Our Publications

Mixed Messages Regarding South Ossetia

Kristina Jeffers

Even as four Georgian civilians remain missing in the breakaway republic of South Ossetia, Georgian and Ossetian leaders seem to be signaling the possibility of talks regarding the unrecognized region’s future prospects. 

South Ossetia, which lies in north-central Georgia, first officially declared its independence from Tbilisi in 1991 and has long demanded union with North Ossetia, a constituent republic of the Russian Federation.  Tskhinvali (the South Ossetian administrative center) was besieged by Georgian troops in late 1991 and early 1992 following both the breakup of the Soviet Union and the republic’s declaration of independence from Georgia.  Since mid-1992 the troubled region has hosted a trilateral peacekeeping force tasked with enforcing a Russian-brokered ceasefire. Although active fighting has been rare, the region remains a sticking point for Georgia’s domestic and foreign policy. 

There were some positive developments early this year as Georgian president Mikheil Saakashvili announced a new initiative aimed at finding a peaceful resolution to the Georgian-Ossetian conflict.  Saakashvili’s plan would give the breakaway republic significant freedom in the realms of culture, education, governance and local economic policy.  In return, Georgia would retain its territorial integrity as well as supremacy in the realms of security, foreign policy and international trade.  While the Ossetian leader, Eduard Kokoiti, rejected Saakashvili’s proposal out of hand, there were some indications this week that the South Ossetian leadership might be willing to entertain the prospect of significant autonomy within Georgia.

On 16 June, Kokoiti’s special representative on Georgian-Ossetian settlement Vazha Khachapuridze made the following statement on live television, “The entry of South Ossetia, with widened autonomy, completely into Georgia is entirely realistic” (16 June 2005, sakartvelo.info).  Khachapuridze went on to speculate that in order to begin the conflict resolution problems, the leadership of Georgia and Ossetia need to, “first of all lay down weapons, look at each other without hatred and, as friends, begin to return refuges and solve social and economic issues.” 

Khachapuridze’s remarks were almost immediately countered by those of his boss, President Eduard Kokoiti, who the next day remarked, “The union of our republic with North Ossetia is necessary and inevitable” (17 June Gazeta.ru). 

It is possible that the conflicting messages out of South Ossetia reflect a trial balloon on the part of the Tskhinvali.  With the Russian Federation having refused to consider ascension for breakaway republics of the former Soviet Union and with Ossetian presidential elections looming in a year, Kokoiti may be considering accepting Saakashvili’s overtures and returning to negotiations.  On the other hand, both Kokoiti and South Ossetian Minister of International Affairs Murad Jioev were quick to deny that there was any truth to Khachapuridze’s overtures, hinting at a possible split within the unrecognized republic. 

Of course, where South Ossetia is concerned, Tbilisi and Tskhinvali are never the only players.  A week before Chachapuridze’s remarks, the newly appointed leader of North Ossetia, Teymuraz Mamsurov had told a Russian newspaper that, “Ossetia - is a divided nation which was split within one country [Soviet Union]. That's why there can be no other option than reunification” (10 June Novaya Gazeta).  Outgoing North Ossetian president Aleksander Dzhasokov was known for his more tempered approach to the South Ossetian issue and the new leader’s remarks were the first time that any North Ossetian leader had openly called for unification with South Ossetia.  Mamsurov was appointed by Russian president Vladimir Putin on 7 June and his comments on 10 June were regarded by some in Tbilisi as reflective of a new, harder line on the part of Moscow. 
 A few days later and many time zones away, Georgian Defense Minister Irakli Okruashvili met with high-ranking United States senators and members of the Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs Richard Lugar and John McCain.  Okruashvili appeared on live television from Washington on 16 June and, with regards to South Ossetia, claimed to have the “full support” of the United States.  He said,  “Here there is a clear feeling, a leitmotif, that of course these conflicts should be resolved peacefully, but the status quo cannot continue for a long time because this hampers Georgia's development in general. So, we feel support from the United States of America, not only words but also concrete projects and concrete assistance” (16 June, Imedi TV). 

While politicians were sending mixed messages regarding the fate of the breakaway republic, events on the ground were making any dialogue more difficult.  On 6 June, four ethnic Georgians disappeared from a village in the conflict zone.  Locals alleged that the four had been kidnapped at gunpoint and theorized that they might have been taken in retaliation for four ethnic Ossetians who were killed in a firefight with Georgian police.  Despite several days of search and rescue missions carried out by Georgian police in cooperation with Russian and Ossetian peacekeepers, the men have not yet been found.   The situation continues to prompt accusations on both sides of the conflict, with South Ossetian officials claiming that the crime situation in the breakaway republic, “still remains difficult due to provocative actions” on the Tbilisi side (9/6/05 civil.ge). On the Georgian side, the Minister for Conflict Resolution called the disappearances, “a provocation carefully planned to the north,” an unequivocal reference to the Russian Federation. 

There is some doubt as to how dramatically the above events will affect the Georgian-Ossetian relationship.  Despite the rhetoric flowing from both Tbilisi and Tskhinvali, neither side has made any moves that would permanently upset the balance of power in the region.  In fact, Tbilisi has gone out of its way to insist that it will not deploy additional troops to the troubled breakaway republic.  This, more than any quotes given to the media, signals the capital’s intention to seek a diplomatic solution to the problem of the missing Georgians.

Russia Agrees to Military Withdrawal

After a lengthy discussion and negotiation process, Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergej Lavrov and Georgian Minister of Foreign Affairs Salome Zourabichvili signed an agreement on 30 May regarding the withdrawal of Russian Military bases from the territory of Georgia.  Sticking points in the negotiation included the exact timeline for withdrawal, the fate of a Tank Repair Factory and compensation paid by the Georgian side. 

The Russian side has committed to completing its withdrawal within 2008.  The presence of Russian troops on Georgian soil had been a sticking point for the Georgian government as well as its citizens.  Many Georgians consider the continued existence of Russian troops to smack of paternalism, particularly given the tacit support which Russia has provided for the breakaway republics of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. 

The final details of the withdrawal remain to be settled.  In particular, the question of what will happen to most of the equipment has been a matter for fierce debate around the Caucasus region.  Russia has announced that much of the equipment and personnel will be transferred to two new mountain bases on the Russian-Georgian border, with the purpose of combating terrorism in the North Caucasus.  The remainder of the equipment will be transferred to the Russian military base in Armenia, a fact that has raised no small amount of furor in Azerbaijan, which has waged a 15-year war with Armenia over the contested region of Nagorno-Karabakh.  Although the region is within Azeri territory, it has been occupied by Armenia since 1994.  Because this conflict remains unresolved, Azerbaijan is understandably nervous about an increased Russian military presence in Armenia. 

KN Jeffers 6/21/05