08-20-2008, 01:01 AM
What Should the West do in Georgia?
Hasan Selim Ozertem
Monday , 18 August 2008
In the literature it is mainly argued that the collapse of the Soviet Union has been surprisingly non-problematic and despite the change in balance of power in the world politics there has been no large scale conflicts or wars in the Eurasian region. As known, system changes bring an environment of chaos which causes crisis in international relations. Among others, French revolution, Bolshevik revolution and demise of Ottoman Empire after World War I can be shown as recent examples from political history that caused many disputes and conflicts to emerge in the old continents of the globe.
However, apart from conflict areas like Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Nagorno-Karabakh, Transdnestr or Chechnya the world did not witness big battles going on between any blocs. In fact, even the tendency of Russia was to compromise with the West at the first term of President Yeltsin when Andrei Kozyrev was the chief of foreign affairs.
Now, after 17 years it seems that the balance in relations seems to be disturbed between Russia and the West.
When Kosovo declared its independence in February 2008, Russia was not satisfied with the result. Since the demise of the USSR, it could not prevent the Westâs movement to the East and ex-Warsaw Pact countries have become NATO and the EU members one by one.
Independence of Kosovo was another blow by the West and meant a loss of power in Balkans for Russia. Russian politicians argued that this would be precedence for other conflict areas and since then supported separatist movements in Georgia.
What brought Russia here?
Sour experiences of shock-therapy, NATO enlargement and zero sum politics of Russia with the West were not satisfactory for the Federation. Drawing a profile that even small countries challenge Russia, while trying to protect its diaspora in Baltics or having problems with Poland which was a friendly country a few decades ago were unacceptable for Russia, which hardly overcome the legacies of Cold War and perception of defining itself as a super power.
While the West-Russian integration discussions going on in the literature and the negotiations going on with WTO, NATO and other international mechanisms, in Caucasus Georgia has given the opportunity to Russia to show its muscles to the world once again.
Georgia and Russia could not build up the relations that Russia desired since 1991. It has started with the hesitation to be a member of Commonwealth of Independent States after the independence. However, especially after the Rose revolution in 2003, Saakashviliâs stance against this country was so disturbing for Russian political elite under Putin administration. Saakashviliâs efforts for being a NATO member and establishing good relations with the West were going on in the backyard of Russian Federation.
Georgian maneuver on 8 August 2008 has given the chance for Russia to punish Saakashvili and the West via showing its muscles in Caucasus. After then the West is trying to get used to this new environment disturbed by Russians aggressive stance.
As known Russia is a one of the permanent members in the UN Security Council and also is a member of OSCE as well as other international organizations like CIS and BSEC. Instead of working these mechanisms, Russia chose to use pure hard power in Georgia. The legitimizing argument was there are human rights violations and people in Ossetia are the citizens of Russian Federation.
Up to a point these arguments were valid. However, using military option and protecting your own citizens without firstly using diplomatic channels in another countryâs territory to stop the ongoing violence as well as devastating Georgian cities to protect South Ossetia are not acceptable.
After the visit of French President Sarkozy to Moscow, a six point peace plan announced by Medvedev and Sarkozy. Medvedev ordered, just a couple hours before his meeting with Sarkozy, Russian Army to halt operations. In fact, this has two messages in it, firstly to overcome the criticisms of the public regarding Putin is still in charge it was an important movement, since Medvedev said that âI ordered Russian Army to halt operations in Caucasus.â Secondly, it would not be Sarkzoyâs success, but it was Russia to take initiative to stop ongoing war.
As known, Saakashvili and Medvedev signed the peace plan. However, Russian politiciansâ comments are really important. For instance, Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov says that âWe recognize the sovereignty and Independence of Georgiaâ¦But territorial integrity, itâs just another matter.â[1] Moreover, Medvedev claimed that ââ¦Georgia can never again have sovereignty over S. Ossetia and Abkhazia.â[2]
All these comments regarding Georgiaâs territorial integrity are too dangerous. First of all, Georgia is a transit country that helps the West to reach to Central Asia and the Caspian. Moreover, it is a key country for the Black Sea Regionâs security. It is the blame of both Russia and the West to hesitate to show necessary political will to bring a permanent solution to these ongoing disputes. In addition to these in Bucharest Summit this year, while Georgia and Ukraine awaiting to be included to the Membership Action Plan, they only could get a blurred promise. This also put Georgia defenseless before aggressive Russian politics. Now, as the Great Game gains impetus in the region once again, it is the civilians getting hurt or losing their lives.
What should be done?
· In the six-step plan, the point of finding a solution for the future of these conflict areas are positive, but neglecting the territorial integrity of Georgia, even before sitting to the negotiation table is not a solution. What region lacks is a long term solution that would bring stability to the region; not polarization or partition of the countries.
· The West should pursue more pro-active and realist policies for the sake of stability. It is so obvious that Russia does not want zero-sum games anymore and it would be naïve to expect Russia to leave the current situation without taking anything. While the parties negotiating for peace plan, international mechanisms should start to function to find a common basis with Russia.
· Moreover, for the sake of Georgia and Azerbaijan, NATO should take a more serious stance and not only in rhetorical sense, but also a road map should be drawn for the membership of these countries to the organization immediately. Partition of Georgia can be a serious threat for Azerbaijanâs isolation from the Western Alliance and would cause a serious blockade for the West to reach inner Asia.
· A military base can be opened in Georgia as a peacekeeping mission by the West.
· Humanitarian aid should be reached to the region via organizations like United Nations, Red Crescent and Red Cross. There should be coordination between parties to prevent malfunction of this mechanism. As known, the US aid could not be reached to Georgia due to uncoordinated movement between the US and Turkey. Moreover, Russia should be involved to this international aid initiative.
· There are 100.000 displaced people in the region. Refugee policies should be created for these people and for any possible situation.
· Gori and Tshinvali should be rebuilt by the international community. It would be a good message to the region, creating a constructive image of international community.
· Russian contribution to these initiatives would be influential for recreating a positive Russian image in Caucasus, which was seriously damaged after Russian Armyâs maneuvers in Gori and other Georgian cities and opened serious wounds among Georgians.
· Opening new areas of dispute in Eastern Europe like missile shield program in Poland would not contribute for a peaceful solution in Caucasus. In fact, this would cause a more aggressive stance to be taken by Russia.
· EU should pursue a more active role for the solution of the crisis. Due to legacies of Cold War era Russia and the US have prejudices regarding each other. In the environment of the crisis, the EU can play a role of mediator.
· French Presidency in the EU is a nice coincidence since a country like France can play an important role as a country that is experienced in diplomacy and strong enough to make the EU mechanisms to function.
· Turkeyâs role should not be underestimated. It is a country that has good relations with the West and Russia. Moreover, it has a good understanding of the dynamics of Caucasus. A country like Turkey that works for a resolution with the EU can help a long lasting solution in the region.
Hasan Selim Ozertem
Monday , 18 August 2008
In the literature it is mainly argued that the collapse of the Soviet Union has been surprisingly non-problematic and despite the change in balance of power in the world politics there has been no large scale conflicts or wars in the Eurasian region. As known, system changes bring an environment of chaos which causes crisis in international relations. Among others, French revolution, Bolshevik revolution and demise of Ottoman Empire after World War I can be shown as recent examples from political history that caused many disputes and conflicts to emerge in the old continents of the globe.
However, apart from conflict areas like Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Nagorno-Karabakh, Transdnestr or Chechnya the world did not witness big battles going on between any blocs. In fact, even the tendency of Russia was to compromise with the West at the first term of President Yeltsin when Andrei Kozyrev was the chief of foreign affairs.
Now, after 17 years it seems that the balance in relations seems to be disturbed between Russia and the West.
When Kosovo declared its independence in February 2008, Russia was not satisfied with the result. Since the demise of the USSR, it could not prevent the Westâs movement to the East and ex-Warsaw Pact countries have become NATO and the EU members one by one.
Independence of Kosovo was another blow by the West and meant a loss of power in Balkans for Russia. Russian politicians argued that this would be precedence for other conflict areas and since then supported separatist movements in Georgia.
What brought Russia here?
Sour experiences of shock-therapy, NATO enlargement and zero sum politics of Russia with the West were not satisfactory for the Federation. Drawing a profile that even small countries challenge Russia, while trying to protect its diaspora in Baltics or having problems with Poland which was a friendly country a few decades ago were unacceptable for Russia, which hardly overcome the legacies of Cold War and perception of defining itself as a super power.
While the West-Russian integration discussions going on in the literature and the negotiations going on with WTO, NATO and other international mechanisms, in Caucasus Georgia has given the opportunity to Russia to show its muscles to the world once again.
Georgia and Russia could not build up the relations that Russia desired since 1991. It has started with the hesitation to be a member of Commonwealth of Independent States after the independence. However, especially after the Rose revolution in 2003, Saakashviliâs stance against this country was so disturbing for Russian political elite under Putin administration. Saakashviliâs efforts for being a NATO member and establishing good relations with the West were going on in the backyard of Russian Federation.
Georgian maneuver on 8 August 2008 has given the chance for Russia to punish Saakashvili and the West via showing its muscles in Caucasus. After then the West is trying to get used to this new environment disturbed by Russians aggressive stance.
As known Russia is a one of the permanent members in the UN Security Council and also is a member of OSCE as well as other international organizations like CIS and BSEC. Instead of working these mechanisms, Russia chose to use pure hard power in Georgia. The legitimizing argument was there are human rights violations and people in Ossetia are the citizens of Russian Federation.
Up to a point these arguments were valid. However, using military option and protecting your own citizens without firstly using diplomatic channels in another countryâs territory to stop the ongoing violence as well as devastating Georgian cities to protect South Ossetia are not acceptable.
After the visit of French President Sarkozy to Moscow, a six point peace plan announced by Medvedev and Sarkozy. Medvedev ordered, just a couple hours before his meeting with Sarkozy, Russian Army to halt operations. In fact, this has two messages in it, firstly to overcome the criticisms of the public regarding Putin is still in charge it was an important movement, since Medvedev said that âI ordered Russian Army to halt operations in Caucasus.â Secondly, it would not be Sarkzoyâs success, but it was Russia to take initiative to stop ongoing war.
As known, Saakashvili and Medvedev signed the peace plan. However, Russian politiciansâ comments are really important. For instance, Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov says that âWe recognize the sovereignty and Independence of Georgiaâ¦But territorial integrity, itâs just another matter.â[1] Moreover, Medvedev claimed that ââ¦Georgia can never again have sovereignty over S. Ossetia and Abkhazia.â[2]
All these comments regarding Georgiaâs territorial integrity are too dangerous. First of all, Georgia is a transit country that helps the West to reach to Central Asia and the Caspian. Moreover, it is a key country for the Black Sea Regionâs security. It is the blame of both Russia and the West to hesitate to show necessary political will to bring a permanent solution to these ongoing disputes. In addition to these in Bucharest Summit this year, while Georgia and Ukraine awaiting to be included to the Membership Action Plan, they only could get a blurred promise. This also put Georgia defenseless before aggressive Russian politics. Now, as the Great Game gains impetus in the region once again, it is the civilians getting hurt or losing their lives.
What should be done?
· In the six-step plan, the point of finding a solution for the future of these conflict areas are positive, but neglecting the territorial integrity of Georgia, even before sitting to the negotiation table is not a solution. What region lacks is a long term solution that would bring stability to the region; not polarization or partition of the countries.
· The West should pursue more pro-active and realist policies for the sake of stability. It is so obvious that Russia does not want zero-sum games anymore and it would be naïve to expect Russia to leave the current situation without taking anything. While the parties negotiating for peace plan, international mechanisms should start to function to find a common basis with Russia.
· Moreover, for the sake of Georgia and Azerbaijan, NATO should take a more serious stance and not only in rhetorical sense, but also a road map should be drawn for the membership of these countries to the organization immediately. Partition of Georgia can be a serious threat for Azerbaijanâs isolation from the Western Alliance and would cause a serious blockade for the West to reach inner Asia.
· A military base can be opened in Georgia as a peacekeeping mission by the West.
· Humanitarian aid should be reached to the region via organizations like United Nations, Red Crescent and Red Cross. There should be coordination between parties to prevent malfunction of this mechanism. As known, the US aid could not be reached to Georgia due to uncoordinated movement between the US and Turkey. Moreover, Russia should be involved to this international aid initiative.
· There are 100.000 displaced people in the region. Refugee policies should be created for these people and for any possible situation.
· Gori and Tshinvali should be rebuilt by the international community. It would be a good message to the region, creating a constructive image of international community.
· Russian contribution to these initiatives would be influential for recreating a positive Russian image in Caucasus, which was seriously damaged after Russian Armyâs maneuvers in Gori and other Georgian cities and opened serious wounds among Georgians.
· Opening new areas of dispute in Eastern Europe like missile shield program in Poland would not contribute for a peaceful solution in Caucasus. In fact, this would cause a more aggressive stance to be taken by Russia.
· EU should pursue a more active role for the solution of the crisis. Due to legacies of Cold War era Russia and the US have prejudices regarding each other. In the environment of the crisis, the EU can play a role of mediator.
· French Presidency in the EU is a nice coincidence since a country like France can play an important role as a country that is experienced in diplomacy and strong enough to make the EU mechanisms to function.
· Turkeyâs role should not be underestimated. It is a country that has good relations with the West and Russia. Moreover, it has a good understanding of the dynamics of Caucasus. A country like Turkey that works for a resolution with the EU can help a long lasting solution in the region.