INTERNATIONAL ENGAGEMENT IN THE GEORGIAN-ABKHAZ CONFLICT RESOLUTION PROCESS May 2010 Understanding conflict. Building peace. About International Alert International Alert is an independent peacebuilding organisation that has worked for over 20 years to lay the foundations for lasting peace and security in communities affected by violent conflict. Our multifaceted approach focuses both in and across various regions; aiming to shape policies and practices that affect peacebuilding; and helping build skills and capacity through training. Our field work is based in Africa, South Asia, the South Caucasus, Latin America, Lebanon and the Philippines. Our thematic projects work at local, regional and international levels, focusing on cross- cutting issues critical to building sustainable peace. These include business and economy, gender, governance, aid, security and justice. We are one of the world’s leading peacebuilding NGOs with more than 125 staff based in London and our 13 field offices. To learn more, visit www.international-alert.org. This publication has been made possible with the help of the UK Conflict Prevention Pool and the European Union Instrument for Stability. Its contents are the sole responsibility of International Alert and can in no way be regarded as reflecting the point of view of the European Union or the UK Government. © International Alert 2010 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without full attribution. Layout by D. R. ink Front cover image: © Mattias Nutt INTERNATIONAL ENGAGEMENT IN THE GEORGIAN-ABKHAZ CONFLICT RESOLUTION PROCESS May 2010 2 International Alert Table of Contents Introduction from International Alert 4 Part I – The Abkhaz Papers International Engagement in Abkhazia – Experience and Prospects 7 Introduction 8 Chapter 1 The Role of International Intergovernmental Structures in the Resolution of the Georgian-Abkhaz Conflict and Political Stabilisation in the Region (before August 2008) – Natella AKABA 9 Chapter 2 Abkhazia’s Experience of Cooperation with International Institutions and Organisations – DIANA KERSELYAN 18 Chapter 3 Consequences of the Withdrawal of the UN Mission and Prospects for International Presence in Abkhazia – IRAKLIY KHINTBA 27 Chapter 4 The Significance of the Geneva Process: Concerns, Limitations, Possibilities and Prospects – MANANA GURGULIA 35 Chapter 5 The Role of International NGOs in the Georgian-Abkhaz Conflict Transformation Process – LIANA KVARCHELIA 47 Part II - The Georgian Papers International Engagement in the Georgian-Abkhaz Conflict Resolution Process 61 Introduction 62 Chapter 1 A Retrospective Analysis of Factors Impeding and/or Contributing to Effective International Engagement in the Resolution of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict – VakHtang KOLBAIA 64 Chapter 2 Expert Assessment of the Closure of the UN and OSCE Peacekeeping Missions in Georgia – N. SARJVELADZE, M. BALIASHVILI, N. JaparidZE, E. MUJIRI 76 Chapter 3 ‘The Geneva Process’: Fears, Opportunities and Prospects – ARCHIL GEGESHIDZE 86 Chapter 4 Prospects for International Participation in the Georgian-Abkhaz Conflict Resolution Process – IVLIAN HAINDRAVA 93 Annex I Expert Assessment of the Effectiveness of International Engagement in the Resolution of the Georgian-Abkhaz Conflict (Results of Qualitative Research) 101 Annex II An Expert Analysis of the Role and Effectiveness of the ‘Geneva Talks’ (Results of Qualitative Research) 105 International Engagement in the Georgian-Abkhaz Conflict Resolution Process 3 Acronyms ADB Asian Development Bank APEC Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation BSEP Black Sea Environmental Programme CBDN Caucasus Business and Development Network CIS Commonwealth of Independent States CR Conciliation Resources CSCE Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe CSTO Collective Security Treaty Organisation ENP European Neighbourhood Policy EU European Union EUMM Monitoring Mission of the European Union GUAM Organization for Democracy and Economic Development (Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Moldova) IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and Development IDP Internally Displaced Person IGO International Governmental Organisation IIFFMCG International Independent Fact Finding Mission on the Conflict in Georgia INGO International Non-Governmental Organisation IPRM Incident Prevention and Response Mechanism IWPR Institute for War and Peace Reporting MEP Member of the European Parliament NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization NGO Nongovernmental Organization OHCHR Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights OSCE Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe PACE Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe UN United Nations UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund UNOMIG United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia UNPO Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organisation USAID United States Agency for International Development WWF World Wildlife Fund 4 International Alert Introduction from International Alert This collection of papers is the second in a series of ‘dialogue through research’ produced by Georgian and Abkhaz researchers, in an attempt to shed new light on the conflict and stimulate a different way of thinking about conflict-related issues. The first paper, on which work began prior to the August 2008 conflict and was published in September 2009, was entitled Dialogue on Security Guarantees in the Context of the Georgian-Abkhaz Conflict and considered the separate analyses of both Georgian and Abkhaz civil society experts on the need for security guarantees, the reasons why the sides have been unable to agree on them as well as barriers and opportunities for future agreements. The theme behind this paper on International Engagement in the Georgian-Abkhaz Conflict Resolution Process was chosen by researchers at a meeting in Paris in July 2009, only two weeks after Russia had vetoed the extension of the UN Observer Mission in Georgia (UNOMIG) mandate.1 This prompted a lively discussion on the potential consequences of the departure of UNOMIG, especially in the context of the already on-going debate on the isolation of Abkhazia, and Abkhazia’s increasing economic and political ties with Russia since Russian recognition of Abkhazia’s independence in August 2008. The veto came somewhat as a surprise to many, despite the fact that UNOMIG’s mandate and name had been under review since August 2008. The core of UNOMIG’s mandate had been undermined by Georgia’s withdrawal from the 1994 Moscow agreement on 30th August 2008, and by the withdrawal of CIS peacekeepers and their replacement with Russian border guards. Many analysts had considered that the interest in keeping a UN mission in Abkhazia was strong enough on all sides to make it possible to find a compromise on the wording of a new mandate, and a new name. Speculation as to why Russia finally vetoed the extension was rife. Why had the sides allowed it to happen? Each side was able to blame the other sides’ intransigence, yet other internal factors appeared to be at play also, such as the Abkhaz internal political dynamic in the run-up to presidential elections in December 2009; concerns within certain Georgian quarters that UN presence in some way legitimised the presence of Russian troops and was preventing progress on getting EU monitor2 access; Russian lack of enthusiasm for observation of its troops; and even US lack of enthusiasm to continue six-monthly head- to-head with Russia at the Security Council when renewing the mandate. Suddenly, with this surprise veto, all political interests were served. But two key questions remained: what of the isolation of Abkhazia? And what did UNOMIG’s departure mean for local and regional security? The previous paper on Security Guarantees had explored the question of who would be acceptable guarantors of an agreement on non-use of force, given that there were no completely neutral actors. While Russia and the EU/US were mistrusted by Georgians and Abkhaz respectively, the UN was considered to be the most neutral, and most experienced. One of the recommendations arising from the research was for there to be a balance of guarantors, but the UNOMIG withdrawal forced the question as to what would a balance of guarantors look like? In considering the significance of UN imminent withdrawal, the researchers discussed UNOMIG’s strengths and weaknesses. Would their impending departure have any significant impact? What had they, or other international organisations for that matter, actually achieved? More importantly, what lessons could be drawn from their experience? 1 UNOMIG (UN Observer Mission in Georgia) established in August 1993 to verify compliance with the ceasefire agreement between the Georgian and Abkhaz parties. Its mandate was expanded following the signing by the parties of the 1994 Moscow Agreement on a Ceasefire and Separation of Forces. 2 The EU Monitoring Mission is a civilian mission operational since 1st October 2008 to monitor the implementation of the EU-brokered peace agreements of 12th August and 8th September. EUMM is currently only able to monitor Georgian-controlled territory and continues to try to negotiate access to Abkhaz & South Ossetian-controlled territory. International Engagement in the Georgian-Abkhaz Conflict Resolution Process 5 The main regret appeared to be that there would be