Commentary
Thomas de Waal
{
"authors": [
"Thomas de Waal"
],
"type": "commentary",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Europe",
"Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Europe",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Caucasus",
"Russia",
"Georgia"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
Commentary
South Ossetian Scenarios
The new Russian legislation allowing regions of another country to seek to join the Russian Federation gives Moscow leverage over a number of regions. Georgians are worrying that South Ossetia could be one of these regions.
Published on Apr 29, 2014
If President Vladimir Putin is planning a move against Georgia, where would it come?
That was the question I heard half of Tbilisi discussing earlier this month.
The new Russian legislation allowing regions of another country to seek to join the Russian Federation gives Moscow leverage over a number of regions. First on the list is Transnistria, which has already applied to become part of Russia.
Abkhazia is a more complicated case, as most of the Abkhaz elite emphatically does not want to be part of Russia and still seeks the ever-elusive goal of independence.
Meeting officials from Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Moscow last week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that he "respects the will of the Abkhaz people, which has chosen independence."
Lavrov's words seemed to cover South Ossetia by implication too, but the case is very different. It is so small (with a current population of no more than 50,000 people) that its residents are not in control of its own destiny. But, given a choice, many South Ossetians would welcome the chance of union with the much bigger republic of North Ossetia on the other side of the mountains to form a single republic of “Alania” inside Russia.
So we should not discount a report I heard in Georgia earlier this month that the South Ossetian authorities are considering holding a referendum on union with Russia on June 8, to be held in parallel with their parliamentary elections. I was told that this was the message the hyper-active Duma deputy Leonid Slutsky brought to South Ossetia on March 28—although the only press report on the visit recorded Slutsky passing on birthday greetings to South Ossetian leader Leonid Tibilov and presenting him with a copy of Pravda from his birth-date in 1952.
Slutsky was one of the first Russian politicians to stir up Crimea and has also been instigating trouble in the Moldovan region of Gagauzia.
So Slutsky's visit may just have been a trial balloon.
Georgians are nervously worrying about a new wave of Russian pressure tactics against them, designed to halt the planned signing of a European Union Association Agreement in June. But at the moment the only news in Georgian-Russian relations is the continued thaw: the renewal of trade and talk of the restoration of a direct air link.
So one wise Georgian politician told me the government is also bracing itself for another Russian tactic: a charm offensive in which Moscow offers Tbilisi a new deal over South Ossetia in return for Georgia renouncing its European path.
If either of these scenarios come to pass we can be sure of one thing: ordinary South Ossetians will not be consulted about what the Russian leadership intends for them.
About the Author
Thomas de Waal
Senior Fellow, Carnegie Europe
De Waal is a senior fellow at Carnegie Europe, specializing in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus.
- Europolis, Where Europe Ends
- Taking the Pulse: Is It Time for Europe to Reengage With Belarus?Commentary
Thomas de Waal, ed.
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Europe
- The EU Needs a Third Way in IranCommentary
European reactions to the war in Iran have lost sight of wider political dynamics. The EU must position itself for the next phase of the crisis without giving up on its principles.
Richard Youngs
- Resetting Cyber Relations with the United StatesArticle
For years, the United States anchored global cyber diplomacy. As Washington rethinks its leadership role, the launch of the UN’s Cyber Global Mechanism may test how allies adjust their engagement.
Patryk Pawlak, Chris Painter
- Global Instability Makes Europe More Attractive, Not LessCommentary
Europe isn’t as weak in the new geopolitics of power as many would believe. But to leverage its assets and claim a sphere of influence, Brussels must stop undercutting itself.
Dimitar Bechev
- Europe on Iran: Gone with the WindCommentary
Europe’s reaction to the war in Iran has been disunited and meek, a far cry from its previously leading role in diplomacy with Tehran. To avoid being condemned to the sidelines while escalation continues, Brussels needs to stand up for international law.
Pierre Vimont
- Taking the Pulse: Can European Defense Survive the Death of FCAS?Commentary
France and Germany’s failure to agree on the Future Combat Air System (FCAS) raises questions about European defense. Amid industrial rivalries and competing strategic cultures, what does the future of European military industrial projects look like?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
