Main page                           
Eurasian Home - analytical resource


MOSCOW’S REALITIES AND THE FUTURE OF GEORGIAN SOVEREIGNTY

Print version

GEORGETA POURCHOT,
Director, OLMA/NCR, Political Science, Virginia Tech; Fellow, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington DC

The current Russian military operation in Georgia marks the beginning of the end for Georgian sovereignty.

The peace deal brokered by France contains the seeds of further chipping away at Georgian territory, by allowing Russian troops the right to patrol “a few kilometers” beyond the conflict zone. Apart from the fact that the deal does not establish exactly how many “few kilometers” the Russians are permitted inside the sovereign space of another country, this clause stands in internal contradiction with other provisions of the deal: Russian troops are supposed to return to their pre-conflict positions and Georgian troops are supposed to return to their permanent place of deployment in South Ossetia. If Russian troops are allowed to patrol outside the zone of conflict even by a meter, not by a few kilometers, their return to pre-conflict positions is moot. The proposition that Georgian troops are to return to their pre-conflict positions is similarly laughable, under conditions where the Russians control most access roads. Moscow’s recent rejection of a UN resolution calling for the withdrawal of troops from Georgia is based precisely on this inherent flaw of the French-brokered deal. Moscow claims it has the right to a “buffer zone,” outside the zone of conflict, that is the “few kilometers” granted last week. It is therefore rejecting full withdrawal and does not see any reason to justify the destruction of Georgian property within or outside the zone of conflict. Georgia is essentially left with no military power to counter this invasion.

The French-brokered deal is a Western concession to Moscow demands in order to secure a rapid cease fire and enable humanitarian assistance to the affected population. This muddled deal gives the Kremlin a legitimate, internationally accepted military presence in Georgia, a country whose leadership has dared defy Moscow on several counts in recent years. Moreover, this bad deal, agreed in order to stop the fighting has not even met its humanitarian assistance purpose. Russian troops have not permitted OSCE monitors or humanitarian aid to enter South Ossetia. As such, the deal has only served one side: the Russians.

The so-called withdrawal of Russian troops already indicates what the Kremlin is prepared to do, versus what the Euro-Atlantic allies think Moscow agreed. Russian troops remain within twenty-five miles of the Georgian capital, and they control road access to cities throughout the country. In the city of Gori, even if there are no Russian tanks, citizens depend on food and water supplies, whose entry is also controlled by Russian posts outside the city. Police stations that should be busy with officers defending the rule of law are deserted. The citizens of Gori are de facto left to take care of themselves. The control of access roads gives Russia the real power inside Georgia. This is not sovereignty, this is occupation.

Chancellor Angela Merkel’s sudden and unexpected support for Georgia’s NATO aspirations suggests that her visit to Tibilisi must have been self-explanatory. She lived in East Germany for most of her adult life and can recognize an occupation tank when she sees one. Considering that she was the one European leader who opposed Georgia’s and Ukraine’s bid at the April NATO summit, that she appeared the most inclined to accommodate Moscow’s demands in the current crisis, her sudden support for Georgia in NATO marks a fundamental shift in the current crisis. Her support indicates that she understands the real stakes, that Georgia is in danger of losing its sovereignty.

In order to understand the current situation between Russia and Georgia, one needs to understand Moscow’s assumptions about its relationship with the former communist bloc. In a nutshell: Russia thinks of countries from Central Europe to Central Asia as if they are still in its former sphere of influence. As such, if these countries make sovereign decisions that Russia dislikes, it reacts either by using diplomatic rhetoric, or economic pressure, or since August 8, 2008, resuming its Cold War military intervention. Poland, the Baltic countries and Ukraine who expressed strong support for Georgia in the current crisis have already been warned by Russian military leaders that their allegiances will not go “unpunished.” At stake is something called “Russia’s traditional interests in the region,” a phrase much used in the Kremlin and among common Russians.

To be fair, Russia refrained from military intervention in almost two decades since the end of the Cold War. It did not invade Central European or Baltic countries when they joined NATO. It did not respond with fire to the color revolutions. It did not interfere in Central European and Central Asian domestic affairs the same way the Soviet Union used to. That said, the march to Euro-Atlantic integration by increasing numbers of countries that used to be Soviet territory is perceived as “Western encircling” in order to render Russia weak and humiliated. The fact that Georgia and Ukraine have been more vocal about joining NATO in recent years is threatening to political circles in Russia. These circles have long advocated for a more forceful approach to reclaim Russia’s former sphere of influence, and these circles now seem to gain the upper hand.

It is worth noting that Russia has legitimate security concerns, and that its overreaction to Georgia’s attempt to take back control of South Ossetia is justified in the name of Russia’s security. It is also worth noting that when Chechnya demanded independence, Russia reacted forcefully, bombing the small republic in the name of “Russia’s domestic interests.” Neither Georgia, nor any other country came to the aid of Chechens, and Russia ravaged the republic for a decade. When Georgia tried to bring back into the fold its separatist republic using the same methods that the Kremlin used in Chechnya, Georgia’s action was deemed “genocide” in Moscow.

Much has been made in Russia of the fact that Georgia attacked first in South Ossetia, and that “Russian citizens” were the subject of genocide. Moscow has kept quiet about the fact that the so-called Russian citizens in South Ossetia are largely local citizens who were afforded Russian passports by Moscow, in contravention to a number of international laws. Several years ago, Mikhail Saakashvili brought to the attention of the UN the fact that his country was being slowly, quietly and surely the subject of annexation by the Kremlin authorities via the issuance of such illegal passports. Moscow responded, again, claiming special interests in the region and continued the process of colonizing South Ossetia with Russia-friendly citizens.

Georgia’s chances to regain control over the separatist republic, as well as of the “few kilometers” that Russian troops now occupy is complicated by the fact that the Euro-Atlantic community has no real leverage over the Kremlin. Short of going to war with Russia to defend Georgian sovereignty, neither the Europeans nor the Americans have the means to force Moscow to withdraw from this daring republic. NATO foreign ministers have met, president Sarkozy “threatened” to convene an extraordinary session of the European Council if Russia does not withdraw immediately, but this is just saber rattling. Moscow is not afraid of another EU meeting in which its actions will probably be “strongly condemned” by its Euro-Atlantic partners. It is not afraid that NATO will send the military to defend Georgian positions, because it knows NATO will not take such action. It is equally not afraid of whatever sanctions the EC or NATO might place against it. All the “strong” words and stern faces are the equivalent of a tempest in a teapot, and Russia knows it. Since Moscow sees itself entitled to do whatever it takes to secure its “traditional interests in the region,” Georgian sovereignty is very much under a question mark.

August 20, 2008




Our readers’ comments



There are no comments on this article.

You will be the first.

Send a comment

Other materials on this topic
Hot topics
Digest

28.07.2008

THE GEORGIAN TIMES: GEORGIA GEARING UP FOR “IMMEDIATE RESPONSE”, RUSSIA FLEXING MUSCLES WITH “CAUCASUS FRONTIER 2008”

1,625 Georgian military servicemen are taking part in a large-scale international military training, alongside US forces, known as Immediate Response at the site of the fourth infantry brigade of Vaziani base.

02.07.2008

RFE/RL: GUA? MULLING MOLDOVA'S ABSENCE AS SUMMIT BEGINS

Officials from Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, and Moldova are in the Georgian city of Batumi for the first day of the two-day GUAM summit.

14.04.2008

RFE/RL: NATO: KYIV, TBILISI FACE MORE OBSTACLES THAN SIMPLY RUSSIAN RESISTANCE

Days before the NATO summit in Bucharest began, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili rolled out a new peace initiative for breakaway Abkhazia.

07.04.2008

RFE/RL: U.S./RUSSIA: FRIENDLY WORDS, BUT BUSH AND PUTIN FAIL TO RESOLVE DISPUTES

Setting aside growing tension on a number of issues, Putin and Bush appeared eager to end their presidential relationship on a high note.

03.04.2008

RFE/RL: NATO WELCOMES CROATIA, ALBANIA, BUT ASKS UKRAINE, GEORGIA, MACEDONIA TO WAIT

Speaking today at NATO's summit in Bucharest, Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said the alliance wants to welcome Ukraine and Georgia as members someday.

27.02.2008

CIVIL GEORGIA: GEORGIAN, RUSSIAN MINISTERS ON PUTIN-SAAKASHVILI TALKS

Davit Bakradze, the Georgian foreign minister: “As a result of an agreement between the presidents, [direct] air traffic will be resumed between Russia and Georgia in the nearest future, it is expected that flights will resume from the second half of March.”

19.02.2008

RFE/RL: IN POST-SOVIET BREAKAWAY REGIONS, EYES LOOK LONGINGLY TO KOSOVO

The ink has hardly dried on Kosovo's independence declaration.  And already, reactions are flowing from frozen conflict zones in the former Soviet Union as if on cue.

25.12.2007

THE GEORGIAN TIMES: WITH OR WITHOUT RUSSIA?

The foreign policy priorities of the presidential candidates. Most put Euro-Atlantic and NATO integration front and center, but good relations with Russia is, for some, another major consideration.

22.11.2007

RFE/RL: COLORED REVOLUTIONS: HIGH HOPES AND BROKEN PROMISES

As anniversaries of the events in Georgia and Ukraine approach, high hopes and great expectations have been replaced with apprehension.

01.11.2007

RFE/RL: GEORGIA SEEKS END TO RUSSIAN PEACEKEEPERS’ MANDATE IN ABKHAZIA

Georgia says it will move to formally ask Russian peacekeepers to leave the breakaway region of Abkhazia following reports that they seized and beat five Georgian police officers.

24.04.2007

THE GEORGIAN TIMES: WILL NATO INTEGRATION HELP ENSURE OR RISK GEORGIA’S SECURITY? POLISH EXPERIENCE AND PUBLIC OPINION

Interview with Jaroslaw Walesa, the member of parliament of Poland.


Expert forum
THE OUTCOME OF THE EXTRAORDINARY EU SUMMIT ON SOUTH OSSETIAN CONFLICT

VLADIMIR CHIZHOV

03.09.2008

The outcome of the extraordinary EU summit held on September 1 in Brussels was more or less predictable, both in terms of the views expressed by the EU member states and in terms of the EU Presidency conclusion.


RUSSIAN-GEORGIAN CONFLICT. EUROPE SUPPORTS THE U.S. POSITION

ALEKSANDR RAHR

20.08.2008

Yesterday I could say that in Europe there were differences in relation to Russia’s actions in South Ossetia. Some countries blamed Georgia for the conflict, others blamed Russia. But at present there is a different tendency.


THE OUTBREAK OF VIOLATION IN SOUTH OSSETIA IS AT ODDS WITH THE INTERESTS OF ALL THE PARTIES

ANDREY MAKARYCHEV

20.08.2008

South Ossetia and Georgia have been at war with each other since last week. The towns and cities came under fire, the reservists were mobilized. There are the killed and the wounded, and a lot of refugees.


WAR IN SOUTH OSSETIA – TIME TO MAKE WISE DECISIONS STILL REMAINS

ZAAL ANJAPARIDZE

12.08.2008

The guns are bellowing now in South Ossetia and Georgia, and muses of those who might mull over the solution of the grave crisis, are still silent. Many things including the people’s lives depend on how long the diplomats and policy-makers will be inactive.


“SEA BREEZE-2008” AND PROSPECTS OF UKRAINE’S JOINING NATO

VITALY PORTNIKOV

22.07.2008

The holding of “Sea Breeze” military exercises and Ukraine’s joining NATO should be regarded as two different processes. Some people want to unite them, but Kyiv has not applied for the NATO membership yet. Ukraine has not received the NATO Membership Action Plan and, apparently, will not recieve it in December.


SITUATION IN ABKHAZIA

SERGEI BAGAPSH

22.05.2008

What will Abkhazia do, if Georgia joins NATO? Abkhazia will do nothing. Let Georgia join NATO even tomorrow. We do not care about that.


“RUSSIAN-GEORGIAN RELATIONS CAN BECOME MUCH BETTER”

EROSI KITSMARISHVILI

21.05.2008

Currently, there are several negative points in the Russian-Georgian relations. The first one is Georgia’s bid for the NATO membership, the second one is Tbilisi’s conflict with the breakaway territories – Abkhazia and South Ossetia. There are also the problems of the bilateral relations.


RUSSIAN-GEORGIAN RELATIONS AND WAYS TO SETTLE THE GEORGIAN-ABKHAZIAN CONFLICT

TEMUR IAKOBASHVILI

21.05.2008

It is impossible to settle the conflicts, on which I am working, without Russia’s participation, especially today when the situation has become so strained that the so-called "frozen conflicts" have got "unfrozen".


CRISIS IN THE RELATIONS BETWEEN GEORGIA AND RUSSIA

KONSTANTIN GABASHVILI

08.05.2008

We do not want to be at war with anybody. We want to normalize the situation, start negotiating with Russia and other countries to put an end to the conflict.


SITUATION IN THE CONFLICT ZONES IN ABKHAZIA, SOUTH OSSETIA AND TRANSNISTRIA

VALERY KENYAIKIN

30.04.2008

The parliamentary elections will be held in Georgia soon. That’s why an “external enemy” is being looked for to mobilize the country’s public opinion.


PRESIDENT OF GEORGIA OFFERS ABKHAZIA BROAD FEDERALISM

ALEXANDER KRYLOV, ALEKSEY MALASHENKO, ANATOLY OTYRBA, SERGEI MARKEDONOV, SHALVA PICHKHADZE, ZURAB ABASHIDZE, IVLIAN KHAINDRAVA

14.04.2008

"For the first time the President of Georgia has put forward such far-reaching proposals," Alexander Krylov.


DOES NATO ENLARGEMENT POSE A THREAT TO RUSSIA?

KONSTANTIN ZATULIN, ALEXANDER KONOVALOV, TATYANA PARKHALINA, OLES DONIY, LEONID KOZHARA, IVAN ZAETS, ANDREW KUCHINS

07.04.2008

"Why do the Central and Eastern European countries seek to join NATO? For many of them it is a way to join the EU. Many countries took this as institutionalization of independence from Moscow. For many countries it was a way to return to Europe," Tatyana Parkhalina.


NATO, THE CIS AND RUSSIA AFTER BUCHAREST

STEPHEN BLANK

02.04.2008

In advance of NATO’s Bucharest summit Russia has decided to employ the traditional Soviet tactics of intimidation and blackmail to block NATO’s enlargement.


NATO-RUSSIA BREAK: A SIGNIFICANT POSSIBILITY

GEORGETA POURCHOT

01.04.2008

The Bucharest NATO summit offers a significant possibility that NATO’s and Russia’s positions on a variety of issues will further diverge, marking the beginning of the end of this uneven relationship.


EURASIA RISING: DEMOCRACY AND INDEPENDENCE IN THE POST-SOVIET SPACE

GEORGETA POURCHOT

14.03.2008

Eurasian Home website with a kind permission of the Greenwood Publishing Group Inc., publishes the first chapter "Sovereignity from Within" of the book "Eurasia Rising: Democracy and Independence in the Post-Soviet Space" by the Eurasian Home website contributor Georgeta Pourchot.


CIS INFORMAL SUMMIT

ALEKSANDR RAHR

26.02.2008

All the CIS leaders arrived in Moscow on Friday to participate in the informal summit. This indicates their respect for Russia’s President Vladimir Putin who steps down in spring. Unlike ex-President Boris Yeltsin, Putin did his best to create the working atmosphere within the CIS. Much was done in the sphere of the economic integration.


MIKHEIL SAAKASHVILI’S FIRST VISIT AS PRESIDENT WAS TO MOSCOW NOT WASHINGTON

GIGA BOKERIA

23.11.2007

No democratic Georgian government will ever agree with Abkhazia’s independence, because in this territory a few people with the assistance of the large neighboring state and the military aggressively hoisted the flag of ethnic nationalism.


MODERN RUSSO-AMERICAN RELATIONS

SERGEI ROGOV

07.05.2007

Unfortunately, I have to state that the strategic partnership between Moscow and Washington has failed. The partnership exists in words only. And there are several reasons for that.


RUSSIAN-GEORGIAN RELATIONS

ARCHIL GEGESHIDZE

02.04.2007

After the Russian ambassador Vyacheslav Kovalenko had come back to Georgia early in this year, hope emerged that the relations between the two countries would improve. But little change followed the ambassador’s coming back.


GEORGIA – NATO: PROSPECTS FOR COOPERATION

MERAB PACHULIA

09.03.2007

Ambitions of the Georgian authorities to develop cooperation with NATO are largely supported by the population. There is a consensus on the benefits that the country could receive after acquiring membership of the Alliance, though contradictions remain.


GEORGIA’S WAY TO NATO STREAMLINED

ZAAL ANJAPARIDZE

19.02.2007

Members of the “National Forum” and some other opposition parties fear that Georgia may join NATO without Abkhazia and South Ossetia, thus losing those territories for good.


ABKHAZIA APPEALS TO THE WORLD COMMUNITY FOR RECOGNITION OF ITS INDEPENDENCE

GHIA NODIA

06.12.2006

Abkhazia, an unrecognized republic of Georgia, held December 6 a “national gathering” to express its will to gain independence.


MOSCOW HAS NO MORE CREDENCE TO TBILISI

ZAAL ANJAPARIDZE

28.11.2006

Tbilisi intends to show Moscow and the whole international community that the Saakashvili Administration is eager to restart the two countries’ dialogue.


CRISIS OF THE RUSSIAN-GEORGIAN RELATIONS

MERAB PACHULIA

10.10.2006

Under the current circumstances there seems to be no compromise between Georgia and Russia over the breakaway regions.


ABKHAZIA: NEW EASTERN POLICY

SERGEI MARKEDONOV

29.07.2005

The Georgian minister on conflict settlement, Giorgi Khaindrava, called the recent meeting between the leaders of Abkhazia and South Ossetia a "statehood game." While Georgian officials continue to describe political developments in the breakaway republics in this way, Abkhazia is taking a number of very important political steps that may give its cause a boost.


COLOR REVOLUTIONS IN THE CIS

TATYANA STANOVAYA

23.06.2005

The treatment of leaders ousted in the recent "color revolutions" in some CIS states is directly related to the way in which power was seized. Kyrgyzstan has meted out the most brutal treatment, followed by Ukraine and Georgia.


RUSSIAN - GEORGIAN RELATIONS

SERGEI MARKEDONOV

19.06.2005

Russia's relations with Georgia are one of the most cute and problematic aspects of foreign policy in the Caucasus. Previously "fraternal," i.e. former Soviet republic, Georgia has become one of Moscow's most intractable partners in the former Soviet space.



Analysis

02.04.2008

EURASIA RISING: DEMOCRACY AND INDEPENDENCE IN THE POST-SOVIET SPACE

Eurasian Home website with a kind permission of the Greenwood Publishing Group Inc. publishes the first chapter "Sovereignity from Within" of the book "Eurasia Rising: Democracy and Independence in the Post-Soviet Space" by the Eurasian Home contributor Georgeta Pourchot.



Opinion
ENOUGH GRAND-STANDING BY THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT
Jules Evans

27.08.2008

The typical criticism of the UK’s Foreign Office is the one eloquently expressed in John Le Carre’s The Constant Gardener - that they are pitiless practitioners of real-politik who care more about stability than idealism, and who only really work to protect the interests of British corporations, rather than British values. But on Russia, the Foreign Office seems to have erred on the other side.


BAD HABITS ARE CONTAGIOUS
Boris Kagarlitsky

14.08.2008

Georgia has resolutely condemned Russia’s actions in Chechnya. Russia has severely criticized NATO actions towards Serbia. Later on the Georgian authorities tried to do the same thing in South Ossetia as the Russian authorities had done in Chechnya. Moscow decided to treat Georgia in the same way as NATO had treated Serbia.


VICIOUS CIRCLE
Boris Kagarlitsky

17.07.2008

The Russian foreign policy boringly runs around in circles: the row with Estonia on the historic past, the squabbles between Moscow and Kyiv over the Crimea and Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, the confrontation with Georgia because of its breakaway republics etc. After having made a full circle we are back to square one - another conflict with Georgia.


GEORGIA COULD BE OBSTREPEROUS OVER RUSSIA’S WTO BID
Jules Evans

20.11.2006

The Georgian government has apparently been offering olive branches to the Russian government over the last two weeks, with the demotion of hawkish defence minister Irakli Okruashvili to the ministry of economy (he’s since resigned).



Author’s opinion on other topics

NATO-RUSSIA BREAK: A SIGNIFICANT POSSIBILITY

01 April 2008

The Bucharest NATO summit offers a significant possibility that NATO’s and Russia’s positions on a variety of issues will further diverge, marking the beginning of the end of this uneven relationship.


EURASIA RISING: DEMOCRACY AND INDEPENDENCE IN THE POST-SOVIET SPACE

14 March 2008

Eurasian Home website with a kind permission of the Greenwood Publishing Group Inc., publishes the first chapter "Sovereignity from Within" of the book "Eurasia Rising: Democracy and Independence in the Post-Soviet Space" by the Eurasian Home website contributor Georgeta Pourchot.


PUTIN’S CHOICE

09 May 2006

There has been ample speculation about the nature of Putin’s State of the Nation Address due in the Parliament on May 10.


NATO AND RUSSIA’S BALANCING ACT

02 May 2006

NATO’s most recent informal summit in Sophia underscores a decade and a half of balancing act between two former adversaries, the North Atlantic Alliance and Russia.


UKRAINE ELECTIONS 2006: SHOCKING RESULTS? DON’T THINK SO

31 March 2006

Election results confirm the expected three-way split in Ukraine’s parliamentary election of March 2006.


UKRAINE ELECTIONS 2006: WHERE NEXT?

20 March 2006

There is little speculation about the results of the March 2006 legislative elections in Ukraine in Western circles: Almost everybody agrees that irrespective of political line-up, the results will not reflect a clear popular choice.


POLITICAL CRISIS IN UKRAINE

14 September 2005

The current political crisis in Ukraine is not unexpected and should not be cause for skepticism regarding the future of democracy in Ukraine. The sacking of the Yuliya Tymoshenko government by president Yushchenko, high-level resignations starting with State Secretary Oleksandr Zinchenko’s over the week-end followed by Security and Defense Council head Petro Poroshenko and Vice Prime Minister Mycola Tomenko, widespread allegations of corruption and coalition n-fighting, disagreements over the “right” course for Ukraine’s reforms and increasing popular dissatisfaction with the pace and depth of economic, political and social transformation are all manifestations of the domestic turmoil that accompanies transitions to a democratic environment.

 events
 news
 opinion
 expert forum
 digest
 hot topics
 analysis
 databases
 about us
 the Eurasia Heritage Foundation projects
 links
 our authors
Eurasia Heritage Foundation