Skip to main content

Regional Security Aspects of the EU Foreign Policy: The Georgian Conflicts Case-Study

 

Professor Vakhtang Maisaia, International Black Sea University (IBSU) and Warsaw University, Central-European Institute of Research and Strategic Studies (CIRSA, Republic of Poland);

PhD Student Miranda Mikadze, Caucasus International University (CIU, Georgia)

 


Abstract:

The EU has been developing its foreign policy implications having considered regional security provisions since 1999 and several approaches have been performing in order to achieve common stability on the European space. Certainly one the pillars of the security enshrines in resolving ethno-political conflicts not only inside of the European area but also in neighborhood ones. That is why the EU leadership has introduced several policy ENP– like, European Neighborhood Policy, The Eastern Partnership, etc. have variety approaches toward dealing peacefully conflicts staggered around the EU geopolitical space, including in Georgia and notable in Abkhazia and in South Ossetia Being contemporary occupied by the Russian Armed Forces.  

Unresolved conflicts and mitigation of threats in the South Caucasus have become one of the most important issues on the EU foreign policy agenda.

In the 2003 Security Strategy, the EU emphasized that it needed to "take a stronger and more active interest in the problems of the South Caucasus, which, of course, will also be a neighboring region." The European Union (EU) has appointed a Representative (SR) to the South Caucasus with the task of promoting peaceful resolution of conflicts in the region, including the crisis in Georgia and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, as well as regional cooperation.

All three countries in the South Caucasus have different policies towards the EU and therefore each of them requires a different form of cooperation. The EU is trying to maintain a balanced approach to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, which has become an obstacle in EU-Azerbaijan relations, but this is clearly different from the Georgian case, where the EU never hides its full support for Georgia.

In 2009, the EU established the Eastern Partnership (EaP) to strengthen relations with its eastern neighbors, including the countries of the South Caucasus.

The Common Security and Defense Policy is an integral part of the EU's foreign policy, aimed at ensuring the EU's operational capabilities through military and civilian means. The EUMM is a country-specific tool used for conflict prevention and peacebuilding.

Key Words: European Union, Ethnical conflict, Political conflicts, Foreign policy, Georgia

 

 

Introduction

 

The EU's foreign policy aims primarily to ensure security, democracy and the protection of human rights - not only in its immediate neighborhood but also in other hotspots around the world, where the EU is seen as a so-called soft power. (Soft Power) Conductor in international relations, covering issues such as election observation missions, humanitarian assistance, political dialogue, mediation, and more.

European Security and Defense Policy (CSDP) enables the EU to play a leading role in peacekeeping operations, conflict prevention and international security. It is a comprehensive approach to crisis management based on civilian and military assets.[1] Through which the EU hopes to achieve regional cooperation and help states resolve their own conflicts. Mitigating the potential threats posed by unresolved conflicts in the South Caucasus remains one of the most important issues on the EU foreign policy agenda.[2]

Although there are numerous definitions of conflict in the modern scientific literature, experts agree that conflict presents a problem that requires a solution. Morton Deutsch points out that incompatibility between the parties gives rise to conflict (Deutch, 1949). Anatole Raport links conflict with competition. He believes that the general difficulty in establishing communication between two people or two groups lies in the lack of common experience.[3]

The EUMM Georgia is a specific tool used for conflict prevention and peacebuilding in the EU. The EUMM is active only in situations where there is a crisis and an immediate response is needed. It has limited rights of action on the other side of the border, within the breakaway regions, although its influence is still very important. On September 15, 2008, the European Union (EU) set up an unarmed civilian monitoring mission (EUMM) in Georgia to monitor the ceasefire agreement, which meant that the EU became One of the key players, However, due to the Russia’s incumbent government efforts, this mission has no right to enter either Tskhinvali or Sokhumi.[4]

Notably, the EUMM was sought to aim having mandate for monitoring mission achievements in both conflict regions since October 1, 2008. Due to the Russia’s authority efforts, this mission was not allowed to enter either Tskhinvali or Sokhumi and their bases were located in Tbilisi, Gori and Zugdidi.[5]

The mission began monitoring the withdrawal of Russian troops from South Ossetia and Abkhazia on October 1, 2008. Since then, the mission has been conducting 24-hour patrols, paying particular attention to the areas adjacent to the administrative borders of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The mission's main focus is on monitoring the situation on the ground and reporting on incidents, and the mission is constantly on the ground in these areas and generally helps to improve the security situation.

During the 2008 Russia-Georgia war, the European Union assumed the role of mediator, and it was Brussels' involvement that led to the signing of a six-point ceasefire agreement between Russia and Georgia. The six-point peace plan was negotiated by the president of France, the then holder of the EU presidency, but Moscow only partially fulfilled the agreement. At the same time, on 25 September 2008, the Council of the European Union appointed the EU Special Representative for the South Caucasus, in particular for the Crisis Resolution in Georgia (EUSR).[6]

After the August 2008 war, the format of the Geneva International Talks was established between Georgia and Russia. In addition to Georgia and Russia, representatives of the United States and its co-chairs from the OSCE, the European Union and the United Nations are taking part in the talks. The Geneva International Talks are being held in two parallel working groups. The first discusses security issues, while the second addresses the return of internally displaced persons and refugees, as well as other humanitarian issues. Despite this, the Geneva peace process only managed to maintain the status quo.

The EU continues to use its traditional model for the peaceful resolution of conflicts, but the conflicts in the South Caucasus are much more deeply rooted than the issue discussed in Europe. On the other hand, the countries of the South Caucasus probably need more time to adapt to the traditional European approach to conflict resolution. The Conflicts in the South Caucasus have become a driving force for European integration. The Georgian-Russian war of 2008 especially conditioned the rapprochement of the South Caucasus countries with the European Union. In 2009, the EU established the Eastern Partnership (EaP) to strengthen relations with its eastern neighbors, including the countries of the South Caucasus.

            The aim of the EU-Georgia Joint Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) dialogue and cooperation is to gradually bring them closer to their Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP).

 

New EU Challenges Security in the Black Sea Basin - South Caucasus

 

In 2007, EU enlargement led to the Black Sea coast. The Black Sea region is an area rich in natural resources and cultural diversity. It has great potential as a transit corridor between Asia and Europe. According to Fischer, its member states are not distinguished by state power, they are characterized by destructive nationalism, unresolved conflicts, which constantly lead to crises such as the 2008 Russia-Georgia war.[7]

The Black Sea connects Europe with the Caspian region and beyond - with Central and Southeast Asia hence it is also called the Natural Bridge. The Black Sea has always been of strategic importance to the EU, especially in terms of the security of Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries located along the Black Sea-Danube basin.[8]

The EU Neighborhood Policy (2003), the Black Sea Synergy (2007) and the Eastern Partnership (2009) have influenced the region's democratic transformation and internal consolidation and helped bring regional players closer to the EU.[9]

In his paper "EU Black Sea Policy and Enlargement", Kakha Gogolashvili discusses the goals and ambitions of the Black Sea region, the tools of cooperation, the shortcomings and challenges of its policy. His interests, in terms of solving various problems of the region, have grown. The researcher also links the main challenges to the environment, migration, employment and social protection, economic development and trade, border and internal disputes and fluctuations, terrorism and arms proliferation, drug and human trafficking, natural resource use, navigation and the military. The countries of the region are either rich in natural resources or are transit countries, which is important for the EU's energy security. They form a transport corridor and bridge between the Caspian and Central Asia regions, which are also rich in natural resources, including energy. Security and stability on the Black Sea have a significant impact on the future of the EU.

On the territory of the post-Soviet world, the South Caucasus is distinguished by the fact that there are three unresolved conflicts in a small geographical area, the conflict is exacerbated by the occupation of Georgian territories by Russia. He periodically tries to create problems with the so-called. Moving the administrative boundary or kidnapping people.

In the modern world, conflicts remain one of the main challenges, it is an integral part of human life, therefore neither society nor country exists without it, conflict in all types of government and everywhere affects the functioning of the state. However, this is particularly acute for developing countries, as already fragile institutions are threatened in a number of areas.

One source of conflict is power and the unequal distribution of resources. Weber notes that power represents the potential expressed in social activity. According to Burton, power is a means of controlling events. Likert believes that power provides an opportunity to influence actions.[10]

It is believed that in recent years states have lost the function of universal control. It is necessary for each person to better understand the essence of the conflict in order to be able to overcome the difficulties and realize their own responsibility for the ongoing processes. It is impossible to completely eliminate conflicts in any society or country, however, it is possible to study their management for the full functioning of the state. It is also necessary to be able to constructively transform the destructive events in the conflict.[11]

Every type of conflict has its cause. It is a fact that the conflicts in Georgia have political and ethnic grounds. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that for years there did not seem to be a desire to solve these problems.

The EU plays an important role in the Middle East peace process, it has troops, it has police and judges who help save lives. Contribute to the further stabilization of conflicts in countries and regions around the world.

Georgian-Abkhazian relations have been strained since the 1980s, when a section of the political elite dissatisfied with the Soviet regime demanded Georgia's independence from the Soviet Union. In the late 1980s, Abkhaz separatists signed the so-called The Likhni Declaration, according to which they granted the Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia the status of a Soviet Republic and declared independence from Tbilisi.[12] The Likhni Declaration was signed by the rector of Sokhumi University, which was met with a negative response from ethnic Georgian scientific and political elites, and escalated into a feud between the opposing parties. This was the reason for the events of April 9, 1989, when the protests in front of the Government Palace in Tbilisi turned into bloodshed as a result of the violent crackdown on peaceful protesters by the Russian special services.

 

The Political Aspects of the Abkhaz-Ossetian Conflitcs: History and Reality

Tensions between the Georgian and Abkhaz populations peaked in Abkhazia on July 16-17, 1989. As a result of the confrontation, 14 people were killed and up to 140 civilians were injured. Most of the victims were ethnic Georgians. This event is considered to be the first armed confrontation between the parties, which played a major role in the subsequent escalation of the situation and significantly determined the future of Georgian-Abkhazian relations.[13]

On July 23, 1992, the political elite of Sokhumi declared Abkhazia's independence from Georgia, and despite the lack of response from the international community, it further strained relations between the ethnic Georgian and ethnic Abkhaz populations. A few days later, the armed conflict escalated into a war after the breakaway region of Abkhazia suspended the Georgian constitution; National symbols emerged: the flag and the coat of arms.[14]

The fighters from the North Caucasus - Chechens, Adyghes, Karachay-Circassians, Kabardino-Balkarians - fought against the Georgian government; Militants from Syria, Karabakh, Transnistria and Turkey also took part in the hostilities. Abkhaz separatists have been mercilessly killing Georgian civilians. According to eyewitnesses, sadistic methods of torturing ethnic Georgians by Abkhazians have been reported. According to unconfirmed reports, up to 6,000 Georgians were killed on the territory of Abkhazia (in Sukhumi, Gagra, Ochamchire, Gali, etc.), including more than 50% women, children, the elderly and the disabled. Georgian cultural and historical monuments were deliberately destroyed in Abkhazia.[15]

As a result of the sharp deterioration of the situation and the large number of victims, there was an urgent need for negotiations between Georgians, Abkhazians and Russians. On May 14, 1993, a ceasefire agreement was signed between the parties in Moscow, signed by Eduard Shevardnadze and Boris Yeltsin. As the Russians failed to meet the terms of the agreement and the "series of false promises" continued, on July 27 of the same year, another agreement was signed in Sochi on a "ceasefire and control mechanism in Abkhazia". It provided for the complete disarmament of the opposing parties.[16]

Despite the Sochi agreement, Abkhaz separatists continued to bomb disarmed Sokhumi, killing people with extreme brutality. Eduard Shevardnadze, in fact, was deceived. He could not control the situation. At the same time, Zviad Gamsakhurdia's supporters were active in counter-attacks, which created an even more difficult and hopeless situation.

On September 27, 1993, after a 13-month battle, Sukhumi fell. On September 28, we read the address of Eudard Shevardnadze in the pages of the newspaper "Republic of Georgia": "In fact, Georgia is on its knees. That too was not enough. It is unfortunate, but I must honestly say that without the interests of the forces we could not be deprived of anything but internal strife and betrayal of fellow citizens. I, along with my comrades, am shocked by what has happened. God knows, I was doing everything I could to avoid this terrible day. I could not. Let my contemporaries and descendants forgive me.[17]

On the day of the fall of Sokhumi, which resulted in the fall of Abkhazia, Abkhaz separatists captured and shot Zhiuli Shartava, the chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia, who heroically sacrificed himself for the survival of Georgia and the Georgian idea in the Abkhaz war. He was severely beaten along with Guram Gabeskiria, the mayor of Sukhumi, Vakhtang Gegelashvili, a member of the Council of Ministers of the Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia, Mamia Alasania, Alexander Berulava and others.

The war in Abkhazia from 1992 to 1993 was fought between Georgian government forces for the most part, and Abkhaz separatist forces, Russian armed forces and North Caucasian militants. The separatists received support from thousands of North Caucasus and Cossack militants and from Russian forces stationed in and near Abkhazia. Between 13,000 to 20,000 ethnic Georgians and approximately 3,000 Abkhaz have been reported killed, more than 250,000 Georgians became internally displaced or refugees and 2,352 are considered missing. Among the missing more than 1,500 are ethnic Georgians, up to 200 are ethnic Abkhazians and about 100 are ethnic Ossetians. 563 bodies have been identified and 191 of the 563 have been given to their families since 2013.[18]

There are still conflicting opinions about what caused the defeat of the Georgians in the Abkhaz war. It is important to emphasize that one of the reasons was undoubtedly Georgia divided into two parts, opposing camps and a wide range of pro-Russian oppositions, which further complicated the already tense situation in the country. One of the reasons is also the faulty intelligence services, the unprofessionalism of Georgian TV channels, which often cover secret information about the dislocation or movement of the Georgian Armed Forces. It is a shameful fact that Georgians are looting their own population, etc.

It is worth mentioning the indifferent attitude of a part of the Georgian society towards the Abkhazian conflict and the Abkhazian ethnos in general. As Akaki Bakradze wrote, "An atmosphere reigned throughout Georgia as if Abkhazia was in Africa and not in ours".[19] Like the Georgian-Abkhazian conflict, the Georgian-Ossetian conflict matured in the 1980s, which 10 years later  alated into the Georgian-Ossetian conflict in 1991-1992.

Tensions and conflicts of interest between the Georgian and Ossetian sides date back to 1918-1920, when the Georgian National Council adopted the Act of Independence and thus seceded from imperialist Russia. The Georgian Menshevik government accused the Ossetians of collaborating with the Russian Bolsheviks, which provoked a negative reaction from the Ossetians. They repeatedly tried to organize an uprising to secede from Georgia and gain independence. In 1921, after the loss of Georgia's independence and its Sovietization, the South Ossetian Autonomous District was established within Georgia.

Bilateral relations are significantly strained since 1985 in the so-called Soviet Union. In parallel with the "transformation" processes. Ossetian separatism was brewing in Georgia against the background of national liberation movements. According to a report published by the Temporary Commission on Territorial Integrity of the Parliament of Georgia, the South Ossetian conflict, as an integral part of the ethno-national confrontation, was based on political, economic, social and criminal motives, which were reflected: a) between Tskhinvali and Tbilisi. In the War of Laws ”; B) in discussions between Ossetian and Georgian socio-political leaders and publicists; And c) in the confrontation of Georgian and Ossetian armed formations.[20]

On August 15, 1989, the Council of Ministers of the Georgian SSR established the constitutional status of the Georgian language, according to which only Georgian as a state language would be used in all scientific-educational or administrative institutions throughout the country. The decision was followed by the first rally and protest by the informal organization Adamon Nikhas, whose leader, Alan Chochiev, was repeatedly noted for his separatist aspirations and anti-Georgian actions or narrative.[21]

The Ossetian side declared disobedience to the Georgian side and initiated an amendment to the Georgian Constitution. They demanded that the Georgian government declare Ossetian the state language in the South Ossetian Autonomous Region and respect Ossetian identity and identity. The Georgian authorities did not comply with the Ossetian side's request, considering their claim "illegal" and abolishing the South Ossetian Autonomous District on November 16, 1989.

Meetings between the Georgian and Ossetian sides were held periodically to defuse the situation. The constructive-minded political elite tried their best to defuse the situation and reach a consensus through negotiations, as neither side's interests included a hand-to-hand fight and escalation of the conflict. 15,000 Georgians moved in the direction of Tskhinvali. Ossetian insurgents blocked the entrance to Tskhinvali and prevented Georgian protesters from entering the city. They considered this action as a "muscle game" by ethnic Georgians and an attempt to destroy two ethnic groups. Ossetians confronted Georgians with Soviet soldiers. The clash was followed by casualties.[22]

Georgian-Ossetian relations have stalled since the Council of People's Deputies of the South passed a resolution on the "sovereignty of South Ossetia" and declared direct distrust of the Georgian central government. As this action was contrary to the Constitution and legislation of Georgia, it was repealed by the Supreme Council of Georgia. In response, the 15th session of the Autonomous District Council was convened in Tskhinvali and the Declaration on the Sovereignty of South Ossetia was adopted again, with local elections scheduled for December 2, 1990.[23]

On December 11, 1990, the Supreme Council of Georgia held a so-called meeting held by the Autonomous District of Abkhazia. He declared the "elections" illegal and declared them invalid. It also abolished the South Ossetian Autonomous Region and declared a state of emergency in the region.

After the above-mentioned events, the conflict of interests between the Georgian and Ossetian sides escalated into a direct military confrontation. Within a year, 1,000 people were killed and more than 30,000 displaced as a result of the Georgian-Ossetian conflict. Residential houses and infrastructure were destroyed. Conflict has done great damage to both sides.[24]

On June 24, 1992, a ceasefire agreement was signed between Russia and Georgia in Sochi, signed by the leaders of Georgia and Russia, Eduard Shevardnadze and Boris Yeltsin. Later, the OSCE (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe) set up a Joint Control Commission (JCC), uniting Georgia, South Ossetia, Russia and North Ossetia. The main task of the Quartet was to resolve the conflict peacefully; Restore trust between the parties; Return of refugees and internally displaced persons; Rebuilding the bridge related to economic challenges between the parties; Maintaining peace and order in the conflict zone, etc.[25]

Despite the above-mentioned efforts, it has become very difficult to restore trust between the parties to the conflict, as the parties have repeatedly violated their obligations and resumed armed attacks. In the early and mid-1990s, the situation was less under control. The Georgian-Ossetian conflict marks a red line in the first years of independence in the recent history of Georgia.

The EU is also an objective player in Georgia, which can inform the whole world about what is happening in the conflict regions, it does not have an additional mandate.

 

Conclusion

 

The European Union is one of the most important organizations in the world, both politically, economically and militarily. Recently, especially after the UK withdrew from the union in a referendum, despite some Euroscepticism, the EU remains a global player of growing global interest and interest in all political, economic and cultural spheres of the world. Therefore, it is natural that the interest and aspirations of the post-Soviet states, including Georgia, towards the European Union are a precondition for the country's development and the peaceful settlement of conflicts.

Conflicts in the post-Soviet space are a global challenge not only for the EU but for the whole world, we have to face a great power that is not bound by international standards and therefore it makes things very difficult. Russia's goal is to maintain its influence in the area that was once called the Soviet Union and is therefore constantly interested in conflict and unrest in the region, because it is easy for it to maintain its influence in such conditions.

The success of EU policy depends on resolving the conflicts in Georgia, the South Caucasus, Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The EU Country Strategy Paper on Georgia states that the EU wants Georgia to develop as a politically stable region in the South Caucasus. Georgia's peaceful conflict resolution policy is linked to a comprehensive vision for the future, where the rights and identities of all citizens and ethnic groups are protected and guaranteed by the Georgian Constitution. Consequently, Georgia's democratic development, stability, economic prosperity and the building of a European model state remain key to Georgia in resolving conflicts.

 

 

 

 

References

Apciauri K., Abkhaz War (1992-1993) (in Georgian), Tbilisi 2003.

Asatiani T., et al., How to resolve conflict (in Georgian), Tbilisi 2000.

Bakradze A., For Abkhazia, (in Georgian)  Tbilisi, 2002.

Fischer S., The European Union and security in the Black Sea region after the Georgia crisis, “Southeast European and Black Sea Studies”, vol.9(3) 2009, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14683850902934325

Georgia & The European Union, http://eugeorgia.com/en/on-georgia/eu-georgia (access 1.03.2021).

European External Action Service, European External Action Service,  2018

Gogolashvili K., EU Black Sea Policy and Enlargement, Georgian Strategy and International Relations Research Foundation, Tbilisi 2018.

Łyhny 1989 goda. 35 tysiacz za Abhazii (Лыхны 1989 года. З6 тысяч за свободу Абхазии),
https://sputnik-abkhazia.ru/Abkhazia/20160318/1017585741.html (access 1.03.2021).

Jafarova E., EU Conflict Resolution Policy Towards the South Caucasus, “The Quarterly Journal” Vol. 10 (3) 2011.

Jojua D., Abkhazia in 1938-2006: Aspects of the Regional Historical Process, CCU, 2007

Jorbenadze R., Managing political conflicts (in Georgian), Open Society Georgia Foundation Tbilisi 2001.

König M., The Georgian-South Ossetian Conflict, Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg, Hamburg 2004.

Malashkhia Sh., Anatomy of Conflict  (in Georgian), Tbilisi 2011.

Nichol J., Russia-Georgia Conflict in August 2008: Context and Implications for U.S. Interests, “CRS Report for Congress”, 3  March 2009.

Rapoport A., Game Theory as a Theory of Conflict Resolution, Springer Science, Dordrecht 1974.

Shevardznadze E., God knows, I was doing everything I could to avoid this terrible day, Republic of Georgia 1993.

Songhulahshvili A., South Ossetia in Georgia ?!, (in Georgian)  Tbilisi, 2009.

Towards Security. Building Confidence, https://eumm.eu/data/image_db_innova/EUMM (access 1.03.2021).

Rondeli, A., 2001. „The choice of independent Georgia“. The security of the Caspian Sea region, pp.195-211.

Parliament of Georgia. "Informative Notice on the Georgian-Ossetian Conflict". Office of the Temporary Commission on Restoration of Territorial Integrity of the Parliament of Georgia. Available: http://www.parliament.ge/uploads/other/18/18511.pdf.

https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/GE%20RU_920624_AgreemenOnPrinciplesOfSettlementGeorgianOssetianConflict.pdf

https://eumm.eu/data/image_db_innova/EUMM, 2008

 



[1] European External Action Service, European External Action Service,  2018

[2] E. Jafarova, EU Conflict Resolution Policy Towards the South Caucasus, “The Quarterly Journal”, Vol. 10 (3) 2011, pp. 59-60

[3] A. Rapoport, Game Theory as a Theory of Conflict Resolution,  Springer Science, Dordrecht 1974

[5] Towards Security. Building Confidence, https://eumm.eu/data/image_db_innova/EUMM (access 1.03.2021)

[6] Georgia & The European Union, http://eugeorgia.com/en/on-georgia/eu-georgia (access 1.03.2021)

[7] S. Fischer, The European Union and security in the Black Sea region after the Georgia crisis, “Southeast European and Black Sea Studies”, Vol. 9(3) 2009

 

[9] K. Gogolashvili, EU Black Sea Policy and Enlargement, Georgian Strategy and International Relations Research Foundation, Tbilisi 2018

[10] R. Jorbenadze, Managing political conflicts, Tbilisi: Open Society Georgia Foundation (in Georgian) 2001

[11] T. Asatiani, et al., How to resolve conflicts, (in Georgian) Tbilisi 2000.

[12] Łyhny 1989 goda. 35 tysiacz za Abhazii (Лыхны 1989 года. З6 тысяч за свободу Абхазии),
https://sputnik-abkhazia.ru/Abkhazia/20160318/1017585741.html (access 1.03.2021)

[13] Sh. Malashkhia, Anatomy of Conflict (in Georgian), Tbilisi 2011

[14] D. Jojua, Abkhazia in 1938-2006: Aspects of the Regional Historical Process, CCU, 2007

[15] Sh. Malashkhia, Anatomy of Conflict  (in Georgian),  Tbilisi, 2011

[16] K. Apciauri, Abkhaz War (1992-1993),(in Georgian), Tbilisi 2003

[17] E. Shevardznadze, God knows, I was doing everything I could to avoid this terrible day, Republic of Georgia 1993.

[18] Agenda.ge, 14 Aug 2020 - 11:41, Tbilisi,Georgia, https://agenda.ge/en/news/2020/2537

[19] A. Bakradze,  For Abkhazia (in Georgian), Tbilisi 2002

[20] Parliament of Georgia. "Informative Notice on the Georgian-Ossetian Conflict". Office of the Temporary Commission on Restoration of Territorial Integrity of the Parliament of Georgia. Available: http://www.parliament.ge/uploads/other/18/18511.pdf.

 

[21] M. König, The Georgian-South Ossetian Conflict, Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg, Hamburg 2004

[22] Ibidem

[23] A. Songhulahshvili, South Ossetia in Georgia ?! (in Georgian), Tbilsi 2009

[24] J. Nichol, Russia-Georgia Conflict in August 2008: Context and Implications for U.S. Interests, “CRS Report for Congress”, 3 March 2009.

[25]https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/GE%20RU_920624_AgreemenOnPrinciplesOfSettlementGeorgianOssetianConflict.pdf

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A failed military coup in Russia. What happened?

  A failed military coup in Russia. What happened?   By: Nika Chitadze Director of the Center for International Studies Professor of the International Black Sea University President of the George C. Marshall Alumni Union, Georgia - International and Security Research Center    For several hours on June 24 of this year, Russia was on the verge of a civil war. The rebellious "Wagnerians" were already 200 kilometers from Moscow. In the center of Rostov, the head of "Wagner" Yevgeny Prigozhin himself was fortified, and the Chechen leader Kadyrov sent his armed formations to destroy him, he had positions in the outskirts of the city and was preparing for an attack. However, in the end, the "march of justice" announced by Prigozhin ended "peacefully". Russia avoided a civil war. At least at this point. Government representatives and the so-called parties reached an agreement during the negotiations between the private military company "Wagne

Ukraine's expected counterattack and possible de-occupation of the country

  Ukraine's expected counterattack and Possible De-Occupation of the Country Nika Chitadze Professor of the International Black Sea University Director of the Center for International Studies President of the George C. Marshall Alumni Union, Georgia - International and Security Research Center  As expected, Ukraine's counteroffensive against the Russian occupation forces has already begun, although it has not yet entered the decisive phase. It should be noted that the past 5 months were particularly difficult for Ukrainian soldiers - the period when Ukraine began to save forces to prepare for a large-scale counteroffensive. In recent months, Ukraine has withdrawn most of its combat-ready units from the front line, and thousands of Ukrainian soldiers have gone abroad for training. The newly formed and refreshed brigades were left intact by the military-political leadership of Ukraine and did not involve them in heavy winter battles.   All this happened against the backgrou

Ecologic Problems of the Modern World and their Impact on the International Politics

Nika Chitadze Affiliated Prof. Dr., Faculty of Social Sciences, International Black Sea University. Director of the Center for International Studies President of the George C. Marshall Alumni Union, Georgia – International and Security Research Center Tbilisi, Georgia Introduction Environment and its such resources, as water, air, always were the necessary conditions for the human`s life and activities. But, during the many centuries of the history of mankind, environment was not represented the problem neither for the humanity, nor for its further sustainable development. Environment and natural resources were offering the satisfaction the needs of those people, who lived in the concrete period of the world history without causing the damage to the next generations. At the second half of the XX Century, the topic related to the environmental protection was included to the agenda, including the political aspects, because of the fact, that as a result