Russia and the South Caucasus
June 2, 2004
By 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."
|