Abkhazia: The Question of UN Governance
During a 29 March news conference at UN headquarters in New York, Revaz Adamia, Georgia's permanent representative to the United Nations, stated that Georgia would not oppose temporary UN governance for Abkhazia. His comment likely is a trial balloon to test the reactaion of the major players, including the UN.
The suggestion to establish UN governance in Abkhazia comes at a time when Moscow
is increasingly incorporating Abkhazia into Russia, the Abkhaz separatists are
growing increasingly restive, and the UN stance is becoming increasingly ambiguous
(see EDM, 29 March). Opponents of Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili decry
the situation and criticize Tbilisi's failure to work with international organizations
to resolve the Abkhaz problem.
On 4 April the opposition Republican Party assessed the 31 March UN Security
Council Resolution 1666 on Abkhazia as "capitulation," and a step
backward in the conflict settlement process.
Tina Khidasheli, a party leader, accused Saakashvili's government of allowing
Russia to railroad a resolution desirable for Moscow but harmful for Georgia.
She said that while the UN Security Council was scrutinizing the text of the
resolution, Saakashvili was on vacation in Italy and, aside from Adamia, no
Georgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs representative was present at UN headquarters
to influence the developments.
According to the Republican Party, the most alarming point in the UN resolution
is that for the first time a UN Security Council resolution on Abkhazia has
not clearly identified the region as being an integral part of Georgia, nor
does it state that the political status of Abkhazia is to be defined within
an integrated Georgian state. Another negative development, according to the
Republicans, is that for the first time the resolution described the Russian
peacekeepers in the conflict zone, operating under a CIS mandate, as a guarantee
of stability.
The Republicans were concerned that the resolution unilaterally urged the Georgian
side "to address seriously legitimate Abkhaz security concerns, to avoid
steps which could be seen as threatening, and to refrain from militant rhetoric."
According to Khidasheli, in previous resolutions the UN Security Council had
given such warnings to both parties. Paata Zakareishvili, a well-known pundit
on Abkhaz issues and a member of the Republican Party, said that with this resolution
Russia had opened "a second front in Abkhazia." Zakareishvili reiterated
his long-standing claim that the Abkhaz were ready for direct dialogue with
Tbilisi without the UN and Russia, but the Georgian authorities have "continuously
avoided such dialogue."
The Republican Party accused Saakashvili's government of misleading the public
by boasting about successes in foreign policy and said that problems exist in
relations with the UN and other international organizations. Meanwhile, Russia
highly appraised the resolution, which actually retains the roles of facilitator
and peacekeeper for Moscow. In July the Georgian parliament must assess the
performance of the Russian peacekeeping troops in the conflict zone and decide
whether to renew the operation. Therefore, the UN resolution has come at just
the right time for Russia.
Merab Antadze, deputy foreign minister of Georgia, dismissed the Republicans'
concerns as "untrue," "misleading," and "harmful"
for society. Instead, he described the UN resolution as "important"
and a "step forward" in the conflict settlement.
However, the Republican Party's concerns echo a statement by the Georgian mission
to the UN. The mission said that the Security Council, while reaffirming its
commitment to the sovereignty and independence of Georgia, for the first time
in recent years did not include in its resolution a clause about the need to
define the status of Abkhazia within Georgia. Indeed, the resolution, which
extends the UNOMIG's mandate in Abkhazia until 15 October, acknowledges the
"territorial integrity of Georgia within its internationally recognized
borders," and calls for the parties "to promote a settlement of the
Georgian-Abkhaz conflict only by peaceful means and within the framework of
the Security Council resolutions." Tbilisi sees Moscow's hand in this wording
and Adamia emphasized that Georgia is alarmed by the present format of the peacekeeping
operation in Abkhazia because Tbilisi believes Russian peacekeepers cannot be
impartial. The discrepancy between Adamia's alarming statements and Antadze's
optimistic tone suggests a lack of coordination at the Georgian Foreign Ministry.
Meanwhile, the Republican Party claim about the Abkhaz leaders' willingness
to engage in direct dialogue with the Georgians has been neutralized with statements
by Raul Khajimba, Abkhaz vice-president, and Stanislav Lakoba, secretary of
the Abkhaz "security council." They called on Saakashvili to reconcile
himself to Abkhazia's separation from Georgia. Moreover, with Russian help the
Abkhaz separatists have established an anti-terror center to "fight Georgian
guerrillas." The center reportedly is heavily staffed by Russian specialists
and receives financial and technical assistance from Moscow.
Saakashvili's government has few options. Georgia will likely resume its policy
of conciliatory gestures toward Moscow while simultaneously urging Georgia's
Western allies and international organizations to halt Russia's creeping annexation
of Abkhazia. Whether the idea of UN governance in Abkhazia will find a positive
reception among the international community remains to be seen. But this UN
initiative, if adopted, could become leverage to stop Russia's seizure of Abkhazia.