Georgian Conflicts - Abkhazia
Mgr. Zinaida Shevchuk
The demography in Georgia
• Ethnic group % of total population
• Georgian 70.1
• Armenians 8. 1
• Russians 6.3
• Azeris 5.7
• Ossetians 3.0
• Greeks 1.9
• Abkhaz 1.8
• Ukrainians 0.9
Abkhazia
Abkhazia
• 45% Georgians, Abkhaz made 17.8%, 14% were
Russians and 14% Armenians.
• Abkhazian language is different from Georgian,
it belong to the North-Caucasian linguistic
family and is akin to Chechen-Dagestan group.
• Orthodox and Muslim believers among
Abkhazians.
• Abkhazia was one of the wealthiest regions of the
Soviet Union and enjoyed a far high standard of
living.
Changes in the Ethnic Composition and Size of
the Abkhazian Population in 1989-2003
The role of ethnicity
• Since early Byzantine times, Georgianized Abkhaz princes ruled their region
with varying degrees of autonomy. Although the Abkhaz language was
linguistically distinct from Georgian, related to the languages of North
Caucasian peoples such as the Circassians, Georgian was the official
language of governance and the nobility.
• As Byzantium’s control slipped in the 9th Century, the rulers of the Abkhaz
Kingdom began efforts to unify their dynasty with that of their Georgian
neighbours.
• In 1001 the royal lines were combined, creating what is known as the
unified Georgian Kingdom. This entity lasted until the 16thCentury when
the Ottomans established suzerainty over the area that is modern Abkhazia.
The role of ethnicity
• The Abkhazian claims for special status stems from their aspiration
to attain separation from Georgia. After Georgia regained its
independence in 1918, there was a struggle between different forces
in Abkhazia: supporters of North Caucasian peoples, supporters of
Turkish invasion, a pro Russian Bolsheviks and pro-Georgian
Menshevik forces.
• In November 1917 the Abkhaz People´s Council took place, which
was originally in line with the interest of pro-Georgian supporters.
At this time, Abkhazia gained a status of autonomy. However, this
status was abandoned soon after disloyalty of Abkhaz People´s
Council. This paved the way to the series of struggles that lasted
until 1921, when Georgia was invaded by the Red Army.
Ethnicity as a driving force?
• The role of ethnicity was key aspect for selfidentification
of different nations living within
the Soviet Union.
• Ethnicity was a “determinant of national
belonging”, granting “ the titular nation of these
Soviet Republics (in the South Caucasus)
exclusive political rights and served to enforce a
strong ideological connection between ethnicity
and territory.”
First phase of the conflict
• During the first year of Soviet rule in Georgia, Abkhazia gained a
status of a Soviet Republic separate from Georgia. The relationship
between Georgia and Abkhazia between 1921-1931 was regulated by
special treaty, according to which Abkhazia gave a piece of
“sovereignty” to Georgia.
• In 1931 Abkhazia became fully subordinated to Georgia since its
status was reduces to the Autonomous Republic. Unsatisfied with its
position, Abkhazians organized strikes and demonstration, in order
to upgrade its status. The public dissatisfaction was unambiguously
restrained in 1931, 1957, 1965, 1967 and 1978. The demands of
Abkhazia was to gain the status of autonomous Soviet republic
incorporated into Soviet Union.
Manifestation of the conflict
interets
• In the beginning of the 1980s the national-liberation movements
erupted all over the former Soviet territories.
• During the “perestroika” period in Abkhazia was marked by the
tendencies of separatist movements. Among them was the creation
of “Aidgilara”, “Slavianski dom” and “Krunk” with strong antiGeorgian
ideology.
• The open manifestation of Abkhazian claims to secede from
Georgian and join to Russia was a major issue at stake in 1988-1992.
By declaration of independence on 25 August 1990 Abkhazia the In
March 1989 mass rally in Lykhny to point out their demand for
granting the status of union republic.
• They signed a declaration demanding the restoration of Abkhazia’s
1925 constitution, upgrading its status to a sovereign Soviet
Republic, effectively seceding from Georgia. The publication of this
declaration in local newspapers immediately sparked furious antiAbkhazian
mass demonstrations in Tbilisi. Many of those who took
part were ethnic Georgians living in Abkhazia, but as they continued
for weeks, the demonstrations began to take on a wider, proindependence
character. What had initially begun as a rally against
Abkhaz secession from Georgia, turned into a rally for Georgian
secession from the Soviet Union. This mixture of sentiments would
characterize much of the developments to come.
The political landscape in Georgia
• National independence movement in Georgia - slogan of
independence from the Soviet Union.
• 9 April, 1989 - the moral death of the Communist regime in Georgia.
Political development within
Georgia
• The beginning of Georgia’s campaign for independence was
characterized by a permanent jostling for power between the
former members of the communist Nomenklatura elite, a part of
who were inspired by nationalistic ideas.
• The process of dissolution of Soviet Union opened an opportunity
for bloody confrontations. It was believed that “Russian empire”
would use a military force to defeat Georgian national movement.
• The radical wing of Georgian political spectrum at this time
emphasizes the need to struggle for restoration independence. As
the Chairman of Georgian Supreme Council (or Parliament) on
November 14, 1990 Zviad Gamsakhurdia exposed the high national
consciousness for freedom and declared that this is the beginning of
the more significant war for independence.
Political development within
Georgia
• According to Ghia Nodia: “Georgia’s nationalist movement was probably
the most radical in style in the former Soviet Union, at least among the
movements at the union republic level. However, this radicalism was
primarily targeted at the imperial centre, not ethnic minorities “.
• The nationalist mobilization and radicalization of newly creating Georgian
government, however, boosted separatist movements of non-Georgian
ethnic groups. The dynamics of the Georgian-Ossetian armed conflict was
shaped by a number of factors, including the extreme position of
Georgian nationalists in 1989, Zviad Gamsachurdia the leader of
coalition “Round Table – Free Georgia” and the first president of Georgia,
the lack of clear idea of Georgian establishment about the
autonomous regions and the great faith of Abkhazian leaders in being
supported by the Russian Federation.
• Thus, the process to attain national liberation was twofold: Georgian
political leaders aspired to attain independence from the Soviet
Union and disregarded the grievance of the national minorities. At the
same time Abkhazia struggled for the preservation of its specific
status it enjoyed within the Soviet ethno-federal system.
• After the demise of the Soviet Union, Abkhazians feared that the Georgian
national movement would undermine their right of self-determination and
this would lead to the assimilation with the titular nation.
• In the result the triangle struggle have occurred: Georgian struggle for
independence, Moscow fight against Georgian secession from the Soviet
Union and South Ossetia trying to carve their special status and protect
their rights vis-à-vis Georgian nationalism under the protection of Moscow.
The political landscape in Georgia
• In May 1991, Zviad Gamsakhurdia was elected as
a president with 86 per cent of the vote.
• This period defined Georgia’s political agenda,
its public discourse and the character of its
political institutions. The agenda was dominated
by two ideas: nationalism and democracy.
The political landscape in Georgia
• Gamsakhurdia’s rule
embodied a paradox typical of
many young and immature
democracies: it had a strong
popular mandate but was very
soon denounced as
authoritarian. The fact that
Zviad Gamsakhurdia was a
strong ethnic nationalist who
openly called the slogan
„Georgia for Goergians“
greatly fuelled the tensions.
The political landscape in Georgia
• Adding to the difficulties in achieving political pluralism was the
problem of ethnic pluralism.
• The Georgian national liberation movement lacked a clear idea
about how to deal with the issues of the autonomies.
• Radicalism and aversion to compromise were as widespread among
the Abkhaz and Ossetian nationalists as among their Georgian
counterparts.
• Zviad Gamsakhurdia’s nationalistic agenda was primarily directed
against Soviet regime in Georgia and problem with Ossetia were
considered to be the part of that struggle. Claims of minority were
interpreted as dictated from Kremlin and there were no trustbuilding
efforts for compromise.
• Meanwhile, Abkhaz demonstrations were decidedly proSoviet,
and Abkhaz leaders tried to ‘project an image of
loyal Soviet citizens resisting anticommunist Georgian
nationalism’, by lobbying Moscow for support.
• Under the condition of accumulating anti-Gamsakhurdia
forces, the president of Georgia played the nationalistic
card to preserve in power, at the expense of
democratization and minority groups in country. However,
the further development was not only unsuccessful to
establish political pluralism in Georgia, but failed to “unite
the nation” by compelling the spirit of armed conflict in
Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
• Perhaps due to Ardzinba’s new close relationship with Russian
commanders in the area, as well as increasing pressure from
political rivals in Tbilisi, Gamsakhurdia decided to attempt a
compromise with the Abkhaz separatists.
• In August 1991, a power-sharing deal was reached for the makeup of
the new Abkhaz parliament based on ethnic quotas, where ethnic
Abkhaz, 17.8% of the population, were guaranteed 28 of the 65
seats, while ethnic Georgians, 45.7% of Abkhazia’s population, were
guaranteed only 26 seats. Tbilisi’s support for this configuration
would not last, however, as Gamsakhurdia’s erratic policies led to
the mutiny of the Georgian National Guard he had created for the
war in South Ossetia. In December 1991, five hundred National
Guard soldiers laid siege to the parliament building in Tbilisi,
forcing Gamsakhurdia into exile.
• To gain legitimacy, the new forces in power
invited former Soviet foreign minister and
Georgian party boss, Eduard Shevardnadze to
lead the transitional State Council. Shortly after,
Gamsakhurdia slipped back into Georgia, to
Mingrelia, where forces loyal to him, the socalled
‘Zviadists’, began an insurgency in the
Georgian province bordering Abkhazia.
First phase: towards escalation
• One of the first manifestations of this process started
with confrontation over amendments in the Georgian
Constitution - the law on the status of the state language,
which strengthened the need to the language in all public
sphere.
• In August 1990 election law was passed, which excluded
the small region based parties from the participation in
the parliamentary elections. These policies were
interpreted as antidemocratic, cutting the influence of
minorities in the power-sharing institutions in Georgia.
Armed conflict in Abkhazia
• The first major blood in the Abkhazian-Georgian conflict spilled on 15-16
July, 1989, when 11 Georgians, 5 Abkhazians, and one Greek were killed
and many more injured in clashes near the city of Ochamchira.
• Escalation of the conflict between the Abkhazians and the local Georgians
continued to embrace the entire population of the autonomous republic. In
August 1990 to the declaration of sovereignty by Abkhazia.
• After Gamsakhurdia's overthrow in January 1992 the situation in Abkhazia
deteriorated further.
• Depending on the source, between 2000 and 5000 Georgian National
Guard troops crossed the border and headed for Sukhumi, while another
1000 troops landed in Gagra, in northwestern Abkhazia, to seal off the
border with Russia. Abkhaz resistance proved much stiffer than anticipated
and heavy fighting broke out in and around Sukhumi
• On 14 August, 1992, the government of independent Georgia sent its troops
to Abkhazia
Full-scale war
• On 18 August full hostilities resumed and Georgian forces re-took
Sukhumi, forcing Ardzinba and the separatist Abkhaz leadership to
flee to Gudauta, the site of a Russian base in western
Abkhazia. Georgian National Guard units occupied the Abkhaz
parliament and a military administrative council of 8 officers was
set up. Shevardnadze declared on television that, ‘Now we can say
that Georgian authority has been restored throughout the entire
territory of the republic’.
• In February 1993, the situation grew chaotic, as
Gamsakhurdia’s Zviadist insurgents began raids
on the Georgian rear and Russian planes
bombed Sukhumi.
• Early July 1993 saw an amphibious landing of
Abkhaz forces near Sukhumi and a renewed
attack on the city, prompting Zviadist fighters to
come to the aid of regular Georgian forces.
• On 27 July, another Russian-brokered cease-fire was signed by the
belligerent parties in Sochi, just across the Russian border, that led
to the withdrawal of Georgian troops from positions in Abkhazia.
• Thinking the conflict was over, Georgian civilians returned to
Sukhumi, while Georgian troops staggered back into Mingrelia,
many of them joining Gamsakhurdia’s insurgency. As Zviadist
attacks on regular Georgian and Abkhaz forces grew in early
September 1993, the Abkhaz forces launched their largest offensive
of the war, breaking the terms of the cease-fire and capturing
Sukhumi on 27 September.
• Shevardnadze’s pleas for Russian help produced only condemnation
and nominal sanctions of the Abkhazians, as they routed the
remaining Georgian forces and drove some 200,000 Georgian
civilians across the Inguri River into Georgia proper.
Abkhazia
• The peace negotiations were held in the Russian Sochi,
in the summer of 1993.
• 27 July 1993 signed a document called the Agreement
on a ceasefire in Abkhazia and the mechanism to ensure
compliance. Only on the basis of the interruption of
firing, a Russian - Georgian - Abkhazian monitoring
group to supervise the ceasefire, the return of Abkhazian
parliament in Sukhumi and an agreement on the
deployment of UN observers in the region. In August of
that year, then the UN Security Council Resolutions No.
849 and No. 854 has been deployed in Abkhazia, the UN
Observer Mission - UNOMIG, active on its own territory
of Georgia. Its mandate was renewed several times until
June 2009, when Russia blocked a further extension.
• During the Abkhazian-Georgian war of 1992-1993, the Abkhazian
side alone lost at least 2,000 people, mainly ethnic Abkhazians
(servicemen and civilians). According to other sources,
approximately 2,700 Abkhazian servicemen perished in this war, a
figure which reached 12,000 when volunteers from other regions of
the former Soviet Union were added.
• Abkhazians formed the backbone of the Abkhazian armed
formations, but a large number of local Armenians and many
Russians, as well as volunteers from among the mountain peoples of
the Northern Caucasus, Cossacks, and Russians from the southern
regions of Russia, also participated in the war against Georgia.
• According to the Stockholm International Peace
Research Institute, the total losses during this
war amounted to approximately 12,000, while
according to the data of the Abkhazian and
Georgian authorities, 1,510 servicemen and
“several hundred civilians” from the Abkhazian
side (mainly Abkhazians) and 3,365 servicemen
and “approximately 7,000 civilians” from the
Georgian side were killed, that is, mainly
Georgians.
• According to the Red Cross, the conflict claimed
between 10,000 and 15,000 lives and left over
8000 wounded. Other sources, emphasizing
ethnic cleansing, cite the figure for deaths as
between 25,000 and 30,000.
• 1992-93 Georgia-Abkhazia War is what can be
termed as a ‘forgotten conflict’.
• 1998 large scale skirmish – Pankisi Gorge – law
intestity conflict.
• When discussing the underlying causes of the conflict the majority
of Abkhaz researchers think that the problem of identity – ethnicity
lies at its heart.
• The Abkhaz see Georgian policy on Abkhazia as an attempt to put an
end to the very existence of the Abkhaz nation. By denying the
existence of the Abkhaz as a separate nation, which is what a
number of Georgian ideologues are engaged in at present, and by
trying to impress on the Abkhaz the idea that they are, in fact,
Georgians, the Georgians infringe upon the identity of the Abkhaz,
one of the basic human needs. Even when it is recognized that the
Abkhaz have a right to their own identity, they are denied the right
to their territory, namely, Abkhazia.
• It is a fact that during social upheavals such as,
for instance, the collapse of the Soviet Union and
of communist ideology, national awareness
begins to play a pivotal role.
• The importance of ethnic identity greatly
increases in a context when other identities, for
example, state, civil and so on, become devalued.
?
• It is an ethno-political conflict, driven by incompatible ‘national projects’ to
form nationstates on the same territory;
• It is an ethno-political conflict born out of the contradiction between two
principles of international law: the right of nations to selfdetermination and
the principle of territorial integrity;
• The conflict is political in nature, but this political conflict resulted in an
inter-ethnic clash at a later stage.
• It is a conflict about resources: about land, natural and human resources.
Often these “resource interests” are not expressed directly but find an
indirect expression through political and ideological aspirations;
• The conflict is multilayered, but the main layer is psychological. At the heart
of the conflict lie misperceptions and false beliefs: the Georgians believing
Abkhaz land to be their own; the false belief in Georgian society that the
Abkhaz are really Georgians and have never had a state of their own; denial
of the fact that the Abkhaz andGeorgians are two different nations.
• Historical arguments can be made both for Abkhazia’s
unity and autonomy from Georgia, but the conflict
cannot be solely blamed on Soviet ‘ethno-federalism’. It
must, however, be understood within the context of
Georgian independence. Ethnic tension between
Abkhazians and Georgians was a necessary but not
sufficient cause for the conflict. It took an unstable
transition in Moscow, and chaotic Russian involvement
in the run-up to the conflict, to turn tension into
violence.
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqfPymWfK
bA