXVVMRLQWO\ZLWKWKH$ENKD]ZKLFK 3 Recognising Abkhazia as a party to the problems to address first in order to resolve the conflict/bilateral talks existing deep disagreements. ɒ Conciliation Resources 7KLVSXEOLFDWLRQZDVPDGHSRVVLEOHWKDQNVWRWKHILQDQFLDOVXSSRUWRIWKH8.JRYHUQPHQWɋV Conflict Stability and Security Fund and the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. Conciliation Resources is an independent international organisation working with people in FRQIOLFWWRSUHYHQWYLROHQFHUHVROYHFRQIOLFWVDQGSURPRWHSHDFHIXOVRFLHWLHV:HEHOLHYHWKDW building sustainable peace takes time. We provide practical support to help people affected by violent conflict achieve lasting peace. We draw on our shared experiences to improve peacebuilding policies and practice worldwide. Conciliation Resources, %XUJKOH\ k&RQFLOLDWLRQ5HVRXUFHV Logo drawn as seperate elements with overlaps coloured seperately