Thread: GEORGIA: IS THE BELL TOLLING FOR UN, OSCE MISSIONS

EURASIA INSIGHT

GEORGIA: IS THE BELL TOLLING FOR UN, OSCE MISSIONS?

Jean-Christophe Peuch 6/11/09

The chances of preserving international observer missions in the separatist territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia look slim, as Russia continues to insist that their respective mandates be amended to reflect "new realities" that Moscow contends arose from recent military hostilities with Georgia.

The UN Security Council is due to meet behind closed doors in New York on June 12 to decide on the fate of the 156-strong UN Observer Mission in Georgia (UNOMIG), whose mandate expires on June 15. A formal vote is expected to take place that day. UNOMIG’s present mandate was decided in 1994 to verify compliance with the Moscow agreement on a ceasefire and separation of forces that formally put an end to the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict.

Negotiations on the future of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s Georgian field operations have been suspended since May 14 amid persisting disagreements among the Vienna-based organization’s 56 participating states. The mandate of the OSCE mission to Georgia, whose duties include monitoring implementation of the 1992 Dagomys Georgian-South Ossetian truce, expires on June 30.

The 340-strong European Union Monitoring Mission (EUMM), which was deployed soon after the August 2008 Georgian-Russian conflict, does not face an immediate challenge to its mandate, which is due to expire in late September. However, it has no access to Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

Following Russia’s post-conflict decision to unilaterally recognize the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Georgia withdrew from all existing peace mechanisms, including the Moscow and Dagomys ceasefire agreements. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Hence, from Russia’s viewpoint, there was a necessity to renegotiate the mandate and modalities of both the UN and OSCE missions.

Russia rejects Georgian and Western claims that it is seeking to "kill" international observer missions with a view toward quietly "annexing" Georgian territories.

"[Our common task is] to maintain an international presence in Georgia, South Ossetia and Abkhazia and help those states restore normal political dialogue under new political and legal conditions," Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Grigory Karasin told the OSCE Permanent Council on June 4.

Karasin also rebuffed Western accusations that Moscow’s continued military presence in Abkhazia and South Ossetia violates the August 12 ceasefire agreement -- which calls for the withdrawal of all armed forces to their pre-war positions. Officials in Moscow have argued that Russian peacekeeping forces were deployed in both territories before the war.

In a message conveyed to last year’s OSCE Ministerial Council in Helsinki, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon argued that both organizations may have to "re-think" their respective roles in the region in light of the Georgian-Russian clash. "The conflict also demonstrated that the lack of a meaningful political process over an extended period of time can lead to conflict," Ban said.

Ban’s recommendations for preserving peace and security in the region are outlined in the 15-page report he presented to the UN Security Council on May 21. "Given the continued erosion of the [current] security regime, an agreement on a revised security regime is essential for a long-term stabilization and a viable [UN] role in the region," the report says.

While criticizing Ban’s report for allegedly "paying too much attention" to Russia’s regional military build-up, Moscow’s UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin praised it for "not containing anything that would contradict the new political realities in the [South Caucasus], or question the status of Abkhazia -- and, consequently, that of South Ossetia -- as independent and sovereign states," the RIA Novosti news agency reported on May 28.

Departing from past practice, the title of Ban’s report does not refer to Abkhazia as part of Georgia. The report’s unusual wording and Ban’s suggestion that UNOMIG be renamed "UN stabilization mission" have drawn much criticism from Tbilisi, which fears the new security regime may in fact cement the post-war status quo.

On May 28, Georgia’s UN Ambassador Kakha Lomaia accused the UN secretary-general of bowing to Russian "blackmail," claiming that Moscow had threatened to veto the report if it contained any reference to Abkhazia as part of Georgia.

Ban vigorously rejected the charge, calling it "unfortunate." In a statement issued on May 28, he said the title he had chosen for his report "was meant to avoid unnecessary politicization of the debate among members of the Security Council and reflected his view of what all members could live with."

In comments to EurasiaNet, Karasin last week described Ban’s report as a mix of "positive elements" and "unbalanced proposals and assessments." He said Moscow’s counter-proposals were being discussed among Security Council members and he described the talks as "uneasy."

Sources familiar with the discussions told EurasiaNet that UN officials privately expressed confidence the mandate of UNOMIG would be extended beyond June 15. However, those same sources said on condition of anonymity that, during his recent visit to the OSCE headquarters, Karasin cautioned against raising expectations too high. Lomaia, the Georgian UN representative, has also sought to dampen expectations, citing Russia’s reported resistance to any UN resolution that would directly or indirectly refer to Georgia’s territorial integrity.

Abkhazia’s Security Council Secretary Stanislav Lakoba on June 9 expressed concern over the fact that, despite its title, Ban’s report explicitly refers to UN resolutions calling for the preservation of Georgia’s territorial integrity. "In those conditions, we’d better renounce the UN mission," Abkhazia’s Apsnypress news agency quoted him as saying. UNOMIG has its headquarters in the Abkhaz capital, Sukhumi.

Western diplomats note that a positive outcome of the New York negotiations could boost discussions on the fate of the OSCE monitoring mission. Conversely, failure to agree on an extension of UNOMIG’s mandate could seal the fate of the OSCE’s Georgian field operations.

The Greek chairmanship of the OSCE has suggested that the number of unarmed OSCE military monitoring officers (MMOs) deployed in the region be raised to 30 from the current 28 and that they be divided into two groups placed under a single command: 22 MMOs in the Georgian town of Karaleti and the remaining eight in the South Ossetian capital, Tskhinvali.

Russia insists that the two groups of monitors be mutually independent and report separately to the OSCE’s Conflict Prevention Center in Vienna. Moscow also demands that civilians -- not MMOs -- be deployed in South Ossetia and objects to Greece’s suggestion that OSCE monitors be allowed to move freely across the de facto Georgian-South Ossetian border.

Western nations object, saying that such an arrangement would be tantamount to recognizing South Ossetia’s independence.

Karasin reiterated Russia’s demands before representatives of OSCE participating states at a closed meeting that followed his public address to the Permanent Council on June 4. In subsequent comments to journalists, Georgia’s Ambassador Paata Gaprindashvili said that after hearing Karasin’s arguments he no longer hoped Moscow would alter its stance by June 30. "If Russia’s position remains unchanged, then we are destined to see the OSCE monitors leave Georgia," he said.


Editor's Note: Jean-Christophe Peuch is a Vienna-based freelance correspondent, who specializes in developments related to the Caucasus and Central Asia.

Posted June 11, 2009 © Eurasianet
http://www.eurasianet.org

http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/i ... 109a.shtml

The 340-strong European Union Monitoring Mission (EUMM), which was deployed soon after the August 2008 Georgian-Russian conflict, does not face an immediate challenge to its mandate, which is due to expire in late September. However, it has no access to Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

Another slither back into the old Soviet territories. Russia, which is still Soviet with Putin in charge (Medvedev is just a mouthpiece) will put their toe in the water to see what the rest of the world does about their encroachment into the two Georgian states. The US did nothing when they took over Hungary in the late 1950s, and I think this is another test of our will for democracy around the world.
And Russia's version of democracy is pretty pathetic these days in mother Russia.