|
Russia and the South Caucasus
Elizabeth Fuller
Georgian officials were tight-lipped on May 17 when
asked by journalists to comment on the visit that day to
Tbilisi
by Russian Security Council Chairman Igor Ivanov. But
the scant information divulged suggests that Ivanov may
have been seeking
Georgia's
approval of a broad scheme that would restore Georgian
central government's control over the breakaway
republics of Abkhazia and
South
Ossetia
while simultaneously preserving a degree of Russian
influence in the
South
Caucasus
as a whole by delaying indefinitely a solution to the
Karabakh conflict.
Moscow's
plan reportedly envisages
Georgia
as a confederation in which the two breakaway
unrecognized republics would presumably retain the
degree of autonomy they enjoy at present. Security
measures – possibly the UN police force that has been
under discussion since last year – would be put in place
to enable the Georgian displaced persons who fled
Abkhazia during the 1992-1993 war to return to their
abandoned homes. Their return would transform the
demographic situation in Abkhazia, making Georgians the
largest single ethnic group. But Russia would retain a
certain leverage over Abkhazia insofar as most of the
Abkhaz population have acquired Russian citizenship in
recent years. In addition, Russian businessmen have
acquired substantial economic assets in Abkhazia. The
Abkhaz leadership would be persuaded to drop their
insistence on full independence from Georgia in return
for the region being designated a free economic zone.
A
formal political solution to the Abkhaz conflict would
make possible the resumption of rail traffic from
Russia
via the Black Sea coast to Georgia and thence to
Armenia, giving a much needed boost to the Armenian
economy. And it would also spare the new Georgian
leadership, headed by President Mikheil Saakashvili, of
the risks that would accompany either an attempt to
stage a rerun in Abkhazia of the popular uprising
earlier this month that toppled authoritarian Adjar
leader Aslan Abashidze or a military operation to win
back Abkhazia that might end in an ignominious defeat.
But
even more important geopolitically, a rail link from
Yerevan via Tbilisi to Russia would obviate the need to
restore rail communications between Azerbaijan and
Armenia – which is the sole incentive Azerbaijan is
currently prepared to offer to secure a solution on its
own terms to the Karabakh conflict.
In
return for the resumption of rail traffic, Baku is
demanding the withdrawal of Armenian forces from six
Azerbaijani districts adjacent to the unrecognized
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and also from the
strategically located town of
Shusha.
During the early 1990s, Azerbaijani artillery in Shusha
kept up relentless artillery bombardment of the Karabakh
capital, Stepanakert. Armenian President Robert
Kocharian, who as commander in the 1990s of the Karabakh
armed forces participated in the operation to wrest
Shusha back from the Azerbaijanis 10 years ago this
month, recently designated that operation one of the
proudest days of his life. On the eve of his meeting
last week in
Strasbourg with his Azerbaijani counterpart Elmar
Mammadyarov, Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian
dismissed Baku's proposal of a resumption of rail
traffic in return for an Armenian withdrawal as
"absurd." With that proposal dead in the water, and its
economy benefiting from new transport links via Georgia
(including the ferry linking Batumi with Constanta on
the opposite shore of the Black Sea) the Armenian
leadership could sit back and wait for either the OSCE
Minsk Group or the EU to persuade Baku to drop its
insistence on a settlement plan that subordinates
Karabakh to the central government. But at present,
Ilham Aliyev,
Azerbaijan's
President, is manifestly not secure enough to agree to
such a major concession.
Granted, the restoration of rail traffic between Russia
and Armenia via Abkhazia would give rise to bad blood
between
Tbilisi
and
Baku.
But Azerbaijan cannot afford to alienate its Western
neighbor, given that the main export pipelines for
Azerbaijan's Caspian hydrocarbons run across Georgian
territory. On the other hand, there are some half
million disgruntled Azerbaijanis living in Georgia whom
Baku could seek to mobilize if it wished to retaliate by
creating problems for Tbilisi.
The
question arises: what quid pro quo is Moscow likely to
exact from Tbilisi in return for restoring Georgia's
territorial integrity? To which one possible answer is:
the inclusion in the bilateral framework treaty
currently under discussion of a clause precluding the
location of any foreign military bases on Georgian soil.
Also,
the festering conflict in Chechnya furnishes Moscow with
a perennial leverage over Tbilisi: the "hawks " within
the Russian military continue to accuse the Georgian
leadership of turning a blind eye to the presence of
"Islamic terrorists" ensconced in Georgia's Pankisi
gorge. However, one thing is clear – geopolitical
movement in the Caucasus is underway.
Elizabeth Fuller is Editor-in-Chief of RFE/RL Newsline
and covers developments in the South Caucasus, the
North Caucasus
and
Central
Asia
for RFE/RL Newsline and writes the weekly "RFE/RL
Caucasus Report."
|