One of my favorite topics has been very much in the news of late, and I wish I had more time to blog about it. I'm referring to Abkhazia, of course, the dispute over which even RIA Novosti now acknowledges, is a "Russian-Georgian dispute."*
This is something that a number of people have been saying for some time; perhaps the most forceful writings to that effect (and some of the most thorough English-language reporting on the "frozen conflicts" in general) can be found here. You can read a very articulate and current account from the Georgian point of view at cyxymu's blog (Civil Georgia is probably the best online source in English); the best place for the official Russian point of view is probably the RIA Novosti topical page (and Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs communiques available in English here and here). But my original point was that I don't, unfortunately, have time at the moment to write a lengthy post on this matter. Luckily, RIA Novosti's outstanding photo archive has a picture that is worth a thousand words:
Official caption: Dmitry Rogozin, leader of the Rodina faction in the State Duma, during his working trip to Abkhazia, where he visited a CIS United Forces' headquarter [sic]. June 14, 2004. Look over Rogozin's right shoulder - whose stern visage is that? The Гарант's, of course. It is interesting that a firebrand like Rogozin would be invited to visit the HQ of a "neutral peacekeeping operation" (though of course such an event is not news to anyone; Zhirik and others have paid visits to Abkhazia as well and no doubt also been well received by the "CIS" Peacekeeping Force), and even more interesting that such a supposedly multilateral "peacekeeping operation" would have a portrait of President Putin hanging on the wall.
*Certainly there remains a Georgian-Abkhazian element to the conflict, but if we imagine a "what-if" version of history where Russia played a genuinely neutral role in the settlement efforts over the past ten-plus years, it's difficult to imagine that some sort of resolution wouldn't have been reached.
3 comments:
Just to expound on one point for those who haven't been to Russia, Putin's picture is in every single government building, usually in every office. When pointing out that Putin's portrait is hanging on the wall of the the peacekeepers' HQ, this portrait makes it seem like an official office of the Russian Federation.
Just wanted to say: I do think you are underestimating Georgian-Abkhazian disagreement. Whatever proposals Georgia is putting out now amount only to what Abkhazia suggested before the war. Abkhazia has won de facto independence at very high cost and it is just not willing to give that up. If the alternative is 20 more years of status quo, then it will still choose that. Likewise, there is no reason why Georgia would want to recognise Abkhazia, so it too prefers the status quo over that.
And I think the Jamestown Foundation is not a good source. In particular Vladimir Socor's contributions are worthless. He basically repeats the official Georgian position, but what is worse, his facts are wrong half of the time and his interpretations and conclusions are not thought through at all.
The best sources on the conflict are Civil.ge for day-to-day news, IWPR for background stories, the occasional report by institutions such as the ICG and analysts such as Ghia Nodia and interesting bits from RFE/RL and Window on Eurasia.
Like your weblog very much, keep up the good work!
Thanks, for your comment. You are right of course - there was a particularly violent war which both sides remember, there are still so many IDPs, and many Abkhazians no doubt believe they really are fighting for the survival of their nationality. So I don't mean to reduce it to a beef between Russia & Georgia, it's of course much more complex than that. Perhaps I've spent too long in Russia and am prone to see it as the center of gravity in the region. I do think, though, that it is important to discuss the Russian-Georgian aspect of the conflict (which certainly exists), and also the degree to which Russia's involvement has the potential to eclipse and Abkhazian hopes for actual independence.
Your note on sources is also helpful, and I tend to agree with your assessment. Notice that I was careful to say that Jamestown is "forceful" and "thorough" (i.e., prolific), but not objective or even necessarily fact-based at all times. The trouble is that their material is so easily available and they write so much about these topics, but you're right, IWPR and the ICG's reports are much more objective. Socor's writings are essentially activist journalism.
Post a Comment