PONARS Eurasia
  • About
    • Contact
    • Membership
      • All Members
      • Core Members
      • Collegium Members
      • Associate Members
      • About Membership
    • Ukraine Experts
    • Executive Committee
  • Policy Memos
    • List of Policy Memos
    • Submissions
  • Podcasts
  • Online Academy
  • Events
    • Past Events
  • Recommended
  • Ukraine Experts
Contacts

Address
1957 E St NW,
Washington, DC 20052

adminponars@gwu.edu
202.994.5915

NEWSLETTER
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Podcast
PONARS Eurasia
PONARS Eurasia
  • About
    • Contact
    • Membership
      • All Members
      • Core Members
      • Collegium Members
      • Associate Members
      • About Membership
    • Ukraine Experts
    • Executive Committee
  • Policy Memos
    • List of Policy Memos
    • Submissions
  • Podcasts
  • Online Academy
  • Events
    • Past Events
  • Recommended
  • Ukraine Experts
DIGITAL RESOURCES
digital resources

Bookstore 📚

Knowledge Hub

Course Syllabi

Point & Counterpoint

Policy Perspectives

RECOMMENDED
  • The Desire to Possess: Russia’s War for Territory

    View
  • Russia at War and the Islamic World

    View
  • Ukraine’s Ripple Effect on Russia’s Indo-Pacific Horizon

    View
  • The Determinants of Assistance to Ukrainian and Syrian Refugees | New Voices on Eurasia with Volha Charnysh (Feb. 16)

    View
  • Conflicts in the North Caucasus Since 1991 | PONARS Eurasia Online Academy

    View
RSS PONARS Eurasia Podcast
  • The Putin-Xi Summit: What's New In Their Joint Communique ? February 23, 2022
    In this week’s PONARS Eurasia Podcast, Maria Lipman speaks with Russian China experts Vita Spivak and Alexander Gabuev about the February meeting between Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping, and what it may tell us about where the Russian-Chinese relationship is headed.
  • Exploring the Russian Courts' Ruling to Liquidate the Memorial Society January 28, 2022
    In this week’s PONARS Eurasia Podcast, Maria Lipman chats with scholars Kelly Smith and Benjamin Nathans about the history, achievements, and impending shutdown of the Memorial Society, Russia's oldest and most venerable civic organization, and what its imminent liquidation portends for the Russian civil society.
  • Russia's 2021 census and the Kremlin's nationalities policy [Lipman Series 2021] December 9, 2021
    In this week’s PONARS Eurasia Podcast, Maria Lipman chats with social scientist Andrey Shcherbak about the quality of the data collected in the recent population census and the goals of Vladimir Putin's government's nationalities policy
  • Active citizens of any kind are under threat [Lipman Series 2021] November 5, 2021
    In this week’s PONARS Eurasia Podcast, Maria Lipman chats with Alexander Verkhovsky about the Kremlin's ever expanding toolkit against political and civic activists, journalists, and other dissidents.
  • Russia's Legislative Elections followup [Lipman Series 2021] October 4, 2021
    In this week’s PONARS Eurasia Podcast, Maria Lipman chats with Tanya Lokot and Nikolay Petrov about the results of Russia’s legislative elections and about what comes next.
  • Why Is the Kremlin Nervous? [Lipman Series 2021] September 14, 2021
    In this week’s PONARS Eurasia Podcast, Maria Lipman chats with Ben Noble and Nikolay Petrov about Russia’s September 17-19 legislative elections, repressive measures against electoral challengers, and whether to expect anything other than preordained results.
  • Vaccine Hesitancy in Russia, France, and the United States [Lipman Series 2021] August 31, 2021
    In this week's PONARS Eurasia Podcast episode, Maria Lipman chats with Denis Volkov, Naira Davlashyan, and Peter Slevin about why COVID-19 vaccination rates are still so low across the globe, comparing vaccine hesitant constituencies across Russia, France, and the United States.  
  • Is Russia Becoming More Soviet? [Lipman Series 2021] July 26, 2021
      In a new PONARS Eurasia Podcast episode, Maria Lipman chats with Maxim Trudolyubov about the current tightening of the Russian political sphere, asking whether or not it’s helpful to draw comparisons to the late Soviet period.
  • The Evolution of Russia's Political Regime [Lipman Series 2021] June 21, 2021
    In this week's episode of the PONARS Eurasia Podcast, Maria Lipman chats with Grigory Golosov and Henry Hale about the evolution of Russia's political regime, and what to expect in the lead-up to September's Duma elections.
  • Volodymyr Zelensky: Year Two [Lipman Series 2021] May 24, 2021
    In this week's episode of the PONARS Eurasia Podcast, Maria Lipman chats with Sergiy Kudelia and Georgiy Kasianov about Ukrainian President Zelensky's second year in office, and how he has handled the political turbulence of the past year.
  • Commentary | Комментарии

Abkhazia and South Ossetia: “Asymmetric Sovereignty”?

  • August 27, 2010

 

On August 25, the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies held a seminar on the implications of the 2008 Russia-Georgia war, in which some innovative discussion was devoted to the question of future status for Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Earlier this month, a number of pieces that came out to commemorate the second anniversary of the war also looked over the horizon at possible political settlements of the Georgian-South Ossetian and Georgian-Abkhaz conflicts. In separate pieces, Thomas de Waal ("How to Square the Caucasian Circle") and Dmitri Trenin ("How to Make Peace with Georgia") both discussed, first, how Russia could use soft power to restore relations with Georgia, with Trenin explicitly calling on Russia to drop its sanctions against Georgia. They also tread, however, where few (outside the Russian government) have dared to go: taking independence of the two breakaway regions, not Georgian territorial integrity, as the baseline for more nuanced final political settlements.

De Waal and Trenin acknowledge that Abkhazia and South Ossetia have been, and continue to develop, along very different models that necessitate different approaches. De Waal seeks creative solutions in the realm of quasi-sovereign status, though the distinction he makes between South Ossetia and Abkhazia is not so clear. For South Ossetia, he suggests "self-government with ties to both" Georgia and Russia; for Abkhazia, some kind of "asymmetric sovereignty" arrangement (citing Andorra, Liechtenstein, the Aaland Islands, as well as Scotland and Northern Ireland). I'm not quite sure why de Waal puts Liechtenstein on the list of "asymmetrically sovereign" countries (I thought it was a fully sovereign micro-state…) but the break on the above list between two distinct forms of sovereignty definitely lies between Andorra (a peculiarly independent state with dual French and Catalonian sovereigns) and Scotland and Northern Ireland (federal or quasi-federal units). It would thus seem that what de Waal is really suggesting is some kind of creatively autonomous status for South Ossetia that retains trappings of sovereignty and some kind of creatively independent status for Abkhazia that retains trappings of Georgian (co-)sovereignty, a la Andorra. Trenin goes further than de Waal, calling outright for partition of Abkhazia, with its southern Gali region (populated mainly by ethnic Georgians) returning to Georgia and the rest receiving recognition as an independent state (think Kosovo without its northern Serb-populated region). For South Ossetia, he reserves something "along the lines of the Andorran model," which would involve "formal trappings of independence" but with Georgia "legally present in South Ossetia as a guarantor of its remaining or returning Georgian population."

So in a nutshell, two independent microstates but with Georgia having some kind of legal status in one. It's far too soon to formally discuss political solutions to the conflicts, and there are issues on the ground that could (and should) be addressed first, perhaps for several more years even before returning to the question of status. But while both these proposals lean much more toward the Russian mainstream than the Western, as a baseline for innovative thinking, of the two de Waal's has merit. To further think outside the box, say there was a proposal for Abkhazia to hold a referendum on independence, similar to that the international community has supported for Nagorno-Karabakh, and all those who fled Abkhazia during the 1992-93 war had the right to return and participate (i.e., mainly ethnic Georgians who made up almost half the population before that conflict). There would still be a reasonable chance that the population, including even some percentage of Georgians, would vote for independence in a democratic, representative, neutral Abkhazia. Along the Andorran model, that Abkhazia might have what amounts to full self-government (de facto independence) but with co-sovereigns, Georgia and Russia, to guarantee the security of populations and the state. Such a proposal will probably attract fervent criticism from all sides, but really, why not? It would accomodate Abkhaz aspirations to independence, justice for Georgian IDPs, validation of the dual role of Abkhazia in both Abkhaz and Georgian national identity formation, and security guarantees for all populations. That of course leaves South Ossetia, which really has virtually no claim, opportunity, or desire for independence (what South Ossetians really want is to be annexed by Russia).

Here some sort of innovative self-government does seem to be the way to go, with South Ossetia reintegrated with Georgia but with, to reverse Trenin's formulation, some kind of legal presence for Russia, that would provide security guarantees for that part of the population that needs it (and, it goes without saying, return of Georgian IDPs whose homes were destroyed by South Ossetia in the 2008 war). As I said, there's much practical work to be done yet before even approaching the question of status again, but the discussion of forms of "asymmetric sovereignty" is at least one worth having. Also of interest: Lincoln Mitchell and Alexander Cooley, “After the August War: A New Strategy for U.S. Engagement with Georgia,” The Harriman Review 17, no. 3-4 (May 2010) (Mitchell and Cooley have co-authored a number of pieces on the topic) Cory Welt, “After the EU War Report: Can There Be a ‘Reset’ in Russian-Georgian Relations?” Russian Analytical Digest No. 68, November 23, 2009.

Note: Some other pieces also came out in time with the anniversary: in the Washington Post, Sen. John McCain ("Georgia Needs U.S. Help in Rebuilding, Standing Up to Russia") called for a harder line toward Russia and greater support for Georgia, including in defensive armaments (to date, the U.S. government not only declines to provide direct military assistance to Georgia but also does not approve of private arms sales requests, out of a belief that Georgian defensive arms are both destabilizing and not very effective). Foreign Policy also ran a good piece ("The Georgia Syndrome") on the Georgian domestic scene by James Traub.

Related Topics
  • Abkhazia
  • Conflict
  • European/Eurasian Security
  • Georgia
  • Russia
  • South Ossetia
  • Welt
Previous Article
  • Policy Perspectives
  • Recommended | Рекомендуем

Kyrgyzstan: Recovery and Reformation

  • August 24, 2010
  • PONARS Eurasia
View
Next Article
  • Commentary | Комментарии

Mayor Yuri Luzhkov

  • September 28, 2010
  • Joshua Tucker
View
You May Also Like
View
  • Commentary | Комментарии
  • Recommended | Рекомендуем

The Desire to Possess: Russia’s War for Territory

  • Irina Busygina
  • February 8, 2023
View
  • Commentary | Комментарии
  • Recommended | Рекомендуем

Kyiv-Washington Relations in Times of Colossal War: The Ultimate Test of a Strategic Partnership

  • Volodymyr Dubovyk
  • January 11, 2023
View
  • Commentary | Комментарии
  • Recommended | Рекомендуем

Prevailing Soviet Legacies

  • Irina Busygina and Mikhail Filippov
  • December 27, 2022
View
  • Commentary | Комментарии
  • Recommended | Рекомендуем

In Russia’s Nuclear Messaging to West and Ukraine, Putin Plays Both Bad and Good Cop

  • Simon Saradzhyan
  • December 23, 2022
View
  • Commentary | Комментарии
  • Recommended | Рекомендуем

Ukraine’s Asymmetric Responses to the Russian Invasion

  • Nurlan Aliyev
  • July 28, 2022
View
  • Commentary | Комментарии
  • Recommended | Рекомендуем
  • Territorial Conflict

Dominating Ukraine’s Sky

  • Volodymyr Dubovyk
  • March 5, 2022
View
  • Commentary | Комментарии
  • Recommended | Рекомендуем

Russian Anti-War Protests and the State’s Response

  • Lauren McCarthy
  • March 4, 2022
View
  • Commentary | Комментарии

Путин и Лукашенко

  • Konstantin Sonin
  • August 29, 2020

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

PONARS Eurasia
  • About
  • Membership
  • Policy Memos
  • Recommended
  • Events
Powered by narva.io

Permissions & Citation Guidelines

Input your search keywords and press Enter.