http://www.isn.ethz.ch/infoservice/sw/details.cfm?ID=10280


Russia loses its slippery foothold in Abkhazia

Moscow has refused to recognize its mistake in interfering in
Georgia's separatist republic of Abkhazia, and has continued to back
the losing side, now to the point of threatening the population with
severely punitive economic sanctions and possible military coercion.

By Dr. Michael A. Weinstein for PINR (01/12/04)

Over the past two months, Moscow's geostrategy has suffered serious
setbacks in Ukraine and Abkhazia, a mini-state on the Black Sea that
broke away from Georgia in 1993 and has since been dependent for its
existence on Russian support. The guiding aim of President Vladimir
Putin's geostrategy is to restore Moscow's influence over its
periphery, which it lost after the fall of the Soviet Union. The Putin
regime envisions a trade and security alliance that would incorporate
some of the republics of the former Soviet Union in Central Asia, the
Caucasus and Eastern Europe, in which Russia would be the dominant
power. Moscow pursues its goal by trying to promote and cultivate
friendly governments in the target states. Wherever Moscow attempts to
reassert its influence, it meets with opposition from the
Euro-American alliance, which has the strategic aim of incorporating
Russia's periphery - especially in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus -
into the Western system of market democracies. If Ukraine tilted
westward, it would be a candidate for admission to the European Union
and NATO. If Abkhazia were to be reabsorbed into Georgia, Moscow would
lose one of its important footholds in the Transcaucasus to a
pro-Western state. The Putin regime has responded to its persistent
structural conflict with the West by taking a proactive approach
toward the political systems of its target states and dependencies. In
Ukraine and Abkhazia, Moscow has most notably attempted to influence
the outcomes of presidential elections overtly through Putin's
endorsements of favored candidates and by sending in political
operatives to strategize and support those candidates. In both cases,
Moscow's tactics have backfired; it has not been able to overcome
internal divisions within the target states and it has awakened
resistance in electorates to outside influence, resulting in disputed
elections that have brought endemic conflicts to a head and, in
Abkhazia's case, institutional failure. Through overplaying its hand,
Moscow now finds itself threatened with a permanent loss of influence
in Eastern Europe and the Transcaucasus. The situation in Abkhazia is
particularly revealing, because that small country with a
quarter-million people shows in microcosm how even a society that is
radically dependent on Moscow and is pro-Russian will resist its
protector when it feels that it is subject to undue pressure.
Abkhazia's disputed election

Until its first contested presidential election on 3 October Abkhazia
was ruled by strong man Vladislav Ardzinba who had followed an
unwavering pro-Moscow line. Unrecognized by any state, including
Russia, Ardzinba's regime was subject to an economic blockade by
Georgia and was only able to survive through the presence of Russian
"peacekeepers" who kept the Georgian military at bay. During
Ardzinba's tenure, Abkhazia's economy collapsed, leaving half the
country's working-age population unemployed. Criminal activity became
rampant and corruption and cronyism were rife within the state
bureaucracies. Nonetheless, when it came time to replace the aging
Ardzinba, Moscow hit upon a plan of contested elections, which it
calculated would result in the victory of its favorite, Raul Khajimba,
an ex-KGB agent and the incumbent prime minister, and would have the
added benefit of conferring a modicum of legitimacy on the mini-state,
which would strengthen its position in any future deal with Georgia or
pave the way to some regularized and permanent form of separation.
>From all appearances, the Abkhazian elections seemed to be a win-win
situation for Moscow. All five candidates were pledged to maintain
Abkhazia's special relation with Russia. Indeed, they could not do
otherwise: the civil war of 1992-1993 had resulted in the ethnic
cleansing of the Georgian half of the country's population, leaving
its ethnic Abkhaz, Armenian and Russian components completely
dependent on Moscow for protection against an irredentist Georgia,
which gained enhanced Western backing after the 2003-2004 Rose
Revolution. Despite the fact that Russian interests were not likely to
be impaired whomever won the presidential election, Putin made it
clear that he endorsed Khajimba by meeting with him and no other
candidate, and posing with him for a photograph that became an icon of
the campaign. Moscow also dispatched operatives to plan and support
Khajimba's campaign. To the surprise of Moscow and political analysts,
Putin's efforts to manipulate the election had the opposite of their
intended effect. Opposition candidate Sergei Bagapsh, running on a
platform of continued ties with Russia and promises of an anti-crime
and anti-corruption administration, won slightly more than 50 per cent
of the vote (44'002) to Khajimba's 30'815 votes, with the other
candidates splitting the rest. Analysts attributed Bagapsh's
unexpected showing to widespread public resentment against Abkhazia's
corrupt political system and Moscow's efforts to perpetuate it. The
slogan "We Can Decide Ourselves" appeared on the streets, signaling
popular defiance of Moscow. Although Abkhazia's Central Electoral
Commission certified Bagapsh's victory, the election was clouded by
charges of irregularities and an unconstitutional revote in the Gali
district, to which Bagapsh and Khajimba agreed. When the Central
Electoral Commission met to reach its decision on 6 and 11 October,
supporters of Bagapsh occupied the building where it was deliberating,
setting a precedent of direct action that would be repeated over the
coming weeks by both sides, finally eventuating in institutional
failure and political paralysis.
Institutional failure

Despite having agreed to the revote in Gali, Khajimba did not accept
the Commission's verdict and sued to have the vote overturned by the
country's Supreme Court. On 28 October, after having heard testimony
that Bagapsh supporters had threatened commissioners during their
deliberations, the Court declared the Commission's decision to be
valid. Upon learning of the Court's verdict, Khajimba's supporters
seized the court building and held the judges hostage until they
reversed their decision and replaced it with a ruling ordering the
Central Electoral Commission to set up a revote. On 29 October,
incumbent President Ardzinba issued a decree requiring new elections,
setting the stage for a downward spiral to institutional failure. In
quick succession, Bagapsh's forces took over the state television and
Khajimba's sealed off parliament, in which Bagapsh supporters have a
majority, to prevent it from declaring Ardzinba's decree
unconstitutional. Meanwhile, the Central Electoral Commission refused
to meet to plan new elections and Ardzinba replaced Khajimba as prime
minister with former Russian Ministry of Emergency Situations
operative Nodar Khashba, a Moscow loyalist. With different
institutions under the control of opposing factions, Abkhazia's
political system became paralyzed as neither candidate proved willing
to compromise, despite repeated negotiations. Bagapsh insisted that he
would be inaugurated on 6 December, whereas Khajimba demanded a
revote. The stand off spiraled out of control on 12 November when,
during a large rally of Bagapsh supporters, a group of them seized
control of the government complex in Abkhazia's capital Sokhumi,
including the president's office, supposedly to allow Bagapsh to set
up his new administration. In the commotion, 78-year-old Tamara
Sharkyl - a linguist, human rights advocate and respected Abkhaz
nationalist - was killed by a ricocheting bullet fired by Ardzinba's
presidential guard. At the urging of Bagapsh, his supporters left the
government complex, but remained outside it, preventing official
business from being conducted there. Since then, the tensions have
deepened. After Bagapsh supporters brought two presidential guards to
the prosecutor's office in connection with Sharkyl's death, security
forces loyal to Ardzinba launched a commando raid on the office and
freed them, setting off a chain of events leading to a "declaration of
disobedience" by 2000 police officers who vowed to refuse to follow
orders from the government.
Moscow's relentless support

Throughout the deepening tensions, Moscow supported Ardzinba, Khashba
and Khajimba, refusing to concede anything to Bagapsh. On 12 November,
Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Alexander Yakovenko
placed Moscow's support behind the Ardzinba regime and threatened
Russian intervention: "If the situation continues to follow the
illegal track, the Russian side will have to protect its interests. In
Abkhazia one and all should know that all responsibility for the
likely effects will be placed on Bagapsh and his followers." Not only
did Moscow's hard line fail to break the resolve of the Bagapsh
faction; it also provoked a strong response from Tbilisi, which
regards Abkhazia as part of Georgia. Despite the failure of its
assertive posture, Moscow has continued to try to exert pressure,
redeploying some of its peacekeepers from Abkhazia's Georgian border
toward Sokhumi and temporarily closing crossings along Abkhazia's
border, threatening to impede Abkhazia's citrus harvest from going to
market. With Moscow taking one side in the election dispute and
Abkhazian state institutions divided and deadlocked, a last attempt at
conflict resolution was undertaken by the Council of Elders, an
extra-constitutional public body of clan and local leaders. When the
Council met in Sokhumi on 20 November, its proceedings were disrupted
by an invasion of 100 old people bussed in by the Bagapsh camp. The
meeting was quickly called off after a decision was made to reconvene
the Council with new membership. On 23 November, the Council met again
and declared that Bagapsh should assume the presidency and that he and
Khajimba should form a team. Earlier, Bagapsh had offered Khajimba the
posts of prime minister or vice president, which the latter had
refused, calling instead either for a revote or for both candidates to
drop out in favor of a new election with new candidates, one of whom
presumably would be Moscow's current prot�g� Khashba. Khajimba
responded to the Elder's decision by appearing to back down for the
first time, saying that he would consult with his supporters before
reaching a decision. Meanwhile, Khashba threatened to resign as prime
minister if the supporters of both candidates did not vacate the
public property that they had seized and disband their militia, and
Ardzinba announced that he would not vacate the presidency on 6
December. In response to Ardzinba's announcement, parliament passed a
resolution on 26 November declaring Bagapsh's victory to be valid and
demanding that the State Guard Service "provide for the inauguration
of the president elect" on 6 December. Khajimba labeled the resolution
"absurd" and Ardzinba's office announced that the incumbent president
had not instructed state agencies to obey the parliamentary
instructions. Deputies in the Parliament who are opposed to Bagapsh
reported that 200 of his supporters had invaded the chamber, demanding
that their candidate's victory be recognized.
Moscow hardens, Georgia senses opportunity

With Moscow's strategy in a state of collapse, Abkhazia appears to be
headed for yet another confrontation on 6 December, when Bagapsh has
vowed to be inaugurated as president and Ardzinba has pledged to
remain in power. In order to head off a Bagapsh takeover, Moscow,
speaking through anonymous government sources and Alexander Tkachov,
governor of Krasnodar territory, which borders Abkhazia, ratcheted up
its hard-line rhetoric, threatening - if Bagapsh assumed the
presidency - to cut off pensions to Russian citizens in Abkhazia and
to close the country's border with Russia, blocking the citrus exports
and tourist trade that are Abkhazia's major sources of income. In a
sharp break from his previous pro-Russian position, Bagapsh responded
that if Moscow followed through on its threats, Tbilisi would have an
opportunity to restore its control over Abkhazia, an opinion echoed by
Alexander Shakov, an analyst at the Russian Institute of Strategic
Research. Thus far, Moscow's position has been eased by the reluctance
of the UN, which monitors the cease-fire between Georgia and Abkhazia,
and the US to intervene in the conflict. Tbilisi, however, has sensed
an advantage and has stated that the "people's will" should prevail in
Abkhazia, a shift from its standard line that nothing that transpires
in the breakaway republic's political system is legitimate or worthy
of comment. Georgian Minister for Conflict Resolution and Prevention
Georgy Khaindrava offered Sokhumi "the widest authority ever known in
international practice". Tbilisi believes that time is on its side. In
a news conference on 24 November celebrating the anniversary of the
Rose Revolution, Georgia's President Mikhail Saakashvili noted that
Georgia's budget in 2005 will be triple its current figure, that much
of the increased spending will go to beef up the military and that
NATO and the EU are considering Georgia as a candidate for membership.
With reference to Abkhazia, Saakashvili said "it is the main goal and
task of my life, my personal life", adding that Tbilisi is getting
ready to reassert sovereignty over the breakaway region and that "we
need patience", but not "excessive pacifism".
The pitfalls of neo-imperialism

It is reasonable to conclude that Moscow has acted to the detriment of
its interests in Abkhazia. The cause of the mini-state's institutional
failure and political implosion resides less in the internal divisions
of its society than in Moscow's "neo-imperialist" policies. Like their
neo-conservative counterparts in Washington, the Russian
neo-imperialists are long on vision and short on a realistic appraisal
of actual conditions. Just as the neo-conservatives believed that US
forces would be welcomed in Iraq, Moscow hard liners were confident
that their favored candidate would win in Abkhazia's contested
election, simply by dint of Putin's endorsement, government control of
the local media, the Abkhaz population's pro-Russian attitudes and its
dependency on Moscow, and Moscow's campaign support. They did not
reckon with the large number of people in the mini-state who were
disaffected by a decade of economic depression, rampant crime and
corrupt rule, and were willing to back a member of the established
political class who promised to bring reform while maintaining good
relations with Moscow. When the election did not yield Moscow's
desired result, Putin could have accepted defeat and turned it into an
opportunity by playing the role of honest broker and arranging the
kind of deal that the Council of Elders proposed and Bagapsh offered,
allowing Bagapsh to assume the presidency and giving the prime
minister's post to Khajimba. Instead, Moscow refused to recognize its
mistake and has continued to back the losing side, now to the point of
threatening the population with severely punitive economic sanctions
and possible military coercion. Moscow has stood by and watched Abkhaz
political society split apart, counting on the resulting stress to
bring its adversaries and the general population around to heed its
dictates. Abkhazia's plunge into direct action and political gang
rule, verging on civil warfare, cancels any possibility of a
legitimized pro-Moscow regime there. If Moscow succeeds in installing
a president to its liking in Sokhumi, his regime will be perceived as
an imposed domination both inside and outside Abkhazia. If Bagapsh
assumes the presidency, Moscow will either institute punitive
measures, driving Sokhumi to bargain with Tbilisi, or it will have to
mend fences with its former opponent. The latter option is the only
one that is consistent with Russian interests, but it is not clear
that Putin will take it. Moscow has managed to cause a shift in
attitudes that was unthinkable before the 3 October election. Bagapsh,
who consistently asserted that Abkhazia had to be pro-Russian, because
if it was not, it would be "swallowed" by Georgia, is now saying that
Moscow is forcing Abkhazia into Tbilisi's arms. Tbilisi is now
signaling that it will be generous to a "popular" government in
Sokhumi. It is a difficult feat to bring Georgians and Abkhazians
together after a bloody civil war and ethnic cleansing, but it seems
possible that Moscow is doing just that. The US-Euro alliance stands
to gain the most from Moscow's mismanagement of Abkhazia, just as it
does in Ukraine. What appeared immediately after the 3 October
election to be a minor slippage in Russia's foothold in Abkhazia has
now become a slide that will be difficult to arrest.

This article originally appeared in Power and Interest News Report,
PINR, at (www.pinr.com). Dr. Michael A. Weinstein is a professor of
political science at Purdue University and an analyst with PINR. All
comments should be directed to [EMAIL PROTECTED]









------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/TySplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to