Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Moscow's Political Tactics Alienating its Near Abroad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Moscow's Political Tactics Alienating its Near Abroad

    PINR - The Power and Interest News Report
    Feb 7 2005

    "Moscow's Political Tactics Alienating its Near Abroad"

    Russia has seen its influence in the Caucasus -- and the rest of the
    former Soviet Union -- wane significantly since the November 2003
    Rose Revolution in Georgia. Although economics play a part in the
    drive to become closer to the United States and the European Union,
    Moscow largely blames post-revolution Georgia for the Orange
    Revolution in the Ukraine and its perceived loss of influence there.
    While Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili and Ukrainian President
    Viktor Yushchenko were in Strasburg for a Council of Europe
    Parliamentary Assembly (P.A.C.E.) meeting, Russian President Vladimir
    Putin made no secret of meeting separatist leaders in Moscow,
    including the newly elected president of Abkhazia Sergei Bagapsh and
    the defeated Ukrainian presidential candidate Victor Yanukovych.
    Russian policies have become increasingly anti-Georgian since
    Saakashvili came to power, which regional experts feel is Moscow's
    response to Saakashvili's decidedly Western bent. But its decision to
    punish Georgia and other opposition leaders in the former republics
    may be working against long-term Russian interests.

    Abkhazia

    The first major blow to Russia's influence in its own background was
    not the election in the Ukraine but the October elections in Abkhazia
    [See: "Russia's Slippery Foothold in Abkhazia Becomes a Slide"].
    Abkhazia is officially a part of Georgia, but gained de facto
    independence from Tbilisi after Georgia lost control of the republic
    following a war in the mid 1990s, a fact that is largely credited to
    Russian interference. The ruling regime in Abkhazia is supported by
    Russia. Russian peacekeepers monitor its borders with Georgia, the
    Russian ruble is the local currency and any economic development is
    limited to Russian investors. Moscow also pays Abkhaz pensions and
    has widely issued Russian passports throughout the Abkhaz population.

    Candidate Raul Khajimba actively campaigned on a pro-Russian
    platform, promising an increase in investments from Russia and
    stronger relations with Moscow. Sergei Bagapsh, known in the Russian
    media as the opposition candidate, also pledged to foster greater
    ties with Russia. Neither candidate spoke favorably of Georgia or the
    possibility of improving Abkhaz-Georgian relations. Tbilisi distanced
    itself from the whole election; only Russia recognizes Abkhazian
    independence and, therefore, the election. The Russian media was the
    only source of international coverage. Despite support from the
    Kremlin and other Russian politicians, Khajimba officially lost the
    election on October 3, an event that nearly resulted in civil war
    when he refused to accept the Central Election Committees final count
    in favor of Bagapsh. Events came to a head in December, when Bagapsh
    refused to give up plans for his inauguration.

    In response to the unexpected turmoil in a republic fully dependent
    on Russian support, Russia closed its borders and cut off trade with
    Abkhazia, in effect squashing the main source of income for most
    Abkhaz, the citrus trade. While that show of strength helped
    convenience Bagapsh to bow to Russian pressures, it also underscored
    what analysts say caused his victory in the first place. The only
    real difference between the two candidates was Bagapsh's calls for a
    truly independent Abkhazia, recognized by the international
    community. In its current state, both Tbilisi and Sukhumi refuse to
    have relations and Georgia refuses to allow any trade to Abkhazia to
    cross its borders, even to the extent that Saakashvili ordered
    Turkish boats heading to Abkhazia bombed over the summer. That limits
    Sukhumi to relations with Moscow. While it is unlikely that any
    country in the international community will recognize Abkhazian
    independence, Bagapsh's strong stance in that direction was perceived
    as a threat to the current status quo.

    Thanks to the immediate embargo on Abkhazian goods, Moscow was able
    to convenience Bagapsh to accept a compromise between the two former
    rivals. Days before the planned inauguration, Bagapsh agreed to a
    revote and ran with Khajimba as his vice presidential candidate.
    Under the current agreement, Khajimba wields an unusually large
    amount of power, including a reported 40 percent of the state budget.
    Since his election on January 12, Bagapsh has stepped up rhetoric
    against Georgia and made open overtures to strengthen Abkhaz-Russian
    ties. Moscow was able to reel the wayside republic back in, but it
    took a last ditch show of strength to do it.

    The Orange Revolution

    Despite a much stronger Russian effort during the Ukrainian election
    in November, the Russian-backed candidate Viktor Yanukovych could not
    defeat opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko. Analysts have debated on
    what Yushchenko's victory will really mean for Ukrainian-Russian
    relations, but regardless of Yushchenko's western looking policies,
    Ukraine remains a major Russian trading partner. Historically,
    religiously and ethnically Russia and Ukraine have close ties. The
    new president's first international trip was to Moscow, albeit
    quickly followed by the address at Strasburg.

    The real question remains what this growing trend of peaceful
    uprisings will mean for the remaining Russian-supported presidents in
    other former republics. However insulting Yushchenko's victory is for
    Moscow, in the long run it will only truly adversely affect
    Russian-Ukrainian affairs if Putin decides to punish Yushchenko like
    he is currently castigating Georgian president Mikhail Saakashvili.
    The Ukrainian vote for Yushchenko was more a vote against rampant
    corruption and the questionable election than a vote against Russia.
    Yushchenko has gone out of his way to pacify Russians in the eastern
    part of the country, even defending the role of the Russian language
    in Ukraine. His drive toward the West is less a statement of
    anti-Russian sentiment than as an accepted desire to improve
    conditions in his country. But that can change if Russia is not
    willing to actively work with Yushchenko.

    Yushchenko has roughly a year to prove to his divided country that
    Ukraine will benefit from better relations with Western states. If
    Russia tries to openly sabotage his effects -- like it is in Abkhazia
    and Georgia -- Putin risks a much more serious backlash during the
    upcoming parliamentary elections. By supporting Yushchenko, Russia
    can help strengthen Ukraine which will result in a deeper alliance
    between the two countries and increase stability in the region. Any
    effort by Moscow to further antagonize the country, especially the
    western half, could have the opposite effect.

    New ethnic discord will only weaken Russia's chance to increase its
    influence in the region as both current leaders and opposition forces
    throughout the former Soviet Union are watching Ukrainian
    developments closely. If it becomes apparent that Moscow will not
    tolerate any action perceived to weaken its influence in the region,
    economic and military aid from the West will seem more desirable.
    While existing leaders might welcome Russia's brand of friendship,
    the opposition will work more strongly to free their respective
    countries from Moscow's influence if it becomes evident Russia sees
    them not as sovereign states but as internal problems.

    Russia's Special Relationship with Georgia

    Moscow's continued interference with ethnic problems within Georgia
    has not strengthened its role in the Caucasus. Even before the Rose
    Revolution, Russia's efforts to destabilize the region and bring it
    into submission with military force backfired. In 2002, Moscow
    accused Tbilisi of harboring terrorists in the lawless Pankisi Gorge
    that borders Chechnya. Instead of resulting in an increase of Russian
    military personnel to Georgia, the accusations led to stronger ties
    between Georgia and the United States and the U.S.-led Train and
    Equip Program for the Georgian army. Since Saakashvili came to power,
    Georgia has made every effort to strengthen ties with the United
    States and Europe.

    Russia's continued support for separatist leaders in Abkhazia and
    South Ossetia is meant to deter stability -- and therefore foreign
    investment -- in Georgia. However, in reality Russia's obvious
    interference has helped the Georgian leadership turn to the West for
    support and resolution. During his speech in Strasburg, Saakashvili
    clearly stated that Russia is not capable of leading Georgia to a
    peaceful resolution in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The Venetian
    Commission's decision to actively participate in the development of a
    peace settlement even further decreases Russia's influence in its own
    near abroad.

    Moscow's newest tactic -- vetoing the continuation of the
    Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (O.S.C.E.) border
    patrol on the Chechen, Ingushetia, and Dagestani borders -- has been
    more successful. Under its current policy, Russia will guarantee no
    international observers will be monitoring the borders by late
    spring. When the snow melts, Chechen rebels will have easy passage
    into Georgia and -- according to Russia -- Moscow will have ample
    cause to bomb the Pankisi Gorge, or force Georgia into accepting more
    Russian peacekeepers inside the Georgian border. Those troops would
    be in addition to the soldiers already in place along the borders of
    Abkhazia and South Ossetia, as well as the two Russian army bases in
    Batumi and Akhalkalaki.

    But this could also backfire. Saakashvili and his administration have
    actively been searching for willing replacements to the O.S.C.E.
    monitoring group and the E.U. has tentatively expressed interest.
    While the E.U.'s monitors are far from certain at this point, any
    move to place independent international monitors would work against
    Russia. Under the O.S.C.E., Russia had a say and a role in the
    monitoring. If it becomes the duty of the E.U. -- or a mixture of
    observers from various countries -- Moscow's say would be diminished
    and its claims that the Georgian government is not strong enough to
    protect its own borders would be disproved.

    Tbilisi and its allies are also becoming more adamant about the
    remaining two Russian army bases in Georgia. In January, Saakashvili
    attacked the role of Russian peacekeepers inside Georgian territory.
    Georgia has proposed creating joint anti-terrorist centers with
    Russia on the current army bases. So far Russia has shown no real
    interest, but if it continues alienating itself from the
    international community with coercive tactics, Georgia will gain more
    support from the international community and could garner the
    necessary support to force Russian troops out of the country all
    together.

    Problems in Armenia

    Another potential defeat for Russian influence is waiting in Armenia.
    In the past, Armenia has been a bastion of Russian support in the
    Caucasus. Russia has long supported the country militarily and
    economically -- for example, Armenia receives all of its gas from
    Russia. While only an estimated 20 percent of Armenia's exports are
    purchased in Russia, a reported two million Armenians live there and
    their families at home depend on the financial support they send.

    Russia supported Armenia during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict with
    Azerbaijan and still stands firmly behind Yerevan during peace talks
    about the contested territories. During the civil unrest in Georgia
    leading up to the Rose Revolution in 2003, both Russia and Armenia
    made public statements about their mutually strong and beneficial
    relationship. Russia strengthened its already strong military
    presence in Armenia, increased arms sales and even moved some
    soldiers from bases in Georgia to Armenia during the protests in
    Tbilisi.

    Nevertheless, Armenia's support for Russian influence is not as
    strong as it was a year ago. While the opposition was emboldened due
    to the success of the Rose Revolution, another important negative
    development for Russia came in September 2004, following the
    terrorist attacks at Beslan. When Russia closed its borders with
    Georgia following the attack, hundreds of Armenian trucks and buses
    were stranded for a month, unable to go to either Russia or back to
    Armenia. While there are no concrete figures for how much Armenian
    businesses lost during that month, Armenians felt slighted by their
    ally and insulted at Russia's reaction to punish them along with the
    rest of the Caucasus. That added to dissatisfaction with Russia's
    continued support of President Robert Kocharian, whose victory in
    2003 is widely disputed by opposition parties and the public.

    Russian diplomats were slow to react to the situation, and statements
    from Moscow largely consisted in recommending different routes into
    Russia. The United States, however, was not slow to act. Since the
    Rose Revolution, Washington has been paying more attention to
    Armenia. Sensing a weakness in Russian-Armenian relations over the
    past year, America has picked up the pace. A new consulate is planned
    for Yerevan which reportedly will be the biggest in the region. In
    addition, American-driven aid projects have been on the rise.

    A third party could further weaken Russian influence in Armenia.
    Yerevan and Iran have held intense talks about a proposed gas
    pipeline. While there are no investors yet, the pipeline has the
    potential to free Armenia from its current state of dependence on
    Russian gas.

    Conclusion

    Due to shortsighted policies, Russia has already lost considerable
    influence in Georgia. Moscow's erroneous politics in Abkhazia and
    Ukraine resulted in embarrassment and more strained relationships
    within Russia's sphere of influence. If Putin does not reverse this
    trend, Russia could lose support during the next Armenian elections
    and further encourage the currently weak opposition parties in
    Central Asia. Although opposition presidents are well aware of the
    importance of good relations with Putin, political games force them
    to increasingly turn to Europe and the United States for aid and
    support in an effort to balance more evenly between Russia and the
    West. If Moscow does not start realizing that coercive tactics in its
    near abroad are causing a loss of support from these states, it will
    continue to see its interests in the region weaken.

    Report Drafted By:
    Molly Corso



    The Power and Interest News Report (PINR) is an independent
    organization that utilizes open source intelligence to provide
    conflict analysis services in the context of international relations.
    PINR approaches a subject based upon the powers and interests
    involved, leaving the moral judgments to the reader. This report may
    not be reproduced, reprinted or broadcast without the written
    permission of [email protected]. All comments should be directed to
    [email protected].
Working...
X