Mark Zoryan: Kosovo precedent is chasing Georgia

Read it in Russian

The referendum and the presidential elections in South Ossetia will become a precedent for similar situations in the coming decades. First of all, this is a political precedent for Russia, who will use such actions to reinforce its strategic positions and to create geopolitical points.

Sooner or later, any system begins to deny or, at least, strongly contradict its own self. As a political action, referendums have been used throughout human history, but only under the modern system of international relations did they become a politically and legally valid act. With democratic imperatives ruling the world, referendums have become quite undesirable as they are shattering the last relics of the world empires or ethnic tyrannies. The correlation of the rights of nations and democratic conditions is not something unimportant and is in no way ignored by the nations ruled by other nations. In reality, many nations comfortably live within different states if those states are sufficiently democratic and well-off – though, sometimes, this, too, is not enough to keep them from the wish to become politically independent. However, no single nation can feel itself comfortably in a racist and chauvinist state.

Today, many nations are “silent” about being discriminated only because they know that their protests will be followed by severe suppressions. In the present-day world, “ethnic revolts” and political claims happen mostly in democratic societies, or when democracy comes to some critical point, or when local traditions and behavioral stereotypes do not permit genocidal actions as the only possible way to solve such problems.

The Western community gives top priority to the principle of human rights, but categorically denies the fundamental democratic principle of the rights of a nation – and not even the right of self-determination but, at least, the right of identity. Even more, the Western community deliberately opposes the rights of a person and the rights of a nation. They discard as archaic the concept that “a person cannot be free if his nation is not free.” By doing so, the Western community, localized within the Northern Atlantic, has brought forth a long-term global conflict between these two doctrines – a conflict that has spawned lots of ethnic-political movements for the freedom of nations and has given rise to violence, to the need for armed struggle, the need for ignoring and pressuring opponent-nations.

Geopolitical tasks have given start to arms races as conflicting sides are actively arming their junior partners. Arms races start either when countries are supplied with arms in unlimited quantities or when they get super incomes from the oil-gas projects of big oil-gas companies. It should be noted that after repeated attempts to get real partnership from the Western powers, Russia has begun to apply a new political style and the approaches long applied by the Western community. In fact, Russia is becoming a truly European or Western state.

Along with Russia, many leading states of the Islamic world have also preferred to support a number of break-away states in line with the western slogans and values. Only politically blind people will fail to see that Russia has already become a part of the Western community. Contradictions do not imply belonging to a different political-cultural type. The rising super-power, China, is not hurrying to join this game but it will not be able to stay aside for long. Thus, amid active geopolitical and geo-economic struggle, these problems are spawning a long belt of newly independent states, which are not recognized de jure but de facto are important factors of the international politics.

One can’t but notice that the problems of newly independent states are substantially different from the outwardly similar problems of the colonial system. With few exceptions, the former colonies got independence after just minor hesitations by their metropolises. After decolonization, the former metropolises led their former colonies “by the hand” along the corridors of the world politics, actively instructed their political elites and are still their patrons both politically and economically. At the same time, any protest in the territory of a metropolis itself received very tough reaction. The attempts of some politically discriminated Eastern European nations to assert their rights faced not just tough but really genocidal reaction. In this situation, the decisive factor for the Western community was the ability of an oppressed nation to protect its right to existence in its historical territory. The Western community found it really hard to conceal the outrageously glaring element of its policy – the fact that in each individual case it adopts decisions on the basis of the law of strength. In fact, the law of strength is the only basis for the international recognition of Kosovo’s sovereignty. That is, this seemingly insignificant aspect of the world politics has catalyzed de facto liquidation of the western system of values and the international law. So, the international community will have to form a new system of values and a new system of international relations, based not on pseudo-liberal but humanitarian philosophy. In this context, I would like to rephrase the Bohemian idea – they better do it five years earlier than five years later.

Serbian Krajina was liquidated because the Serbs were disorganized and Serbia was politically pressured. South Ossetia and Abkhazia did not perish because their nations stood up in the face of annihilation and got timely support from Russia. The US and Europe keep reiterating that any solution must observe the territorial integrity of Georgia. When somebody states something so much, one begins to doubt that he really means what he says. That is, after this statement, there is a big and sickly coma, implying that Georgia should decide itself how to ensure its territorial integrity.

Abkhazia and South Ossetia do not have the right of vote, but Russia has. And Russia’s only argument has overtrumped any empty talk by the West. It says that nobody and nothing can guarantee that Georgia will not apply genocidal actions against Abkhazia and South Ossetia if it restores its control over those republics. No need to waste your imagination, it’s quite enough imagining an “ordinary” exodus of a nation, which is already a genocide. No single western politician, parliamentarian, expert or human rights activist can be sure that there will not be genocidal actions should Abkhazia and South Ossetia be placed under the rule of a country that has done its best to prove to the whole world that it really can be chauvinist.

Were it not for the oil and gas communications, the Georgian authorities would have long been condemned for their chauvinism. Nobody in the West has any idea how to protect the Abkhazians and Ossetians from the policy of the Georgian authorities if Abkhazia and South Osseitia are placed under their rule. The present situation is quite beneficial for the US and Europe, who are ready to accept Georgia in its new borders created by Gamsakhurdia-Shevardnadze-Saakashvili.

After the rose revolution in Tbilisi and given an absolute popularity, the new regime had all chances to use the vote of confidence and to stop hurrying to solve these two problems. However, it seems that the present Georgian authorities are being chased by dogs. It should be noted that their fuss over Abkhazia and South Ossetia was by no means a way to solve internal problems. They had other arguments that could allow them to preserve their power and to refrain from hasty solutions. It is not for this regime to solve these two problems, it is for the Georgian people to try to do it in the coming decades.

Mark Zoryan – expert of Caucasus analytical center