Parties to Conflict

The European Union really is a piece of work sometimes. On the one hand, the EU is very concerned about Russia-Georgia tensions. On the other, they tell Georgia to not have unrealistic expectations. Such expectations include greater EU participation in Georgia’s conflicts with South Ossetia and Abkhazia or EU contribution of peacekeepers.

“There are discussions going on currently within the EU about strengthening the EU’s role, but Georgia’s expectations may be unrealistically high,” she said. “The EU urges the Georgian leadership to have patience. Too quick decisions with regard to the South Ossetian and Abkhazian peace processes must be avoided, as they could endanger the presence of the UN and the OSCE [Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe] in the region.”

From not only the European, but also the US perspective, it certainly does make sense to avoid getting too deeply involved in the conflict. But keeping out of it certainly does put Georgia in a hard spot, considering the other country that says it does not want to be involved.

On October 20 in Finland, Vladimir Putin addressed Georgia’s separatist conflicts and Russia’s role in them. On the conflict between Russia and Georgia, he says that his country has nothing to do with it.

The problem does not lie in the relations between Georgia and Russia. The problem lies in relations between Georgia and South Ossetia, between Georgia and Abkhazia.

He goes on to really underline Russia’s abdication of any responsibility in these conflicts.

And this is what I wanted to emphasise first and foremost. As soon as different relations between Georgia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia are established, then Russian-Georgian relations will normalise. You should not blame us for not doing what we are not called upon to do. In the territory of the former Soviet Union we have quite a few frozen conflicts. And everyone I talk to says that if Russia were to desire it, then tomorrow this could be resolved. Russia will not take this responsibility upon herself. First and foremost it is the responsibility of the peoples and their representatives to reach an agreement between themselves and to find a compromise.

What a wonderful international reputation for Russia Putin is building! It remains important, but not so much in the way a respected, responsible member of the community is important as in the way that a mafia boss dangling threats over everyone’s heads is.

He also says that Russia’s goal for the resolution of Georgia’s separatist conflicts is a single state for all parties to the conflict. To paraphrase him, this is of course difficult considering what monumental jerks the Georgians are. He refers to large numbers of Ossetian refugees, Ossetian claims of ethnic cleansing, and Abkhazia’s small population compared to Georgia to point out about whom everyone should worry. Incredibly, he forgets to mention that Georgia has great reason not to trust the the Abkhaz especially.

Despite his protestations, Russia is indeed quite clearly a party to these conflicts. Russian politicians make quite clear that because so many Abkhazian and South Ossetian citizens hold Russian citizenship, Russia has an obligation to be involved. And given that Russian forces were involved in the initial fighting (see this report — PDF), it is quite hard to deny Russia’s involvement. All told, it is ridiculous for Russia to claim impartiality and even moreso for anyone to humor such claims.

While Georgia is not of enormous or clear interest to the West at present, it should be. Both it and the way that its conflicts with its Russian-backed separatists are resolved are far more crucial for the West, especially Europe, than officials seem to realize. Georgia matters in terms of real estate. Europe certainly has a strong interest in finding secure and reliable sources of energy, and many of the routes for transport run through Georgia. On top of that, every bit of energy not obtained through Russia’s pipeline network makes it that much more likely that Russia will find alternative, perhaps even more responsible, ways to act internationally. Furthermore, Georgia’s fates determine options for Azerbaijan and Central Asian states in their relations with Russia. In other words, Georgia’s fate impacts the sovereignty of six other states. Additionally, Georgia is a player in democratization in post-Soviet states. While we may or may not care about that, Georgians are far more likely to be successful and credible advocates for democratization to citizens of former Soviet states than are Westerners.

The list could go on, but suffice it to say that Georgia knows there is a case to be made to the West for paying it more attention and it is communicating that to the West at every opportunity.

Georgia is in a race against time. Once the regions frozen conflicts and the West-Iran conflict are solved, the “real-estate bubble” will bust. Thus, Saakashvili knows he must get his conflicts on the agenda and secure Georgia a place in the West.

Vladimir Socor has much more on Putin’s remarks on the conflict, arguing that at the very least, the West must avoid taking Putin’s bait and not focus go down the path of least resistance by ignoring Russia’s creeping annexation (protestations that it has no such wishes notwithstanding*) of Abkhazia and South Ossetia and seeking to restrain Georgia.

* Putin should, by the way, quit talking about Kosovo as a precedent for Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

There are certain contradictions: on the one hand, Russia supports the territorial integrity of Georgia and other countries. However, a nation has a right to self-determination. Therefore, we should take into account these contradictions and, of course, we will thoroughly consider international precedents, including that of Kosovo.

There are more than a few places in the Russian Federation that might find good reason to throw that in his face.

UPDATE: RFE/RL notes that the EU does not apply the same standards to all frozen conflicts in the former Soviet Union.

From the EU’s point of view, not all frozen conflicts are alike.

It continues to acknowledge Russia’s key role in attempts at resolution. But when it comes to its own involvement, Brussels is clearly more enthusiastic about Moldova than it is about Georgia.