Biting the hand that feeds them? Abkhazia–Russia client–patron relations (original) (raw)
Related papers
QUADERNI DI SCIENZE POLITICHE, 2024
What structures of the post-Soviet de facto States have enabled them to persist and develop despite international sanctions and conflicts with their parent States? Why have such entities continued to function even with a weakened patron State? Building on the concept of post-Soviet patronal politics, this article answers these questions in terms of these States’ specific political systems. Through analysis and comparison of the Abkhazian and Transnistrian cases, the author argues that the political systems these entities developed in the 1990s–2010s, as much as patron State support, have given them longevity and resilience. Beyond discussing factors in these entities’ durable existence, the article describes the structure of their political systems, their history and their role in international relations.
Abkhazia’s quest for status under the shadow of the patron
2017
This paper attempts to outline policy recommendations for the Abkhaz government to ease the republic's dependence on Russia and improve its international status simultaneously. The goal is to address the republic's isolation and improve the lives of its people who are stripped of fundamental human rights.
The scholarship on unrecognised or de facto states has been booming in the recent decades exploring this phenomenon from a variety of perspectives. Yet, as this article illustrates, a crucial accent on the instrumentalisation of unrecognised states by regional actors—or, to put it differently, on unrecognised states as a source of coercive diplomacy— has been neglected. This article seeks to fill that gap by offering an empirical analysis of Russia's instrumentalisation of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as unrecognised states as a means of putting effective pressure on the government in Tbilisi—usually with respect to issues unrelated to the unrecognised states themselves. More specifically, this article shows that Moscow has used three instruments (military deployment, passportisation of residents of the unrecognised states, and responsibility to protect).
In this paper author wants to present progressive Russian neo-imperialism. Direct and indirect pressure measures have been defined towards so called “near abroad” countries, for which Russia can fulfill their expansionism aspirations. One of the means of pressure is to support ethnic minorities and quasi-states. It is possible to destabilize the internal situation in Georgia, through favoring and helping Abkhazians and Ossetians. Applying comparative review, the author analysed two Russian Integration Treaties signed with authorities in Sukhumi and Tskhinvali. The aim of the publication is to answer the question whether the observed correlations between military and political (followed by economic and financial) level within Russian Federation can be a prelude to the rebuild of Russia's superpower on a global basis. Are “Treaty on Alliance and Strategic Partnership” signed by RF and Abkhazia and “Alliance and Integration Treaty” between RF and South Ossetia a threat to the vital interests of the para-states mentioned above and the Republic of Georgia?
Navigating de facto statehood: trade, trust, and agency in Abkhazia's external economic relations
Eurasian Geography and Economics , 2020
What opportunities and trade-offs do de facto states encounter in developing economic ties with the outside world? This article explores the complex relationship between trade and trust in the context of contested statehood. Most de facto states are heavily dependent on an external patron for economic aid and investment. However, we challenge the widespread assumption that de facto states are merely hapless pawns in the power-play of their patrons. Such an approach fails to capture the conflict dynamics involved. Drawing on a case study of Abkhazia, we explore how this de facto state navigates between its “patron”Russia, its “parent state”Georgia, and the EU. The conflict transformation literature has highlighted the interrelationship between trust and trade – but how does this unfold in the context of continued nonrecognition and contested statehood? Does trade serve to facilitate trust and hence prospects for conflict transformation? With Abkhazia, we find scant correlation between trust and trade: in the absence of formal recognition, trade does not necessarily facilitate trust. However, the interrelationship between trade, trust, and recognition proves more complex than expected: we find less trust in the patron and more trade with the parent than might have been anticipated.
Occupied Abkhazia and the Tskhinvali Region: Changes in Russian Politics from the 1990s to 2024
2024
In the post-Soviet period, the Kremlin’s policy regarding the separatist regions of Georgia, Abkhazia, and the Tskhinvali region, underwent several stages of transformation. In the 1990s, Moscow positioned itself as a neutral mediator between the conflicting parties. However, following the August 2008 war and the subsequent recognition of the “independence” of these separatist regions, as well as the deployment of armed forces, Moscow became their main ally and security guarantor. Since 2022, after the onset of full-scale military aggression in Ukraine, Moscow has intensified efforts to increase its influence on these occupied regions, aiming for their full integration into Russia’s political, economic, and legal space. The article discusses the stages of transformation in Russian policy towards the occupied regions of Abkhazia and the Tskhinvali region from the 1990s to 2024, detailing and analyzing changes at each stage.
With the ratification of the Association Agreements with Georgia and Moldova in 2014, the European Union (EU) has been confronted in its integration policies with several post-Soviet de facto states (Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Transnistria). The paper clarifies the concept of the de facto state and discusses how non-recognition affects the sustainability and international position of these entities. It will be argued, that de facto states can be considered as a permanent part of the international system rather than just temporal anomalies and that they confront the EU with a serious action dilemma. Based on the Abkhazian case study, I will analyse the strategies and instruments the EU is implementing to achieve its policy objectives, identify key obstacles such as the growing Russian presence in the region and highlight the practical consequences of the action dilemma.
The article reviews the foreign policy of the 45th US President Donald Trump in the South Caucasus. In the Consolidated Appropriations Act, signed in May 2017, which prohibits financial assistance to the states that recognized Abkhazia's independence and established diplomatic relations with it, for the first time on the legislative level America declares Abkhazia an " occupied territory ". Since 2016, America has been strengthening military cooperation with Georgia, similar course is pursued during the presidency of Trump. These measures, as well as the growing escalation of the relations between the US and Iran, contribute to the destabilization of the situation in the South Caucasus in general and in Abkhazia in particular. Under Trump, the confrontation with Russia in the South Caucasus has become more aggressive. Such a situation can not but affect the interests and security of Abkhazia, which is part of the region. In this connection, this article attempts to trace possible challenges in the foreign policy course of US President Donald Trump to the Republic of Abkhazia.