DOCSLIB.ORG

Report by the Government of Georgia on the Aggression by the Russian Federation Against Georgia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Report by the Government of Georgia on the Aggression by the Russian Federation Against Georgia REPORT BY THE GOVERNMENT OF GEORGIA ON THE AGGRESSION BY THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AGAINST GEORGIA Introduction In 2008, the Russian Federation launched a full-scale assault against a sovereign state—its immediate neighbor, Georgia. This incursion, systematically preceded by political and other provocations, was the violent climax of policies pursued by Russia against Georgia over many years. Rather than work to peacefully resolve the conflicts in Georgia, Russia systematically stoked them. Moscow interfered in Georgian politics, supplied separatist militias with arms, ignored its peacekeeping responsibilities, failed to prevent widespread ethnic cleansing of Georgians and, ultimately, sought to annex Georgian territories by means of military force. Russia’s main goals have been to annex Georgian territories, overthrow Georgia’s legitimate government, subvert Georgia’s independence, curtail Georgia’s sovereignty, and send a message to its neighbors and to the West that it is in control of what it calls its “sphere of privileged interest”. To date, the Russian Federation has only partially achieved its aims: since August 2008, inalienable parts of Georgia – namely, Abkhazia and the South Ossetia/Tskhinvali region – now exist under a state of full-scale Russian military occupation (note, however, that these areas had previously been controlled by Russian military and law enforcement forces, disguised as “peacekeepers”). This document represents the Georgian Government’s report to the public on the background and details of the August conflict. The purpose of this document is to provide the public with information on the political situation in Georgia, the changing nature of Georgia’s relationship with Russia, and Georgia’s efforts to secure a peaceful resolution to the ongoing conflict. It covers the current political situation in Georgia, presents the history behind the conflict, and describes the actions taken by the Georgian Government in response to Russia’s relentless provocations. This document aims to provide comprehensive and transparent information on these issues. This document will focus on the three main actors involved in the process: 1. The Russian Federation and its puppet regimes in South Ossetia/Tskhinvali region and in Abkhazia; 2. The Georgian authorities and its various political structures; and, 3. The international community, including the main international organizations. The document covers the policies pursued by these three actors, the actions they have undertaken and the crucial decisions that were made throughout the process. Legal, political, and military documents are also attached as appendices to this report. Chapter 1: The Genesis of the Conflict 1989-1994 1.1. Disintegration of the USSR, Russia’s attempt to maintain its influence over the former Soviet Republics and the creation of the CIS. Towards the end of the 1980s, as the Soviet Union entered its final throes and began to disintegrate, a strong national liberation movement was born in Georgia. This national liberation movement was marked by intense anti-Soviet sentiments, which were exhibited via demonstrations and other forms of civil protest. The growth of the national liberation movement led to a repressive crack-down by both Georgia’s Communist Government and the Moscow- based central authorities. This was manifested in the violent break-up of peaceful meetings, the persecution of leaders of the national liberation movement, and attempts to stir up civic and ethnic confrontation. As a result of efforts to divert attention via ethnic politicization, there was a noticeable escalation in the degree of artificially generated internal conflict in Georgia. In particular, the situation in Abkhazia and the South Ossetia/Tskhinvali region became overtly tense and antagonistic. On 31 March 1991, as a result of a national referendum in Georgia (including the Abkhazian Autonomous Republic and former South Ossetia), Georgia adopted an Act of Independence and declared its independence from the Soviet Union. The nascent country’s borders followed the internationally recognized borders of 21 December 1921. On 8 December 1991, the former Soviet Republics signed a document that confirmed the disintegration of the USSR (the Belovezh Treaty). With the exception of Georgia and the three Baltic states, the former Soviet Republics joined together to establish the Russo-centric Commonwealth of Independent States. 1.2. Georgia’s attempt to pursue an independent policy In 1991, political processes in Georgia were defined by the country’s widely popular national- liberation movement. The aim of the movement was to restore Georgian independence. It saw the West as Georgia’s main ally. In light of this, Georgia began to follow a development path that differed from that of other former Soviet Republics. Simultaneously, post-Communist state institutions started to form in the country. The then- government—which was faced with a series of urgent political, economic, social, and military problems—had to institute a deep-rooted reform program. The orientation chosen by Georgia—including its path of strategic development—was based on a democratic mandate that for the first time saw its national interests rooted in public consensus. However, these interests quickly turned out to be incompatible with Russia’s own political and geostrategic goals. As a result, Russia, from the outset of the post-Soviet era, instituted policies aimed at undermining Georgian statehood. In policy terms, one of the first areas where this discord became apparent was in the field of ethnic manipulation. The Russian authorities—building upon tensions Moscow itself had stoked among “separatist elites” in Georgia’s autonomous regions—sought to further inflame the situation by dividing Georgia’s territory. In Abkhazia, for instance, the political elite remained totally dependent on Russia, to the extent that following independence they did not appreciate or respond to the Georgian national government offer of parity in the Abkhazian Supreme Council (parity that would have been achieved by reducing the number of Georgian representatives). While newly independent Georgia attempted to adjust its policies to accommodate these autonomous republics, Russian policies continued to foment political differences among the newly formed political elites in Georgia’s capital, with the aim of sparking internal confrontation. Russia’s efforts to sow discord resulted in a series of civil confrontations both in the autonomous areas of Georgia and in Georgia’s capital, Tbilisi. The deteriorating security situation, combined with the weak state of public institutions, opened the way for organized criminal groups and militias to gain substantial power. Rent-seeking opportunists seized this opportunity to gain power. This trend applied to the elites in the capital, as well as to local elites in Sukhumi and the South Ossetia/Tskhinvali region, both of which were encouraged by Russia. These groups, claiming to be driven by “national interests,” actively opposed each other, resulting in conflict, the destruction of property, the plunder of public and private assets, the terrorizing of local populations, theft, banditry, and the labeling of all of these violent and criminal activities as “ethnic confrontation.” It is noteworthy that the above-mentioned groups obtained weapons, bullets, and other forms of military materiel from Russian military bases located on the territory of Georgia and directly from Russia. This led to a marked increase in the amount of weaponry and ammunition at their disposal. In parallel to the deteriorating security situation, Russian military instructors also arrived in Georgia to train the separatists. At the beginning of this period of conflict, the separatists used mainly small-caliber pistols and automatic firearms; however, by the end, tanks, battleships, and mortars were widely available (for example, on 14 August 1992, the 643rd rocket-carrying air regiment of the Russian armed forces provided the Abkhaz separatists with 984 automatic guns, 267 pistols, 18 mortars, 600 flare pots, over 500 trench bombs, bullets, gun powder, military vehicles, uniforms, food, chemical weapons, and other engineering equipment). The plan to further inflame ethnic tensions was not limited to the local population. With the help of Russian Special Services, volunteer mobilization centers were formed in the North Caucasus. From those centers, “boeviks” (warriors) were sent in an organized fashion to different hot spots in Georgia. In this manner, Kazakhs, as well as Chechens, Ingush, Armenians, and other Caucasian nationals found themselves involved in the conflict in Georgia. At crucial points during the conflict, Russian military forces became directly involved in combat and directly participated in military operations. In addition to Special Servicemen and commandos, Russian artillery and aviation were also actively used. For example, in Abkhazia, Georgian military formations brought down a Russian SU-27 fighter jet flown by a Russian pilot. The Russian Minister of Defense reacted to this fact in a cynical manner, claiming that the Georgians had painted Russian Army identification markings on the plane. On 24 June 1992, the Sochi (Dagomis) Agreement was signed. This was a bilateral agreement between Georgia and Russia that established principles for regulating the Georgian-Ossetian conflict. Unfortunately, the Abkhazian conflict continued despite several negotiated ceasefire agreements. These included the agreements
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Russian Analytical Digest No 40: Russia and the "Frozen Conflicts" Of
    No. 40 8 May 2008 rrussianussian aanalyticalnalytical ddigestigest www.res.ethz.ch www.laender-analysen.de/russland RUSSIA AND THE “FROZEN CONFLICTS” OF GEORGIA ■ ANALYSIS Georgia’s Secessionist De Facto States: From Frozen to Boiling 2 By Stacy Closson, Zurich ■ ANALYSIS A Russian Perspective: Forging Peace in the Caucasus 5 By Sergei Markedonov, Moscow ■ OPINION POLL Russian Popular Opinion Concerning the Frozen Confl icts on the Territory of the Former USSR 9 ■ ANALYSIS A Georgian Perspective: Towards “Unfreezing” the Georgian Confl icts 12 By Archil Gegeshidze, Tbilisi ■ ANALYSIS An Abkhaz Perspective: Abkhazia after Kosovo 14 By Viacheslav Chirikba, Sukhumi / Leiden Research Centre for East Center for Security Otto Wolff -Stiftung DGO European Studies, Bremen Studies, ETH Zurich rrussianussian aanalyticalnalytical russian analytical digest 40/08 ddigestigest Analysis Georgia’s Secessionist De Facto States: From Frozen to Boiling By Stacy Closson, Zurich Abstract Relations between Russia and Georgia have reached a new low. At the center of their quarrel are Georgia’s secessionist regions, Abkhazia and South Ossetia. As Russia and Georgia accuse the other of troop move- ments in and around the secessionist territories, the UN, EU, OSCE, and NATO meet to determine their response. Critical to these deliberations are several underlying developments, which would benefi t from an independent review. Th ese include economic blockades of the secessionist territories, Russia’s military sup- port for the secessionists, the issuance of Russian passports to secessionist residents, and declarations of in- dependence by secessionist regimes. In these circumstances, it has become diffi cult to contain the confl icts without resolving them. However, as confl ict resolution has proven impracticable, it is time to consider al- tering present arrangements in order to prevent an escalation of violence.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Georgia Page 1 of 21
    Country Report on Human Rights Practices in Georgia Page 1 of 21 Georgia Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2006 Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor March 6, 2007 The constitution of the Georgian republic provides for an executive branch that reports to the president, a unicameral Parliament, and an independent judiciary. The country has a population of approximately 4.4 million. In 2003 former president Shevardnadze resigned during what became known as the Rose Revolution. Mikheil Saakashvili won the presidency in 2004 with over 90 percent of the vote in an election, and his National Movement Party won a majority of seats in the Parliament. International observers determined that the 2004 presidential and parliamentary elections represented significant progress over previous elections and brought the country closer to meeting international standards, although several irregularities were noted. Civilian authorities generally maintained effective control of the security forces. The government's human rights record improved in some areas during the year, although serious problems remained. While the government took significant steps to address these problems, there were some reports of deaths due to excessive use of force by law enforcement officers, cases of torture and mistreatment of detainees, increased abuse of prisoners, impunity, continued overuse of pretrial detention for less serious offenses, worsened conditions in prisons and pretrial detention facilities, and lack of access for average citizens to defense attorneys. Other areas of concern included reports of government pressure on the judiciary and the media and - despite a substantial reduction due to reforms led by the president - corruption.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Prisoners in Post- Revolutionary Georgia
    After the rose, the thorns: political prisoners in post- revolutionary Georgia Article 1: All human beings are born free and equal Article 1: All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. Article 2: Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, spirit of brotherhood. Article 2: Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty. Article 3: Everyone has be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty. Article 3: Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person. Article 4: No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the the right to life, liberty and security of person.
    [Show full text]
  • Parliament of Georgia in 2019
    Assessment of the Performance of the Parliament of Georgia in 2019 TBILISI, 2020 Head of Research: Lika Sajaia Lead researcher: Tamar Tatanashvili Researcher: Gigi Chikhladze George Topouria We would like to thank the interns of Transparency International of Georgia for participating in the research: Marita Gorgoladze, Guri Baliashvili, Giorgi Shukvani, Mariam Modebadze. The report was prepared with the financial assistance of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Norway Contents Research Methodology __________________________________________________ 8 Chapter 1. Main Findings _________________________________________________ 9 Chapter 2. General Information about the Parliament ____________________ 12 Chapter 3. General Statistics ____________________________________________ 14 Chapter 4. Important events ______________________________________________ 16 4.1 Interparliamentary Assembly on Orthodoxy (chaired by Russian Duma Deputy Gavrilov) and a wave of protests _________________________________ 16 4.2 Failure of the proportional election system __________________________ 17 4.3 Election of Supreme Court judges ____________________________________ 19 4.4 Abolishing Nikanor Melia’s immunity and terminating his parliamentary mandate ________________________________________________________________ 20 4.5 Changes in the Composition of Parliamentary Subjects _______________ 20 4.6 Vote of Confidence in the Government _____________________________ 21 4.7 Report of the President ______________________________________________ 21 Chapter
    [Show full text]
  • Reserved Domains
    Countries: (.ge; .edu.ge; .org.ge; .net.ge; .pvt.ge; .school.ge) afghanistan cameroon ghana lebanon nigeria spain zambia albania canada greece lesotho norway srilanka zimbabwe algeria centralafricanrepublic grenada liberia oman sudan andorra chad guatemala libya pakistan suriname angola chile guinea liechtenstein palau swaziland antiguaandbarbuda china guinea-bissau lithuania palestina sweden argentina colombia guyana luxembourg panama switzerland armenia comoros haiti macau papuanewguinea syria aruba congo honduras macedonia paraguay taiwan australia costarica hongkong madagascar peru tajikistan austria croatia hungary malawi philippines tanzania azerbaijan cuba iceland malaysia poland thailand bahama curacao india maldives portugal timor-leste bahrain cyprus indonesia mali qatar togo bangladesh czechia iran malta romania tonga barbados denmark iraq marshallislands russia trinidadandtobago belarus djibouti ireland mauritania rwanda tunisia belgium dominica israel mauritius saintlucia turkey belize dominicanrepublic italy mexico samoa turkmenistan benin ecuador jamaica micronesia sanmarino tuvalu bhutan egypt japan moldova saudiarabia uganda birma elsalvador jordan monaco senegal ukraine bolivia equatorialguinea kazakhstan mongolia serbia unitedarabemirates bosniaandherzegovina eritrea kenya montenegro seychelles uk botswana estonia kiribati morocco sierraleone england brazil ethiopia northkorea mozambique singapore unitedkingdom brunei fiji korea namibia sintmaarten uruguay bulgaria finland southkorea nauru slovakia uzbekistan burkinafaso
    [Show full text]
  • Situation of Human Rights in Georgia October 2006 Since the Coming Into Power of Mr
    Note Situation of Human Rights in Georgia October 2006 Since the coming into power of Mr. Mikhaïl Saakaschvili at the favor of the so-called “roses’ revolution”, local and international organisations observe regular deterioration of fundamental freedoms. The violations of rights and freedoms are encouraged by a very personalised and authoritarian sense of power from the President. The first consequences of it are the exessive use of violence et and the impunity by law-enforcement bodies, repression and harassment against journalists, human right defenders, etc... This also contributed to conflictual situations at both internal (minorities and separatist regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia) and external (recent break of diplomatic relations with Russia) levels. This new escalation of internal and external tension can provoke a serious deterioration of the situation of civilian population of Georgia and lies within the on-going agravation of a general human rights situation. A. Torture, ill treatments and excessive use of force Use of torture and ill treatments by law enforcement officials FIDH and Human Rights Information and Documentation Center (HRIDC), member of FIDH, strongly condemn the increase of torture, inhuman and humiliating treatments especially by law enforcement bodies. Despite the fact that, NGOs and UN human rights mechanisms reported numerous cases of torture committed by police officers, the impunity of their perpetrators is still a reality. In his annual report to the 62nd Commission on human rights (march 2006) and following a mission to Georgia, the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, declared that “torture and ill-treatment by law enforcement officials still exist in Georgia” and that “ the methods of torture included beatings with fists, butts of guns and truncheons and the use of electric shocks, and cigarette burns; injuries sustained by the victims included, among other things, broken bones, cigarette burns, scars, as well as neuropsychological changes”.
    [Show full text]
  • Causes of War Prospects for Peace
    Georgian Orthodox Church Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung CAUSES OF WAR PROS P E C TS FOR PEA C E Tbilisi, 2009 1 On December 2-3, 2008 the Holy Synod of the Georgian Orthodox Church and the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung held a scientific conference on the theme: Causes of War - Prospects for Peace. The main purpose of the conference was to show the essence of the existing conflicts in Georgia and to prepare objective scientific and information basis. This book is a collection of conference reports and discussion materials that on the request of the editorial board has been presented in article format. Publishers: Metropolitan Ananya Japaridze Katia Christina Plate Bidzina Lebanidze Nato Asatiani Editorial board: Archimandrite Adam (Akhaladze), Tamaz Beradze, Rozeta Gujejiani, Roland Topchishvili, Mariam Lordkipanidze, Lela Margiani, Tariel Putkaradze, Bezhan Khorava Reviewers: Zurab Tvalchrelidze Revaz Sherozia Giorgi Cheishvili Otar Janelidze Editorial board wishes to acknowledge the assistance of Irina Bibileishvili, Merab Gvazava, Nia Gogokhia, Ekaterine Dadiani, Zviad Kvilitaia, Giorgi Cheishvili, Kakhaber Tsulaia. ISBN 2345632456 Printed by CGS ltd 2 Preface by His Holiness and Beatitude Catholicos-Patriarch of All Georgia ILIA II; Opening Words to the Conference 5 Preface by Katja Christina Plate, Head of the Regional Office for Political Dialogue in the South Caucasus of the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung; Opening Words to the Conference 8 Abkhazia: Historical-Political and Ethnic Processes Tamaz Beradze, Konstantine Topuria, Bezhan Khorava - A
    [Show full text]
  • A Historical-Geographic Review of Modern Abkhazia
    A Historical-Geographic Review of Modern Abkhazia by T. Beradze, K. Topuria, B Khorava Abkhazia (Abkhazeti) – the farthest North-Western part of Georgia is situated between the rivers Psou and Inguri on the coast of the Black Sea. The formation of Abkhazia within the borders is the consequence of complicated ethno-political processes. Humans first settled on the territory of modern Abkhazia during the Paleolithic Era. Abkhazia is the place where Neolithic, Bronze and Early Iron Eras are represented at their best. The first Georgian state – the Kingdom of Egrisi (Kolkheti), formed in 15. to 14. century BC, existed till the 2.century BC. It used to include the entire South-Eastern and Eastern parts of the Black Sea littoral for ages. The territory of modern Abkhazia was also a part of the Egrisi Kingdom. Old Greek historical sources inform us that before the new millennium, the territory between the rivers Psou and Inguri was only populated with tribes of Georgian origin: the Kolkhs, Kols, Svan-Kolkhs, Geniokhs. The Kingdom of Old Egrisi fell at the end of the 2.century BC and was never restored till 2.century AD. Old Greeks, Byzantines and Romans called this state - Lazika, the same Lazeti, which was associated with the name of the ruling dynasty. In 3. and 4. centuries AD, entire Western Georgia, including the territory of present Abkhazia, was part of this state. Based on the data of Byzantine authors, the South-East coastline part of the territory – between rivers Kodori and Inguri - belonged to the Odishi Duchy. The source of the Kodori River was occupied by the Georgian tribe of Misimians that was directly subordinated to the King of Egrisi (Lazeti).
    [Show full text]
  • [ 2006 ] Part 1 Chapter 5 Europe and the Mediterranean
    452 Political and security questions Chapter V Europe and the Mediterranean The restoration of peace and stability in the post- Kosovo in August when its Government adopted a conflict countries in the Europe and Mediterranean European Partnership Action Plan. In November, region advanced in 2006, as efforts to re-establish the Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for the fu- their institutions and social and economic infra- ture status of Kosovo announced that the presenta- structure continued. However, a number of issues tion of the Settlement Proposal would be delayed remained unresolved. until the end of January 2007 to allow for the hold- Led by the European Union (eu), the interna- ing of parliamentary elections in Serbia. tional community continued to assist Bosnia and In a historic referendum in May, Montenegro Herzegovina to move towards full integration voted to separate from Serbia. In June, the General into Europe through the eu Stabilization and Assembly welcomed Montenegro to membership in Association Process. The country adopted an eu the United Nations. integration strategy, its first long-term strategic Renewed efforts were made to end the stalemate document leading towards full eu membership, and in the Georgian Abkhaz peace process. During the made progress in meeting the North Atlantic Treaty year, the Special Representative of the Secretary- Organization Partnership for Peace requirements, General in Georgia convened the first session of which culminated in an invitation for Bosnia and the resumed Coordination Council of the Georgian Herzegovina to join the Partnership. In October, and Abkhaz sides, which had not met since 2001. domestic authorities successfully carried out the Senior officials of the Group of Friends of the country’s first self-organized general elections since Secretary-General (France, Germany, Russian the war ended in 1995.
    [Show full text]
  • Consejo De Seguridad Distr
    Naciones Unidas S/2007/588 Consejo de Seguridad Distr. general 3 de octubre de 2007 Español Original: inglés Informe del Secretario General sobre la situación en Abjasia (Georgia) I. Introducción 1. Este informe se presenta en cumplimiento de la resolución 1752 (2007) del Consejo de Seguridad, por la que el Consejo decidió prorrogar el mandato de la Misión de Observadores de las Naciones Unidas en Georgia (UNOMIG) hasta el 15 de octubre de 2007. El informe contiene información actualizada sobre la situación en Abjasia (Georgia) desde que presenté mi informe de 18 de julio de 2007 (S/2007/439). 2. Mi Representante Especial, Sr. Jean Arnault, siguió al frente de la Misión. En esta tarea contó con la ayuda del Jefe de Observadores Militares, el General de División Niaz Muhammad Khan Khattak (Pakistán). Al 1° de octubre de 2007, la dotación de la UNOMIG era de 133 observadores militares y 19 agentes de policía civil (véase el anexo). II. Proceso político 3. Durante el período objeto del presente informe, la UNOMIG continuó su labor destinada a mantener la estabilidad en la zona de conflicto, impedir que las tensiones se agudicen y facilitar el diálogo entre las partes georgiana y abjasia. Los intentos de resolver el conflicto siguen basándose en la idea de que un diálogo positivo sobre la seguridad, el regreso de los desplazados internos y los refugiados, la rehabilitación económica y las cuestiones humanitarias contribuirá a encontrar una solución política amplia al conflicto, teniendo en cuenta los principios enunciados en el documento titulado “Principios básicos para la distribución de competencias entre Tbilisi y Sukhumi”, su carta de envío (véase S/2002/88, párr.
    [Show full text]
  • Download File
    AT THE HARRIMAN INSTITUTE Overcoming Warlords and State Failure: Lessons from Post-Soviet Georgia n Wednesday, November 11, 2009, Kimberly she calls “middlemen” warlords, because they remained Marten, Professor of Political Science at Bar- in power with Russian or Abkhazian support, operating nard College, Columbia University, spoke at the between two states—Russia and Georgia. OHarriman Institute about two Georgian warlords—Aslan Abashidze and Emzar Kvitsiani. Marten discussed their Aslan Abashidze was a high-ranking official in both the influence in Georgia, and the divergent approaches to- Georgian and the Ajarian Communist parties until the fall wards warlordism taken by the administrations of Geor- of the Soviet Union. “This means that he had a lot of con- gian leaders Eduard Shevardnadze (1992-03) and Mikheil nections with political figures emerging in the post-Sovi- Saakashvili (2003-present). et space,” Marten said. In 1991, Abashidze was elected Marten, who is writing a book on “Warlords, Sover- chairman of the Parliament of Ajara. Marten explained eignty, and State Failure,” had just returned from Georgia, that his election was semi-legal. Georgia's first president, where she conducted 26 interviews with policy makers Zviad Gamsakhurdia, had pressured the chairman of the and analysts connected to these cases. Her findings were parliament to resign and then swayed the parliament to the basis for her presentation and will comprise a chap- elect Abashidze. “While Abashidze's election was techni- ter in her book. “Until now there have been ideographic cally legal, it was actually an exercise of force.” Simulta- studies of warlordism, but not a body of theory about the neously Abashidze became deputy chairman of Georgia's relationships between states and warlords.
    [Show full text]