New hope for Georgian relations with Abkhazia and South Ossetia? Russia offers reconciliation

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov recently expressed Russia's readiness to assist Georgia in normalizing relations with the breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, contingent on Georgian interest. At a press conference, Lavrov noted that the current Georgian government acknowledges its historical past and openly seeks “historical reconciliation.” He emphasized that the decision on how to pursue this reconciliation rests with Georgia, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia.

“If there is a genuine interest in normalizing these relations and establishing non-aggression agreements, we are prepared to help,” Lavrov stated.

In response, Georgian officials called for specific actions following Lavrov's remarks. Kakha Kaladze, the Mayor of Tbilisi and Secretary General of the ruling Georgian Dream party, urged Russia to translate its words into meaningful steps.

“I believe that following Lavrov's statements, it would be beneficial to take effective action,” Kaladze remarked.

He suggested initiating a plan for the withdrawal of Russian military personnel from both Abkhazia and South Ossetia as a critical first step toward rebuilding trust and fostering dialogue.

One might wonder where this movement could realistically begin. What concrete steps could the parties take at the initial stage given the current conditions?

Prominent foreign observers shared their views on the issue with Caliber.Az.

Alexander Karavaev, a Russian political scientist, and an expert at the Caspian Institute for Strategic Studies, suggests that a trilateral commission should be established to coordinate interaction among the interested parties.

“Considering the complex and multifaceted nature of these issues, this commission should encompass all relevant topics from the outset. Essentially, it would aim to define the agenda for future dialogue. Once the parties have agreed on an agenda they can work with, they can then focus on forming a commission dedicated to normalizing relations and agreeing on further steps. This commission would involve Tbilisi, Moscow, and the capitals of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

We need to consider whether it would be more effective to have one unified commission representing both regions or to create two separate formats. This distinction is important because, in subsequent stages, we will need to address the specific issues and agendas relevant to Georgia and each region individually, as their concerns differ,” Karavaev noted.

According to him, it's important to recognize that the situation in Georgia is quite different from the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict, particularly regarding the events in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan.

“The dynamics here are far more complex. For nearly 30 years since the end of the acute phases of these two conflicts, the sides have even managed to find formats for economic interaction.

When we discuss the issues of rapprochement and normalization of relations between the unrecognized regions of Georgia and Tbilisi, we must always consider the internal political processes within these entities. In the case of Karabakh, it was a clear occupation by Armenia, and Azerbaijani society has never accepted that situation. In contrast, Georgia's territorial conflicts have been viewed differently, with varying ideas and periods of interaction between these regions and the central government.

Now, the key question is how Abkhazia and South Ossetia themselves view the potential normalization of relations with Georgia and the hypothetical integration into a single framework, whether federal or otherwise. It's crucial to note that Abkhazia has never officially advocated for joining Russia; this is a significant point. They have consistently called for independence, stating that while their relationship with Russia is close and neighborly, there remains a distinct boundary. The future of their relationship with Georgia is still uncertain.

This is not the case for South Ossetia. Because Ossetians reside on both sides of the border with Russia, the question of integration with the Russian Federation becomes a political matter. In this regard, Moscow has effectively limited South Ossetia's movement toward integration. Before the last presidential elections in South Ossetia, a date for a referendum on the region's accession to Russia had already been set. However, Moscow stated at that time that it did not consider such a matter necessary for discussion and that it was not on the political agenda for bilateral cooperation with South Ossetia. Following this, the authorities in Tskhinvali abandoned the initiative.

These nuances must be taken into account as we develop a framework for potential future integration of these regions with Georgia. This is a crucial aspect. If, in the long term, Russia perceives no risks from the Georgian authorities, it could indeed encourage a process of gradual rapprochement between Tbilisi and the two regions. This could evolve into economic collaboration and eventually lead to deeper integration,” Karavaev added.

Georgian political scientist, professor Badri Nachkebia noted that Lavrov's statement was likely intended to give the reconciliation process some momentum.

"Russia continues to recognize the independence of these regions, and Moscow believes that they should establish some form of non-aggression pact with Georgia. This creates a paradox. Perhaps that's why Kakha Kaladze emphasized that the reconciliation process can truly begin only after Russian troops withdraw from Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Until that happens, all discussions will remain mere statements," the professor explained.

He noted that Georgians have yet to hear anything substantial from either the Abkhazian or Ossetian sides.

"Much like before, the anniversaries of the 1992-93 wars are celebrated there as victories for these regions, while the role of Russia in these conflicts is largely ignored. If the Abkhazians were to honestly reflect on whether they would have achieved victory in September 1993 without Russia's involvement, they would likely conclude that they would not have. So, while this rhetoric about rapprochement may serve certain political agendas, there is currently no practical progress to report," Nachkebia stated.

Georgian political analyst, lawyer, and human rights activist Levan Chkheidze expressed cautious optimism regarding Russia's willingness to cooperate with Georgia on issues concerning South Ossetia and Abkhazia. However, he urged for a careful assessment of Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov's statements.

“At first glance, Russia’s readiness to engage can seem promising. But we must scrutinize the diplomatic language being used. Lavrov isn't discussing reconciliation among Georgians, Ossetians, and Abkhazians; he is implying that Russia will mediate reconciliation between these nations. This raises concerns that such mediation would require us to recognize these separatist regions as independent states, leading to treaties with them. This is fundamentally unacceptable for the majority of Georgian society. Many overlook these crucial details, but as the saying goes, the devil is in the details,” Chkheidze emphasized.

He characterized the reconciliation process as highly complex and expressed skepticism about its feasibility.

“Furthermore, the ruling Georgian Dream party, currently promotes an ‘ideology of peace’ primarily as part of their election campaign. I realistically believe that if this party wins the elections, the next day, issues concerning Abkhazia and South Ossetia will be forgotten. This rhetoric is merely for internal political consumption,” the pundit concluded.