Tweet
GEORGIA FACING REALITY OF DEFEAT
By Thomas de Waal
BBC NEWS
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/e urope/7571002.stm
2008/08/20 09:05:10 GMT
Institute for War and Peace Reporting
When Russian troops eventually pull out of Georgian towns such as
Gori and Zugdidi, ordinary Georgians will heave a sigh of relief.
But that will also be the moment that they take on board the fact that
the two territories at the heart of the conflict with Moscow, South
Ossetia and Abkhazia, although formally still regarded internationally
as Georgian territory, are now essentially lost to them.
The people who will suffer most in the long term from this conflict
are more than 20,000 ethnic Georgians from a mosaic of villages in
South Ossetia who have now mostly fled.
Relatively few Georgians left during or after the small-scale 1990-92
conflict over South Ossetia and despite intermittent skirmishes and
incidents, neighbourly contacts continued.
Reporters who have passed through many of the villages in the last
few days say they are now in ruins.
The Russian authorities and their South Ossetian allies are now saying
that they will not allow the Georgians back any time soon.
A Russian foreign ministry statement on August 18 said, "It is clear
that some time Â- and not a short period of time Â- must pass in
order to heal the wounds and to restore confidence. Only after this,
the =0 Aconditions will be created for discussing practical aspects
related to the problems of refugees."
Hundreds of South Ossetians also lost their homes in the Georgian
military assault of 7-8 August and, it appears, in the ensuing Russian
counter-attack - but they have the small consolation of knowing they
can start rebuilding them.
Russian leverage
The prospect is also now much bleaker for the 240,000 or so ethnic
Georgians who were registered as displaced from the 1992-3 conflict
in Abkhazia.
Their hopes of return were predicated on a successful peace agreement
which now looks more elusive than ever.
Around 50,000 Georgians live in Abkhazia's southernmost Gali district
under an Abkhaz administration.
So far they have managed to stay in their homes, but their future is
also more precarious.
It is not just a matter of Georgian control. It will also be harder
now to maintain an international presence in the two disputed regions.
The final point in the six-point ceasefire plan reads: "Pending an
international mechanism [in South Ossetia], Russian peacekeeping
forces will implement additional security measures."
That effectively puts an end to the former Joint Peacekeeping Forces,
which had a Georgian contingent.
It also gives Moscow even more leverage than before over the shape
of any security arrangements for the region.
Moscow is already insisting it can have the only real security presence
t here.
"We are of course not against international peacekeepers... but the
problem is that the Abkhaz and the Ossetians do not trust anyone
except Russian peacekeepers," Russian president Dmitry Medvedev told
German chancellor Angela Merkel.
Unattainable dream
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE),
the only international organization with a mandate in South Ossetia,
wants to dispatch an additional 100 monitors to South Ossetia.
But Russia has dragged its feet, saying it wanted to agree the terms
of their deployment in more detail and the OSCE has so far agreed to
send just 20 more monitors.
The OSCE had just nine military monitors on the ground in South
Ossetia when fighting started there on 7-8 August.
The European Union, with French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner
taking the lead, also says it want to provide peacekeepers, but
Mr Kouchner's Swedish counterpart, Carl Bildt, admitted this might
not work.
"There are no signs of the Russians letting in anyone else," he said.
In Abkhazia, the United Nations has a small contingent of around 130
unarmed monitors, who were bystanders in the recent crisis.
When the Abkhaz, with Russian support, wanted to capture the
mountainous Upper Kodori Gorge district from the Georgians, they
merely gave the UN monitors there a 24-hour warning to leave.
The EU has approved small aid programmes for both Abkhazia and South
Ossetia in th e last few years, but they have looked relatively
modest when compared to the vast amount of Russian money coming into
both regions.
Abkhazia is bigger and more diverse than South Ossetia with a lively
media and many non-governmental organizations.
Many Abkhaz intellectuals dreamed of having some kind of independence
free of both Georgia and Russia and with links across the Black Sea
to the EU but that now looks unattainable.
'Double standards'
Internationally mediated peace talks over both disputes had stalled
and there is little chance of them resuming properly any time soon.
Faced with a tightening Russian grip, Western leaders can only fall
back on expressing support for Georgia's right to these territories.
US President George W Bush made this commitment on 16 August, saying:
"Georgia's borders should command the same respect as every other
nation's.
There's no room for debate on this matter."
This becomes a moral argument, with the Russians answering that after
supporting Kosovo's unilateral secession from Serbia, the West is
guilty of "double standards" in the Caucasus.
Caught in the middle of these international wrangles are the current
and former populations of both Abkhazia and South Ossetia Â- Abkhaz,
Ossetians and other nationalities such as Armenians on the one hand,
and the displaced Georgians on the other.
They often get along fine when they have a chance to engage in
low-level me etings arranged by foreign organisations or across
market stalls.
Now, unfortunately, they are being wrenched apart further than ever
by conflict.
Thomas de Waal is Caucasus Editor at the Institute for War and Peace
Reporting in London.
--Boundary_(ID_3vBwZFwQJk4iuMPcc+05Jw)--
By Thomas de Waal
BBC NEWS
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/e urope/7571002.stm
2008/08/20 09:05:10 GMT
Institute for War and Peace Reporting
When Russian troops eventually pull out of Georgian towns such as
Gori and Zugdidi, ordinary Georgians will heave a sigh of relief.
But that will also be the moment that they take on board the fact that
the two territories at the heart of the conflict with Moscow, South
Ossetia and Abkhazia, although formally still regarded internationally
as Georgian territory, are now essentially lost to them.
The people who will suffer most in the long term from this conflict
are more than 20,000 ethnic Georgians from a mosaic of villages in
South Ossetia who have now mostly fled.
Relatively few Georgians left during or after the small-scale 1990-92
conflict over South Ossetia and despite intermittent skirmishes and
incidents, neighbourly contacts continued.
Reporters who have passed through many of the villages in the last
few days say they are now in ruins.
The Russian authorities and their South Ossetian allies are now saying
that they will not allow the Georgians back any time soon.
A Russian foreign ministry statement on August 18 said, "It is clear
that some time Â- and not a short period of time Â- must pass in
order to heal the wounds and to restore confidence. Only after this,
the =0 Aconditions will be created for discussing practical aspects
related to the problems of refugees."
Hundreds of South Ossetians also lost their homes in the Georgian
military assault of 7-8 August and, it appears, in the ensuing Russian
counter-attack - but they have the small consolation of knowing they
can start rebuilding them.
Russian leverage
The prospect is also now much bleaker for the 240,000 or so ethnic
Georgians who were registered as displaced from the 1992-3 conflict
in Abkhazia.
Their hopes of return were predicated on a successful peace agreement
which now looks more elusive than ever.
Around 50,000 Georgians live in Abkhazia's southernmost Gali district
under an Abkhaz administration.
So far they have managed to stay in their homes, but their future is
also more precarious.
It is not just a matter of Georgian control. It will also be harder
now to maintain an international presence in the two disputed regions.
The final point in the six-point ceasefire plan reads: "Pending an
international mechanism [in South Ossetia], Russian peacekeeping
forces will implement additional security measures."
That effectively puts an end to the former Joint Peacekeeping Forces,
which had a Georgian contingent.
It also gives Moscow even more leverage than before over the shape
of any security arrangements for the region.
Moscow is already insisting it can have the only real security presence
t here.
"We are of course not against international peacekeepers... but the
problem is that the Abkhaz and the Ossetians do not trust anyone
except Russian peacekeepers," Russian president Dmitry Medvedev told
German chancellor Angela Merkel.
Unattainable dream
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE),
the only international organization with a mandate in South Ossetia,
wants to dispatch an additional 100 monitors to South Ossetia.
But Russia has dragged its feet, saying it wanted to agree the terms
of their deployment in more detail and the OSCE has so far agreed to
send just 20 more monitors.
The OSCE had just nine military monitors on the ground in South
Ossetia when fighting started there on 7-8 August.
The European Union, with French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner
taking the lead, also says it want to provide peacekeepers, but
Mr Kouchner's Swedish counterpart, Carl Bildt, admitted this might
not work.
"There are no signs of the Russians letting in anyone else," he said.
In Abkhazia, the United Nations has a small contingent of around 130
unarmed monitors, who were bystanders in the recent crisis.
When the Abkhaz, with Russian support, wanted to capture the
mountainous Upper Kodori Gorge district from the Georgians, they
merely gave the UN monitors there a 24-hour warning to leave.
The EU has approved small aid programmes for both Abkhazia and South
Ossetia in th e last few years, but they have looked relatively
modest when compared to the vast amount of Russian money coming into
both regions.
Abkhazia is bigger and more diverse than South Ossetia with a lively
media and many non-governmental organizations.
Many Abkhaz intellectuals dreamed of having some kind of independence
free of both Georgia and Russia and with links across the Black Sea
to the EU but that now looks unattainable.
'Double standards'
Internationally mediated peace talks over both disputes had stalled
and there is little chance of them resuming properly any time soon.
Faced with a tightening Russian grip, Western leaders can only fall
back on expressing support for Georgia's right to these territories.
US President George W Bush made this commitment on 16 August, saying:
"Georgia's borders should command the same respect as every other
nation's.
There's no room for debate on this matter."
This becomes a moral argument, with the Russians answering that after
supporting Kosovo's unilateral secession from Serbia, the West is
guilty of "double standards" in the Caucasus.
Caught in the middle of these international wrangles are the current
and former populations of both Abkhazia and South Ossetia Â- Abkhaz,
Ossetians and other nationalities such as Armenians on the one hand,
and the displaced Georgians on the other.
They often get along fine when they have a chance to engage in
low-level me etings arranged by foreign organisations or across
market stalls.
Now, unfortunately, they are being wrenched apart further than ever
by conflict.
Thomas de Waal is Caucasus Editor at the Institute for War and Peace
Reporting in London.
--Boundary_(ID_3vBwZFwQJk4iuMPcc+05Jw)--