DOCSLIB.ORG

Journal 2 2008.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

ivane javaxiSvilis sax. Tbilisis saxelmwifo universiteti iuridiuli fakultetis saerTaSoriso samarTlis instituti Iv. Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University International Law Institute, Faculty of Law Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe OSCE Mission to Georgia #2, 2008 saerTaSoriso samarTlis Jurnali JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW Tbilisi, Tbilisi, 2008 `saerTaSoriso samarTalis Jurnali~ samecniero xasiaTis samenovani gamocemaa. masSi warmodgenilia rogorc saerTaSoriso samarTlisa da saerTaSoriso urTierTobebis prob- lemebi, aseve saqarTvelos kanonmdeblobis sakiTxebi. Jurnali gamiznulia saerTaSoriso samarTlis specialistebisa da mkiTxvelTa farTo wrisaTvis. Jurnali gamoicema saqarTveloSi euTos misiis finansuri mxardaWeriT. statiebSi gamoTqmuli mosazrebani ekuTvniT avtorebs da SeiZleba ar asaxavdes euTos pozicias. The Journal is Published with Financial Support of the OSCE Mission to Georgia. The views expressed in the articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the OSCE. © Tsu ISSN 1512-0368 dabeWdilia stamba `grifonSi~ saredaqcio kolegia mTavari redaqtori aleqsiZe levan iv. javaxiSvilis sax. Tbilisis sax. universiteti (Tsu) aRmasrulebeli redaqtori tuSuri rusudan (Tsu) saredaqcio kolegiis wevrebi: burduli irakli mamedovi rusTam (Tsu) baqos saxelmwifo universiteti butkeviCi volodimer (azerbaijani) adamianis uflebaTa evropuli pataraia daviT sasamarTlo (strasburgi, safrangeTi) (Tsu) gabriCiZe gaga qurdaZe irine (Tsu) (Tsu) demetraSvili avTandil ugrexeliZe mindia (Tsu) (strasburgi, safrangeTi) korkelia konstantine hanikaineni laur (Tsu) turkus universiteti (fineTi) koCariani vigen erevnis saxelmwifo universiteti (somxeTi) BOARD OF EDITORS Editor in Chief ALEXIDZE LEVAN Iv. Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University (TSU) Executive Editor TUSHURI RUSUDAN (TSU) Members of the Board: BURDULI IRAKLI KOCHARYAN VIGEN (TSU) Yerevan State University (Armenia) BUTKEVICH VOLODIMIR MAMEDOV RUSTAM European Court of Human Rights Baku State University (Azerbaijan) (Strasbourg, France) PATARAIA DAVID GABRICHIDZE GAGA (TSU) (TSU) KURDADZE IRINE HANNIKAINEN LAURI (TSU) University of Turku (Finland) UGREKHELIDZE MINDIA DEMETRASHVILI AVTANDIL (Strasbourg, France) (TSU) KORKELIA KONSTANTINE (TSU) 3 saerTaSoriso samarTlis Jurnali, #2, 2008 JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, N2, 2008 redkolegiisagan `saerTaSoriso samarTlis Jurnals~ iv. javaxiSvilis saxelobis Tbilisis saxelmwifo uni- versitetis saerTaSoriso samarTlisa da saerTaSoriso urTierTobebis fakulteti gamoscemda 1996 wlidan, saqarTveloSi gaeros ltolvilTa umaRlesi komisris warmomadgenlobis, saqarTveloSi gaeros ganviTarebis programis mudmivi warmomadgenlobis, `Ria sazogadoebis samarTlebrivi iniciativisa~ da saqarTveloSi amerikis SeerTebuli Statebis saelCos dax- marebiT. saredaqcio kolegia kidev erTxel uxdis did madlobas am organizaciebs esoden mniS- vnelovani mxardaWerisaTvis. Jurnali ar gamosula 2005 wlis Semdeg. saqarTveloSi saerTaSoriso samarTlis mecniere- bis ganviTarebisa da demokratiuli principebis ganmtkicebis xelSewyobis mizniT, Tbilisis saxelmwifo universitetis iuridiuli fakultetis saerTaSoriso samarTlis kaTedram ganaaxla Jurnalis gamocema. Jurnalis am nomris momzadeba da gamoqveyneba SesaZlebeli gaxda evropaSi uSiSroebisa da TanamSromlobis organizaciis (euTo) saqarTveloSi delegaciis finansuri mxardaWeriT. sare- daqcio kolegia madlobas uxdis euTos misias am keTilSobiluri daxmarebisaTvis. *** `saerTaSoriso samarTlis Jurnali" perioduli samecniero gamocemaa, romelic gamoqvey- ndeba weliwadSi orjer. masSi warmodgenil naSromebSi ganixileba saerTaSoriso sajaro da kerZo samarTlis problemebi, saerTaSoriso urTierTobaTa sakiTxebi, saqarTvelos kanonm- deblobisa da misi saerTaSorisosamarTlebrivi praqtikis aqtualuri aspeqtebi. Jurnali gam- iznulia rogorc saerTaSoriso samarTlis specialistebisaTvis, aseve aRniSnuli problema- tikiT dainteresebul mkiTxvelTa farTo wrisaTvis. is garemoeba, rom yoveli statia, rogorc wesi, qveyndeba qarTul da inglisur enebze, agreTve, zogjer, rusuladac, SesaZleblobas aZlevs warmodgenili sakiTxebiT dainterese- bul am enebis mcodne ucxoelebs, gaecnon avtorTa mecnierul debulebebs, aseve saqarTve- los zogierT kanonsa Tu saerTaSoriso xelSekrulebas. statiebis warmodgena SeiZleba samive aRniSnul enaze. saredaqcio kolegia uzrunvely- ofs maTs Targmnas Sesabamis enebze. Jurnali Tavis gverdebs dauTmobs rogorc Teoretikos da praqtikos iuristebs, aseve studentebs, romlebic ikvleven saerTaSorisosamarTlebriv sakiTxebs da romelTa statieb- Si gaSuqebuli iqneba Tanamedrove saerTaSoriso samarTlis normaTa srulyofisa da Semdgomi ganviTarebis aqtualuri problemebi, maT Soris: adamianis uflebaTa dacvis saerTaSoriso meqanizmebi, samoqalaqo sazogadoebis mSeneblobis sakiTxebi. JurnalSi avtorTa mier gamoqveynebuli Sexedulebebi SeiZleba ar emTxveodes saredaq- cio kolegiis wevrTa azrs. 4 FROM THE EDITORIAL BOARD The Journal of International Law has been published by the Iv. Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University Department of International Law and International Relations since 1996 with the support provided by the UNCHR office in Georgia, the UNDP office in Georgia, Open Society Justice Initiative (OSJI) and the US Embassy to Georgia. The Editorial Board is honored to convey the appreciation for provision of such an indispensable sup- port, once again, to the above mentioned organizations. The Publication of the Journal was suspended in 2005. Aiming at promoting the development of the science of International Law and strengthening the democratic principles in Georgia, the Chair of Interna- tional Law of the Tbilisi State University Law Department renewed publication of the Journal. The publication of the current volume has become possible with the support of OSCE Mission to Georgia. The Editorial Board expresses the gratitude to the OSCE Mission for this generous contribution. *** The Journal of International Law is the scientific periodical, published twice a year. The articles present- ed cover issues of public and private international law, international relations, important aspects of the Georgian legislation and Georgia’s international legal practice. The Journal is intended for experts of inter- national law, as well as for broad circles of readers interested in above mentioned issues. The fact that each article, as a rule, is published in Georgian and English and occasionally in Russian language as well, provides the possibility for the foreigner readers interested in these topics to become acquainted with the scientific concepts of authors, as well as certain Georgian legislative acts and interna- tional treaties to which Georgia is a party. The articles may be submitted in all the languages listed above. The Editorial Board provides corre- sponding translation. The Journal welcomes the contributions from scholars and practicing lawyers, as well as students engaged in research of international law issues, and whose articles [Priority will be given to articles which refer to the pressing problems of enhancement of the norms of the contemporary International Law and their further development, particularly dealing with international protection mechanisms of Human Rights and building civil society. The views expressed by the authors in the Journal may not correspond to that of the Editorial Board. 5 saerTaSoriso samarTlis Jurnali, #2, 2008 JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, N2, 2008 Sinaarsi CONTENTS redaqtorisagan levan aleqsiZe, saqarTvelos teritoriaze ruseTis SeiaraRebuli SemoWris 7 saerTaSorisosamarTlebrivi aspeqtebi Ëåâàí Àëåêñèäçå, Ìåæäóíàðîäíî-ïðàâîâûå àñïåêòû âòîðæåíèÿ Ðîññèè íà òåððèòîðèþ Ãðóçèè 9 Levan Alexidze, International Legal Aspects of Russian Invasion into the Territory of Georgian 11 I. saerTaSoriso samarTlis ZiriTadi principi Ð.Ô. Ìàìåäîâ, Â.È. Ïàíàõîâ, Ð.Ô. Ñàëèìîâ, (Áàêèíñêèé ãîñóíèâåðñèòåò) Ïðèíöèï 13 ñàìîîïðåäåëåíèÿ â òåîðèè è ïðàêòèêå ìåæäóíàðîäíîãî ïðàâà R.F. Mamedov , V.I. Panakhov, R.F. Salimov, Principle of Self-determination 26 in the Theory and Practice of International Law (Current Trends) II. SeiaraRebuli konfliqtebi da saerTaSoriso sisxlis samarTali nino abramiSvili, ruseT-saqarTvelos SeiaraRebuli konfliqti da Zalis 39 gamoyenebis akrZalva saerTaSoriso samarTlis farglebSi Nino Abramishvili, The Russian-Georgian Armed Conflict and the Prohibition 51 of the Use of Force in International Law Teimuraz anTelava, ramdenime mosazreba 2008 wlis agvistoSi saqarTveloSi 61 ganviTarebul movlenebTan dakavSirebiT sisxlis samarTlis saerTaSoriso sasamarTlos SesaZlo reagirebis Taobaze Teimuraz antelava, Some Implications on the ICC’s Potential Interference in Relation 71 to the August Events in Georgia maia TiTberiZe, agresiis danaSauli XXI saukuneSi – warumatebloba, 79 dapirebebi, perspeqtiva Maia Titberidze, Crime of Aggression in the XXI Century: Failures, Promises, Prospects 89 III. saerTaSoriso humanitaruli samarTali Tamar RonRaZe, saerTaSoriso humanitaruli samarTlis dacva XXI saukuneSi 97 (ruseTis federaciis magaliTi) Tamar Gongadze, Observance of International Humanitarian Law in the XXI century – 106 the case of the Russian Federation IV. saerTaSoriso sazRvao samarTali Salva kvinixiZe, mSvidobian periodSi samxedro wvrTnebis an manevrebis Catareba 113 sanapiro saxelmwifos gansakuTrebul ekonomikur zonaSi – sxva saxelmwifoebis sazRvao samarTliT aRiarebuli Tu akrZaluli ufleba? Shalva kvinixadze, Peacetime Military Exercises or Manoeuvres in the Exclusive conomic 127 Zone of a Coastal State – Admitted or Prohibited Right of ther States under the Law of the Sea? V. adamianis uflebaTa saerTaSoriso samarTali giorgi tuRuSi, `non-refoulement~-is
Recommended publications
  • METHODOLOGICAL APPENDIX: FIELDWORK and ARCHIVES in TORN STATES Even Though I Had Anticipated Methodological Problems When I

    METHODOLOGICAL APPENDIX: FIELDWORK and ARCHIVES in TORN STATES Even Though I Had Anticipated Methodological Problems When I

    METHODOLOGICAL APPENDIX: FIELDWORK AND ARCHIVES IN TORN STATES Even though I had anticipated methodological problems when I set out to investigate the relation of separatism to organized crime, I completely misidentified what the main ones were to be. Having repeatedly done fieldwork in Kosovo, including an interview-based study of nationalism among students at Belgrade and Priština Universities (Mandic 2015), I expected the primary problems to be logistical. Since crossing “borders” (as separatists call them) or “administrative boundaries” (as host state bureaucrats call them) was often time-consuming and costly, and since ignorance of Albanian, Georgian, Ossetian and Russian often required a translator as well as a tour guide, I thought traveling would be the greatest difficulty. In fact, the two main difficulties were access to archives – by far the greatest challenge, and the most costly research component – and evaluating the credibility of sources – steering clear of nationalist propaganda and quasi-scientific references. Below I explore some of the dilemmas, challenges and regrets I have faced in the hopes that they aid future students of the topic. Fieldwork With the help of a Research Fellowship from the Minda de Ginzburg Center for European Studies in the 2013-4 academic year, I was able to travel extensively in Serbia/Kosovo and Georgia/South Ossetia interviewing experts, conducting informal ethnographies and exploring archives. I spent a total of five and a half months in Serbia, three of which were in Kosovo and three and a half months in Georgia, four weeks of which were in South Ossetia. I visited the four relevant capitals, cities/towns along separatist borders, and major towns on separatist territory.
  • Status and Protection of Globally Threatened Species in the Caucasus

    Status and Protection of Globally Threatened Species in the Caucasus

    STATUS AND PROTECTION OF GLOBALLY THREATENED SPECIES IN THE CAUCASUS CEPF Biodiversity Investments in the Caucasus Hotspot 2004-2009 Edited by Nugzar Zazanashvili and David Mallon Tbilisi 2009 The contents of this book do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of CEPF, WWF, or their sponsoring organizations. Neither the CEPF, WWF nor any other entities thereof, assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, product or process disclosed in this book. Citation: Zazanashvili, N. and Mallon, D. (Editors) 2009. Status and Protection of Globally Threatened Species in the Caucasus. Tbilisi: CEPF, WWF. Contour Ltd., 232 pp. ISBN 978-9941-0-2203-6 Design and printing Contour Ltd. 8, Kargareteli st., 0164 Tbilisi, Georgia December 2009 The Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) is a joint initiative of l’Agence Française de Développement, Conservation International, the Global Environment Facility, the Government of Japan, the MacArthur Foundation and the World Bank. This book shows the effort of the Caucasus NGOs, experts, scientific institutions and governmental agencies for conserving globally threatened species in the Caucasus: CEPF investments in the region made it possible for the first time to carry out simultaneous assessments of species’ populations at national and regional scales, setting up strategies and developing action plans for their survival, as well as implementation of some urgent conservation measures. Contents Foreword 7 Acknowledgments 8 Introduction CEPF Investment in the Caucasus Hotspot A. W. Tordoff, N. Zazanashvili, M. Bitsadze, K. Manvelyan, E. Askerov, V. Krever, S. Kalem, B. Avcioglu, S. Galstyan and R. Mnatsekanov 9 The Caucasus Hotspot N.
  • Freedom of Religion in Abkhazia and South Ossetia/Tskhinvali Region

    Freedom of Religion in Abkhazia and South Ossetia/Tskhinvali Region

    Freedom of Religion in Abkhazia and South Ossetia/Tskhinvali Region Brief prehistory Orthodox Christians living in Abkhazia and South Ossetia are considered by the Patriarchate of the Georgian Orthodox Church to be subject to its canonical jurisdiction. The above is not formally denied by any Orthodox Churches. Abkhazians demand full independence and imagine their Church also to be independent. As for South Ossetia, the probable stance of "official" Ossetia is to unite with Alanya together with North Ossetia and integrate into the Russian Federation, therefore, they do not want to establish or "restore" the Autocephalous Orthodox Church. In both the political and ecclesiastical circles, the ruling elites of the occupied territories do not imagine their future together with either the Georgian State or the associated Orthodox Church. As a result of such attitudes and Russian influence, the Georgian Orthodox Church has no its clergymen in Tskhinvali or Abkhazia, cannot manage the property or relics owned by it before the conflict, and cannot provide adequate support to the parishioners that identify themselves with the Georgian Orthodox Church. Although both Abkhazia and South Ossetia have state sovereignty unilaterally recognized by the Russian Federation, ecclesiastical issues have not been resolved in a similar way. The Russian Orthodox Church does not formally or officially recognize the separate dioceses in these territories, which exist independently from the Georgian Orthodox Church, nor does it demand their integration into its own space. Clearly, this does not necessarily mean that the Russian Orthodox Church is guided by the "historical truth" and has great respect for the jurisdiction of the Georgian Orthodox Church in these territories.
  • Security Council Distr.: General 18 July 2007

    Security Council Distr.: General 18 July 2007

    United Nations S/2007/439 Security Council Distr.: General 18 July 2007 Original: English Report of the Secretary-General on the situation in Abkhazia, Georgia I. Introduction 1. The present report is submitted pursuant to Security Council resolution 1752 (2007) of 13 April 2007, by which the Security Council decided to extend the mandate of the United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia (UNOMIG) until 15 October 2007. It provides an update of the situation in Abkhazia, Georgia since my report of 3 April 2007 (S/2007/182). 2. My Special Representative, Jean Arnault, continued to lead the Mission. He was assisted by the Chief Military Observer, Major General Niaz Muhammad Khan Khattak (Pakistan). The strength of UNOMIG on 1 July 2007 stood at 135 military observers and 16 police officers (see annex). II. Political process 3. During the reporting period, UNOMIG continued efforts to maintain peace and stability in the zone of conflict. It also sought to remove obstacles to the resumption of dialogue between the Georgian and Abkhaz sides in the expectation that cooperation on security, the return of internally displaced persons and refugees, economic rehabilitation and humanitarian issues would facilitate meaningful negotiations on a comprehensive political settlement of the conflict, taking into account the principles contained in the document entitled “Basic Principles for the Distribution of Competences between Tbilisi and Sukhumi”, its transmittal letter (see S/2002/88, para. 3) and additional ideas by the sides. 4. Throughout the reporting period, my Special Representative maintained regular contact with both sides, as well as with the Group of Friends of the Secretary-General both in Tbilisi and in their capitals.
  • Russia's Quiet Annexation of South Ossetia

    Russia's Quiet Annexation of South Ossetia

    FEBRUARY 2015 Russia’s quiet annexation of south ossetia By Maia Otarashvili Maia Otarashvili is an FPRI Research Associate and Program Coordinator for FPRI's Project on Democratic Transitions. Her research has focused on democratic consolidation and regression in the EU-11 countries, as well as on fragile hybrid states such as Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine and other former USSR states in the Black Sea and Caucasus region. Maia holds an MA in Globalization, Development and Transition from the University of Westminster in London, with emphasis on post-authoritarian transitions. All Georgian- and Russian-language material has been translated by the author. Russia and South Ossetia have ironed out final details of a “Treaty of Alliance and Integration.” The treaty was drafted in December 2014 and on January 31, 2015 Georgian news agencies reported that the leader of South Ossetia, Leonid Tibilov, had sent the finalized document back to Moscow. On February 18th Russia and South Ossetia signed a precursor to this treaty, called the “treaty on the state border.” According to Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, the broader treaty is still under consideration, but “the approval process won’t take long.” Once the Treaty of Alliance and Integration is signed, it is set to be implemented in a matter of three to six months, allowing Russia to absorb South Ossetia. This comes less than three months after the signing of the Russia-Abkhazia treaty of a similar nature, although it is not as comprehensive. The international community and the Georgian government have condemned Russia’s actions and will not recognize either of the treaties but that is not likely to stem Putin’s expansionist policies – if Crimea is any guide.
  • Russian Socio-Economic and Demographic

    Russian Socio-Economic and Demographic

    Black Sea Journal of Public and Social Science doi: 10.52704/bssocialscience.875417 Open Access Journal Research Article e-ISSN: 2618 – 6640 Volume 4 - Issue 2: 71-74 / July 2021 RUSSIAN SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC EXPANSION IN THE PRINCIPALITY OF ODISHI (SAMEGRELO) IN THE 30S AND 60S OF THE 19TH CENTURY ACCORDING TO THE DIARIES OF FOREIGN CONFIDANTS Lia GULORDAVA1* 1St. Andrew the First-Called Georgian University of the Patriarchate of Georgia, 0179, Tbilisi, Georgia Abstract: In the travel diaries of foreign confidants we have found the reasons for the high degree of poverty and socio-economic decline described in Odishi's life in the structure of the conquest plan of a low political culture empire. The Russian Empire is waiting for an opportune moment in its ambush position to torture the Odishi principality with its socio-economic, demographic policies, de facto and de jure, and turn the ancient trade routes between Georgia and Europe and Asia, namely the Turkish Sea into the Black Sea. At least in part, it turned into a lake in Russia. Under these conditions, the empire fully described the natural resources of Odishi, made it a raw material supplement, and applied its demographic transformation as well. Keywords: Odishi (Georgia), Black Sea, Russian Empire, Confidents *Corresponding author: St. Andrew the First-Called Georgian University of the Patriarchate of Georgia, 0179, Tbilisi, Georgia E mail: [email protected] (L. GULORDAVA) Lia GULORDAVA https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2391-5898 Received: February 06, 2021 Accepted: February 12, 2021 Published: July 01, 2021 Cite as: Gulordava L. 2021.
  • Georgia/Abkhazia

    Georgia/Abkhazia

    HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH ARMS PROJECT HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH/HELSINKI March 1995 Vol. 7, No. 7 GEORGIA/ABKHAZIA: VIOLATIONS OF THE LAWS OF WAR AND RUSSIA'S ROLE IN THE CONFLICT CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................................................5 EVOLUTION OF THE WAR.......................................................................................................................................6 The Role of the Russian Federation in the Conflict.........................................................................................7 RECOMMENDATIONS...............................................................................................................................................8 To the Government of the Republic of Georgia ..............................................................................................8 To the Commanders of the Abkhaz Forces .....................................................................................................8 To the Government of the Russian Federation................................................................................................8 To the Confederation of Mountain Peoples of the Caucasus...........................................................................9 To the United Nations .....................................................................................................................................9 To the Organization on Security and Cooperation in Europe..........................................................................9
  • Analyzing the Russian Way of War Evidence from the 2008 Conflict with Georgia

    Analyzing the Russian Way of War Evidence from the 2008 Conflict with Georgia

    Analyzing the Russian Way of War Evidence from the 2008 Conflict with Georgia Lionel Beehner A Contemporary Battlefield Assessment Liam Collins by the Modern War Institute Steve Ferenzi Robert Person Aaron Brantly March 20, 2018 Analyzing the Russian Way of War: Evidence from the 2008 Conflict with Georgia Contents Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................................ 1 Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 9 Chapter I – History of Bad Blood ................................................................................................................ 13 Rose-Colored Glasses .............................................................................................................................. 16 Chapter II – Russian Grand Strategy in Context of the 2008 Russia-Georgia War ................................... 21 Russia’s Ends ........................................................................................................................................... 22 Russia’s Means ........................................................................................................................................ 23 Russia’s Ways .........................................................................................................................................
  • Chapter 11 Case Study of the Conflict in South Ossetia Ketevan Tsikhelashvili and Natasha Ubilava*

    Chapter 11 Case Study of the Conflict in South Ossetia Ketevan Tsikhelashvili and Natasha Ubilava*

    Chapter 11 Case Study of the Conflict in South Ossetia Ketevan Tsikhelashvili and Natasha Ubilava* I Introduction Following nearly three years of irregular armed confrontation, the breakaway re- gion of South Ossetia has been enjoying relative peace brought about by a cease- fire in 1992. Unfortunately, formal peacemaking has ceased there. The conflict has remained politically ‘frozen’ as negotiations have failed to yield any genuine settlement for more than a decade. In the absence of a formal settlement, how- ever, a rather peculiar informal peace arrangement emerged out of local and in- ternational initiatives and needs-driven transactions. Initially, segmented functional interactions were maintained by previously op- posed groups. Over time, internationally-sponsored bilateral contacts and joint activities of all conflicting sides have gradually forged multifaceted interactions that are based upon an informal/semi-formal power-sharing principle. This ‘bot- * The authors would like to acknowledge the valuable comments from Emmanuel An- quetil (Project Manager, European Commission Delegation in Georgia), Jonathon Cohen (Caucasus Programme Manager, Conciliation Resources, London), Bruno Coppieters, (Associate Professor and Head of the Department of Political Science, Vrije Universiteit Brussel [Free University of Brussels]), S. Neil MacFarlane, (Lester B. Pearson Professor of International Relations, University of Oxford), Klaus Ras- mussen (Political Officer, OSCE Mission to Georgia), and Ermina Van Hoye (Special Assistant to the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Georgia UN- OMIG). 1 South Ossetia is a breakaway region of the territory of Georgia. It is also referred to as “Tskhinvali Region,” “Samachablo” or “Shida Kartli” in different sources, each evoking tense debates between Ossetians and Georgians.
  • Development Perspectives of the XXI Century

    Development Perspectives of the XXI Century

    Caucasus University Friedrich Ebert Foundation International Students’ Scientific Conference Development perspectives of the XXI century Georgia, 8-11 May, 2009 UDC 330/34(479) (063) s-249 D-49 krebulSi ganTavsebulia samecniero naSromebi, SerCeuli meore saerTaSoriso studenturi samecniero konferenciisaTvis `21-e saukune _ ganviTarebis perspeq- tivebi~, romlis umTavresi mizania studentTa dasabuTebuli Tvalsazrisis warmoCena TavianTi qveynebis ganviTarebis perspeqtivaze. agreTve erTiani xedvis SemuSaveba msoflios winaSe mdgari problemebis gadawyvetis Taobaze. The collection contains works of the Second International Student’s Scientific Conference “Development Perspectives of the XXI century”. The major goal of the conference is to present reasonable arguments from the students of the countries of Europe and South Caucasus on European integration opportunities. Here also one can find the initiative on forming entire vision for solving key problems, facing Europe and South Caucasus. gamomcemeli: kavkasiis universiteti _ fridrix ebertis fondis mxardaWeriT Published by Caucasus University, with the support of Friedrich Ebert Foundation saredaqcio kolegia: Salva maWavariani (Tavmjdomare), indrek iakobsoni, giorgi RaRaniZe, londa esaZe, lia CaxunaSvili, naTia amilaxvari, dina oniani, naTia narsaviZe. Ed. board: Shalva Machavariani (head), Indrek Jakobson, Giorgi Gaganidze, Londa Esadze, Lia Chakhunashvili, Natia Amilakhvari, Dina Oniani, Natia Narsavidze. ISSN 1987-5703 Tbilisi, 2008 Contents 1. Ana Kostava The self-determination principle and
  • Annex E.4.15

    Annex E.4.15

    ICC-01/15-4-AnxE.4.15-Corr 06-11-2015 1/35 EC PT Annex E.4.15 Public Corrected Version of ICC-01/15-4-AnxE.4.15 ICC-01/15-4-AnxE.4.15-Corr 06-11-2015 2/35 EC PT SOUTH OSSETIA: THE BURDEN OF RECOGNITION Europe Report N°205 - 7 June 2010 lnternationa Crisis Group WORKING TO PREVENT CONFLICT WORLDWIDE GEO-OTP-0001-1242 ICC-01/15-4-AnxE.4.15-Corr 06-11-2015 3/35 EC PT TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS i I. IN.TRODUCTION 1 II. POST-RECOGNITION DEVELOPMENTS 2 A. THEPOPfilJ\TION 2 B. TIIE Soc10-EcoNOMIC SITUATION AND RECONSTRUCTION 4 l. Local conditions .4 2. Russian aid and corruption 6 C. RUSSI/\ '8 MILITARY PRR8F.NCE-SOOTH 0SSETIJ\ '8 STRJ\ TRGTC V /\LUE 7 Ill. LOCAL POLITICS 9 A. CoMPr:rnroN FOR RlJ8SIJ\N RRSOlJRCKS 9 B. Tl IE RULE OF LAW ANI) HUMAN RIOI ITS 12 C. FUTURE PROSPECTS 13 IV. GEORGTAN-OSSETTAN RELATIONS 15 A. FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT 15 B. Dt-:TENTTONS 16 C. DISPLACEMENT ISSUES 17 V. THE INTERNATIONAL RESPONSE 19 A. THE GENEV J\ T /\LKS 19 B. FIELD PRESENCE 20 C. TIIE EU MONITORINGMI SSION 21 VI. CONCLUSION 23 APPENDICES A. MAP OF G.EOROlA 24 B. MAP OF Soun 1 OssHTIA 25 C. MAP OF sotrra 0SSETIA SHOWING VILLAGES UNDER GEORGIANAND 0SSETIAN CONTROL PRIOR TO 7 AUGUST 2008 26 D. AnOUTTIIEINTERNATIONALCRl SIS GROUP 27 E. CRISIS GROUP REPORTS AND BRll:FINGS ON ElJROPli SINCE 2007 28 F. CRJSlS GROUP BOAR!) OFTRUSTEES 29 GEO-OTP-0001-1243 ICC-01/15-4-AnxE.4.15-Corr 06-11-2015 4/35 EC PT lnternationa Crisis Group WORKING TO PREVENT CONFLICT WORLDWIDE Program Report N°205 7 June 2010 SOUTH OSSETIA: THE BURDEN OF RECOGNITION EXECUTIVE SUlVIMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS South Ossetia is no closer to genuine independence now threats on its own North Caucasus territory, Moscow than in August 2008, when Russia went to war with has preferred to work with Kokoity and his entourage, Georgia and extended recognition.
  • Failed Prevention 35

    Failed Prevention 35

    Table of Contents Foreword by the Editors 5 PART I: CONCEPTS IN CONFLICT PREVENTION 9 Concepts and Instruments in Conflict Prevention 11 Frida Möller PART II: CONFLICT DEVELOPMENT AND FAILED PREVENTION 35 The Georgian-Abkhaz Conflict 37 Sabine Fischer Missed Windows of Opportunity in the Georgian-South Ossetian Conflict – The Political Agenda of the Post-Revolutionary Saakashvili Government (2004-2006) 59 Doris Vogl Failures of the Conflict Transformation and Root Causes of the August War 79 Oksana Antonenko PART III: VIEWS FROM THE REGION 95 Frozen Conflicts: The Missed Opportunities 97 Salomé Zourabichvili Failure to Prevent Violence – Lessons Learnt from the Georgian- Abkhazian Conflict Resolution Process 113 Liana Kvarchelia Missed Chances in the Georgian-South Ossetian Conflict – A View from South Ossetia 131 Alan Parastaev 3 PART IV: THE INTERNATIONAL INFLUENCE 139 OSCE Early Warning and the August Conflict in Georgia 141 Dov Lynch The Role of the United Nations in Abkhazia, Opportunities and Missed Opportunities between 1992 and 2009 151 Charlotte Hille United States’ and NATO’s Role in Georgia’s Territorial Conflicts August 1992-July 2008 169 Eugene Kogan Used & Missed Opportunities for Conflict Prevention in Georgia (1990-2008) – The Role of Russia 187 Markus Bernath Russia and South Ossetia: The Road to Sovereignty 207 Flemming Splidsboel Hansen PART V: CONCLUSIONS 235 Some Lessons Learnt in Conflict Prevention from the Conflicts in the Southern Caucasus 237 Predrag Jurekovi ć List of Authors and Editors 243 4 Foreword by the Editors The violent escalation of the Georgian/South Ossetian and Georgian/Abkhazian conflict in the summer of 2008 resulted in a significant deterioration of the regional security situation in this part of the Southern Caucasus.