Email 
Print 
Broken Georgian promises to refugees
Written by: Nikolaj Nielsen
Reuters and AlertNet are not responsible for the content of this article or for any external internet sites. The views expressed are the author's alone.
A girl sits outside her house in Upper Abkhazia, May 3, 2008. REUTERS/David Mdzinarishvili
When Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili traveled to the Georgian-Abkhaz ceasefire line last year, he promised a crowd of Georgian refugees their return to Abkhazia within a year. But Saakashvili's promises to Georgian refugees rang hollow, even before the current crisis. A combined total of some 250,000 Georgians fled Abkhazia following the 1992-1994 war and the two-week war in 1998. Any prospect of their return has now been lost. Instead, Tbilisi's military venture and Russia's disproportionate response in South Ossetia has augmented the number of internally displaced people in and around Georgia's breakaway states by 100,000, according to the U.N. refugee agency, UNCHR. Last month I spoke to numerous refugees in Zugdidi, a Georgian border town a few kilometres from the ceasefire line near Abkhazia. Mzia Shakaia and her husband live in an abandoned hospital and both have resigned any hope of ever returning to their former homes in Abkhazia. The two are unemployed and Mzia's husband is confined to a wheelchair after a traffic accident. "We have no water, no electricity," she said. In the Abkhaz town of Gali, a day after a bomb exploded and killed four people in early July, a local resident told me that the instability serves Russia's interest. Regional instability thwarts Georgia's chances of NATO membership. Another complained of the harsh living conditions. "Look around," he said. "Fuel and food (prices have) increased. How can I feed my children?" Russian soldiers were standing around the destroyed café as two investigators picked through the debris. The current crisis involves more than geopolitical ramifications and a pipeline. It involves people, caught up in the misery of war and poverty caused in part by the manipulations of one impervious president in Tbilisi and a prime minister with a personal vendetta in Moscow. Tbilisi used the return of refugees to Abkhazia as a condition for any peaceful resolution knowing full well that such a demand would never be accepted. "How can we accept or allow all the refugees to return? Some fought against us, some are innocent," said Abkhazia's de facto Deputy Foreign Minister Maxim Gunjia. Fifteen years is a long time to wait for a crack in the status quo. Abkhazia, internationally isolated and forced into an ambivalent relationship with Russia, is driven to become independent and recognised. Russia now demands that the breakaway regions vote on their status. Hawks inside Abkahzia's de facto government, in particular inside the opposition parties, will want to push for a unilateral policy with Russia. Such a prospect has some Abkhazians worried. "Russia is not interested in promoting Abkhazia's civil society," said the chair of the board of the Association of Women in Abkhazia, Natella Akabar. Everyone speaks of peace but under inconsolable and irrevocable terms. The reality on the ground is as one would expect, desperate. Inadequate housing, lack of infrastructure, unemployment and abuse are the daily realities of Georgians living inside the Gali district of Abkhazia. And now they have become the daily realities of Georgians in Gori and those who fled South Ossetia. Georgian refugees in Zugdidi had to surrender to bleak conditions and national strategic interests as Saakashvili diverted a large part of the budget to military spending. And to what end? Within a matter of days Russia's troops crushed Georgia's army. Tbilisi ignored Moscow's repeated warnings of any military ventures inside the breakaway territories. And Saakashvili's rash and naive decision to launch a surprise attack on August 8 on Tskhinvali has dashed any chance of making true on his promise to the Georgian refugees. Georgia's president gambled on Russian restraint, Western support and the lives of his fellow countrymen. And he lost. In Tbilisi, a number of Georgians are calling on Saakashvili to resign. His "democracy" has undermined his credibility and many inside the country see him as an authoritarian. Since the Rose Revolution, Saakashvili has consolidated executive power and cracked down on media. The parliament is weak and ineffective. The Open Society Georgia Foundation's programme manager in Tbilisi, Mikheil Mirziashvili, said in June: "Unfortunately, I tasted real democracy in the West and I can see the differences here. "The main problem in Georgia is the lack of real self-government," he said.
Reuters AlertNet is not responsible for the content of external websites.
Alertnet , all rights reserved
We welcome argument but AlertNet will not publish comments that are racist, abusive or libellous.
10 responses to “Broken Georgian promises to refugees”
Please note that comments should not be regarded as the views of Reuters.
Leave a Reply
When you submit a comment to us we request your name, e-mail address and optionally a link to a website. Please note where you submit a website address, we may link to it via your name. By sending us a comment, you accept that we have the right to show the comment and your name to users. Although we require your email address, this will not be published on the site, and is only required to enable us to check facts with you, e.g. if you are making a claim we can not confirm easily. Additionally, if you would like your comment removed at anytime, you'll have to use this e-mail address when you contact us. To remove a comment at any time please e-mail us at blogs-(at)-reuters-(dot)-com (address obscured to avoid spam) specifying who you are and what you would like removed. We moderate all comments and will publish everything that advances the post directly or with relevant tangential information. We reserve the right to edit comments in order to maintain the quality of the comments, and may not include links to irrelevant material. We try not to publish comments that we think are offensive or appear to pass you off as another person, and we will be conservative if comments may be considered libelous. Reuters will use your data in accordance with Reuters privacy policy. Reuters Group is primarily responsible for managing your data. As Reuters is a global company your data will be transferred and available internationally, including in countries which do not have privacy laws but Reuters seeks to comply with its privacy policy.
All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content in this article, including by framing or by similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters.
14 Aug 2008 18:52:15 GMT
These people are very unfortunate to have a president that gambled away their future on American and NATO's provocation. They should have learn the lessons of other nations misled by these 'friends'.
14 Aug 2008 18:54:03 GMT
I'm amazed to see such a good article. NOT the usual universal propaganda in the west.
15 Aug 2008 14:54:16 GMT
I agree with John. None of the usual pro-western blah-blah-blah. Good job Nikolaj Nielsen
19 Aug 2008 11:17:58 GMT
Another "masterpiece" by Nielsen. I respect your interest in the issue of multiethnic Caucasus, however, again, I would advise you not to write things you do not understand. Or at least try to read more stuff. Blunders are all around. For instance "Abkhaz town of Gali", unless you are recruited by the separatists, you should respect the existing world order (at least at the moment) and even if you have personal grudge against Georgians, try to stick to some neutral forms. So far it is part of sovereign Georgia so your wording is rather unprofessional not to say biased.
Second, you are absolutely misinformed about the situation in Tbilisi. If before the war many people did not want Saakashvili, the situation has changed as in the view of the devastation that Russian troops brought to Georgia, both the opposition and the people united and largely support Saakashvili now (check the huge demonstration of support in the main square when the 5 EU presidents arrived). So please edit that part and add that now the talks of authorianism are far away as Georgia was torn apart by Russian forces. I am not stating this was not the case or that this would not be the case in the future, my point is that when you piblish an article on August 14, it should reflect the current situation not the earlier one. You fail to mention that in order for the separatist republics to have referendum, those people who were cleansed both in Abkhazia and Ossetia, namely 65% Georgians in Abkhazia and 70% Georgians in Ossetia, should be also asked their opinion. If today's Karelia is cleansed of all Russians and a referendum takes place, I assure you the Finns there will vote for reunification with Finland. So when talking about independence of Ossetia or as we Polish call it, reintegration with Russia, this fact has to be emphasized as well. You also seem to be uninformed that part of separatists headed by Ossetian Sanakoev several years ago made choice in favour of Ossetia within Georgia and he was elected in the elections as the head of Georgian refugee community in a poll attended by various observers (unlike Bagapsh and Kokoyti elections where Belorussia and Russia is in the observer's role). So part of Ossetians and refugee Georgians take Sanakoev as the President of Ossetia. You seem to do not possess the knowledge about that. Also, regarding your comment about Vladimir Gurgenidze. The prime minister is the most balanced man in today's Georgian government so saying that he has a personal "vendetta with Moscow" is your interpretation which is ridiculous for those who have knowledge of the political situation in the Caucasus. I have PhD in the conflicts in South Caucasus and believe me, to understand it one needs much more time than just superficial research. You want to be different and write different stories, I accept that but do not write things you do not know about. This will never lead you to success. You seem to be young and aspiring journalist, it is very good. But first thing in order to be noticed is telling the truth. To know how to tell truth you should read and study more. Finally, if you stick to more learning I am sure you will grow into a good professional. Truly, Dominik19 Aug 2008 13:18:58 GMT
Dear Dominik,
What is happening in Georgia is tragic. Russia has indeed overstepped the line. As is so often the case, it's the people who suffer the must. My point in this article was to address how Saakashvili has failed his people. Nonetheless, you have raised some interesting issues. I would like to address your points in reverse order. 1.You claim I made a comment about Vladimir Gurgenidze is sloppy reading on your part. I challenge you to find where I write he has a personal "vendetta with Moscow". In fact, what I write is "a prime minister with a personal vendetta in Moscow." Obviously I'm making reference to Vladimir Putin. I am surprised that you fail to make that simple distinction. I suggest for future reference that before you make and post comments, you read the article at least twice. 2.You mention the separatists headed by Sanakoev several years ago in Ossetia. This is an interesting subject but this blog entry is about Georgian refugees and their president. I am curious as to why you would criticize my judgment to question the current Georgian president but you have no qualms about bringing up a relatively unrelated issue that is several years old. You write "my point is that when you piblish (sic) an article on August 14, it should reflect the current situation not the earlier on." 3.You mention the referendum in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. However, your very first sentence makes little sense so I'm not sure how to comment on it. I am assuming you think I haven't spoken to Georgians in Abkhazia about the referendum issue or at least asked their opinions. I have. People are frightened. They want security first and foremost. They want jobs, housing, water, electricity, the basic necessities that we often take for granted. 4.You say that everyone is supporting Saakashvili. There are quite a few demonstrations for his support. I don't think this is unusual in times of war. But you are absolutely wrong to say the opposition parties are standing by Saakashvili. May I draw your attention to a recent article in civil.ge. I paraphrase: Levan Gachechiladze, co-leader of opposition coalition, told the Financial Times "Saakashvili was personally responsible for the military operation,and for starting a war we could not win." I also suggest you follow the link in my article which will lead to quotes in the Manchester Guardian. For example: "Why are people waving flags? It's not as if we won," Lasha Darkveldze, 23, said as supporters thronged the centre of Tbilisi and marched on its freedom square. "Saakashvili should now resign." 5.Your comment about Gali on Georgian sovereignty. In July I asked Georgia's Minister of Reintegration, Temuri Yakobashvili, what kind of jurisdiction Georgia has in the Gali region of Abkhazia. Not much was his response. I asked the same question to Tornike Kilanowa, Georgia's representative for the Gali Administration in exile in Zugdidi. He made it clear that they had no real, concrete jurisdiction in Gali. So while you mention sovereignty, often, the reality on the ground is different. I would hardly call this superficial research as you so claim. You have a Ph.D in the field, obviously you've been to both Abkhazia and South Ossetia. When you were there, what kind of reactions and statements did you get? Kind regards, Nikolaj19 Aug 2008 16:47:43 GMT
Well, honestly, I am not that familiar with NIkolay Nielsen masterpieces to judge this article against them. But this particular article seems to me to ber superficial and lacking in logic. The author describes the destitute that people in the conflict region are experiencing and it is indeed heartbreaking to know that these people have been living like that, without a hope of a normal life, of return to their houses, being afraid every day of their life to be killed, robbed or humiliated. The question is though: why? Why are they living like this? Why are they so miserable?
It looks to me that Mr. Nielsen is some extravagant person who wishes to be perceived as one "with a dissenting opinion", for the sake of just having it. It's incredulous that he puts blame on the current President Saakashvili for the problems that Georgia is facing as regards the conflicts and the refugees' dire conditions. He does not mention that the reason that there are refugees in Georgia is the actualy current regime in Abkhazia, which not only condones the ethnic cleansing of Georgians in teh beginning of the 1990s but which is actually comprised of the very same people who committed the horrible crimes against humanity against Georgians, together with Russians (including the Russian regular army), Chechens and other North Caucasus mercenaries. One has to think that either Mr. Nielsen is extermely biased, or that he is not knowledgable about the topic he writes in the article. Not having the ability to realize that whatever happened in South Ossetia a week ago is a logical continuation of Russia's revanchist policy in the former Soviet Union and elsewhere, not to realize that Georgia was doomed to be invaded by Russia taking into account Russia's leadership, aggressive stance and the West's passiveness, not to know that judging from the way and the swiftness of Russia's invasion it was planned well ahead, means to close eyes on the very essential issues that are importnat when one is discussing the subject. The countless provocations by Russia escalated immensely in teh recent times. Not only they did they boost their military presence in Georgia in breach of all the existing agreements, not only did they distribute Russian passports to the Abkhaz and Ossetian population, not only did they sabotage the peace process (Georgia made multiple efforts to resolve the conflict peafecully), but they shelled the innocent civilians on August 7 and onward si! mply because they had not been successfull in making Georgia respond. And they needed that response to invade and occupy the country, as well as to conduct the regime change, in which they effectively admitted (including in the UNSC). And I wonder which president of which democratic country would allow the massive shelling of its peaceful citizens without redressing this. So who is to blame that Georgia has more refugees than ever before? Is it Kremlin? No, of course not, according to Mr. Nielsen. Big deal it invaded Georgia and made those people refugees. He prefers not to see the connection. Bad job, Mr. Nielsen20 Aug 2008 02:31:20 GMT
First of all let me point out that people fled from South Osetia and Abkhazia and currently residing in other parts of Georgia are called IDPs or Internally Displaced Persons. Someone who decides to write an article on this issue as a minimum should know the difference between IDP and a Refugee. The general feeling I got while reading this article was that the author tries to be very specific when he mentions facts that support his anti-Georgian or anti-Saakashvili stance but limits himself to rhetorical questions and hasty conclusions when it comes to the matters that are most important for peaceful resolution of the conflicts in South Osetia and Abkhazia. Namely, he says âTbilisi used the return of refugees to Abkhazia as a condition for any peaceful resolution knowing full well that such a demand would never be acceptedâ. What does it mean and why should Georgia know âfull wellâ that this demand would never be accepted. And why does the author of this article finds the return of IDPs so unimaginable unless he shares the same feelings that the separatist Foreign Minister Maxim Gunjia apparently has. Return of the IDPs should be and rightly is the starting point in negotiations for peaceful resolution of these conflicts. These people that are in such miserable conditions in whatever shelters theyâve found after being displaced following separatist and Russian aggression against ethic Georgians in the above mentioned regions and who you âseemâ to feel so sorry, they had their homes, land, their lives in Abkhazia and South Osetia. They should be returned to their homes if fairness and should prevail. It is wrong to be kicked out of someoneâs own place and this wrong should be corrected. Maxim Gunjia and his alikes are obviously not interested in peaceful resolution of these conflicts. And it is no surprise to me as of why- because that is what the separatistsâ biggest and the only supporter Russia wants to have an excuse to roll in its tanks and take over Georgian territories or even achieve a regime change while they are at it. How is it possible to hold a referendum on the future of the region when 60% to 70 % of the original population is not present and able to participate in the vote??? You should also know that while Saakashvili has an opposition NOBODY IS ASKING HIM TO RESIGN now. You should not confuse facts. If someone criticizes the president it does not mean they are asking for his resignation. Bush is criticized by the Democrats but it does not mean they are asking him to resign. Putin made it close to impossible to criticize him but it does not mean everybody in Russia agrees to him and/or Medvjedev. And lastly, Abkhaz and South Osetian separatists and Russians have been provoking Georgian government to use force. Namely, months earlier Russia increased its number of troops in Abkhazia and brought in weapons that were illicit in the conflict zone according to all the existing agreements. The separatist government and Russian so called peace keepers made local population in Abkhazia dig fox halls around the bodrer of the conflict zone. South Osetian separatist government started evacuating women and children from the villages and towns and sending them to Northern Osetia days before this current conflict erupted. I wonder why? They would not stop until they got a military response to their provocations- so it was only a matter of time. Sadly Georgian president had very little power if any to avoid what has happened since the 6th! Of August. (Do not start the account of the current events by the 8th of August because South Osetian separatists started attacking Georgian vi!llages on the 6th!) Good luck with finding that silver line in your journalistic career- may be it is not always a good thing to try to be different. May be truth is more important than being extraodrinary.
21 Aug 2008 08:04:24 GMT
Ok you guys can have your PhD's or be so called experts but all of you fail to mention why the U.S./NATO and Russia are so interested in Georgia.
I can give you a little advice. It's called oil! Understand the truth the U.S./NATO could care less about democracy or humanitarian reasons for their actions. Examples include Rwanda, Darfur, Somalia for humanitarian reasons and Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Kuwait to name a few for democracy. The last 3 are allies with the U.S. so naturally they will not bother with democracy while the first 3 have nothing to offer to the U.S. so they are ignored. So what does Georgia have? They have the massive Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline running through their nation. The West controls it but if Russia were to take control they would have yet even more leverage over Europe's energy needs. Understand Georgia is a pawn. The U.S./NATO are there for the oil pipeline and NOT democracy. Russia seeks to control this pipeline. Same can be said about U.S./NATO's interest with Ukraine for even more oil pipelines to Europe. And boy the Russians were lucky for their part the U.S./NATO indirect support for the Chechens did not grant that region independence where the U.S./NATO would then play Chechnya like Georgia to wrestle them from Russian influence and hence control those massive oil pipelines through that part of the Caucasus. Understand its about oil and not democracy. If you cristsize Russia for their actions in Georgia you better critisize U.S./NATO's actions in Serbia. Almost the same type of motivations. So stupid statements by Sec. of State Rice âThis alliance ⦠is not going to permit a new line to be drawn into Europe.â is quite arrogant when NATO has been the one creating new lines by allowing new members into their COLD WAR alliance and by stealing, yes stealing a chunk from Serbia without UN approval. Read UN Resolution 1244. U.S./NATO is the threat to stability in Europe not the Russian Federation. Want more evidence of this try the Polish missile deal with the U.S. Anybody that can read a map could argue NATO Turkey would be an ideal base to stop Iranian missiles. But those U.S. missiles are not intended to stop Iranian missiles they are intended to stop Russian ones. Think about that.23 Aug 2008 08:48:18 GMT
Dear all,
This is certainly a heated debate! For further reading and analysis I would like to draw your attention to articles by Thomas de Waal, Neil Ascherson, George Hewitt, and Ivan Krastev at www.opendemocracy.net. -Thomas de Waal is Caucasus editor at the Institute for War and Peace Reporting in London. -Neal Ascherson is a journalist and writer. -Ivan Krastev is chair of the Centre for Liberal Strategies in Sofia, Bulgaria. -George Hewitt is professor of Caucasian languages at London's School of Oriental & African Studies. Best, Nikolaj01 Sep 2008 09:21:55 GMT
We are now closing this debate because it has moved too far away from AlertNet's core interest in humanitarian needs and responses in crisis areas. Political differences are part of that but here they have taken over completely.