• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "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": [
    "Russia"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

Commentary
Carnegie Europe

Abkhazia: Deeper With Russia

With Russia—for better or worse. That is the message society in Abkhazia is receiving now that a new Abkhaz-Russian treaty has been drafted which could be signed as early as next week.

Link Copied
By Thomas de Waal
Published on Nov 20, 2014

With Russia—for better or worse. That is the message society in Abkhazia is receiving now that a new Abkhaz-Russian treaty has been drafted which could be signed as early as next week.

The latest draft of the treaty, sent by the Abkhaz government to Moscow on November 18, has added the line that Abkhazia shares a “common social and economic space” with Russia. In many ways it does so already.

Abkhazia broke away from Georgia de facto more than 20 years ago and the word Georgia is now mainly uttered as a political slogan signifying a threat. The Georgian card was used opportunistically in the presidential elections last August, when Abkhazia’s Georgian population in Gali region was not given a vote.

Nowadays in the city the locals call Sukhum (but most of the rest of the world still calls by its Soviet-era Georgian name, Sukhumi) the effects of the one billion dollars Russia has poured in here over the last six years, since it recognized Abkhazia as independent in 2008, are visible. Ruined buildings have been reconstructed, there are Japanese cars on the streets, shops selling Tissot watches and iPhones. Abkhazia is still poor, but no longer devastated.

The republic uses the Russian ruble and is sharing the best and worst of its current fall: rising inflation, combined with greater demand for its citrus fruits and other products. The public watches Russian television, travels abroad only via Russia.

Yet the Russia relationship is far from smooth. Society is bubbling with heated discussions over the treaty on “Union Relations and Strategic Partnership.”

The first version drafted in Moscow had a different word in the title, “Integration.” It was the work of Vladislav Surkov, adviser and chief ideologist to President Vladimir Putin. It proposed merging most of Abkhazia’s government structures with Russia’s. Crucially, Russians were to be given a fast track to acquiring Abkhaz citizenship, which would also give them the right to acquire property, a right they are currently denied.

Abkhazia is still poor, but no longer devastated.
 
Tweet This

This looked to be Russia’s answer to Georgia’s Association Agreement with the European Union and also a quick cure to the problem that the Kremlin saw Abkhazia as increasingly unstable and unpredictable, especially after the murder there of Russian consul Dmitry Vishernev in September 2013.

Surkov had also quarreled with former Abkhaz leader Alexander Ankvab, a proud and aggressive personality, and he shared his ideas with the opposition. In May, according to several Abkhaz sources, the Kremlin gave it to understand that they would not act to support the unpopular Ankvab if there was a domestic political crisis. The emboldened opposition went out on the streets and eventually forced Ankvab to resign. In August Raul Khajimba was elected as his successor.

Society is still bruised and polarized from the “May event,” seen variously as a popular uprising or a putsch. That has spilled into angry debates about the new draft treaty.

In its draft, the Abkhaz government has taken out several of the more unpopular points, including the one on Abkhaz citizenship. But it still keeps many elements which its critics believe will undermine whatever sovereignty Abkhazia currently enjoys. Article 3 says the bilateral relationship will be based on “a coordinated foreign policy” and “creation of a common defense and security space.” It forms new “authorized organs” to manage relations, a “joint information-coordination center of the organs of internal affairs” and a “united group of forces” of both the Abkhaz and Russian militaries.

The public will mainly notice that the treaty promises Russian money to raise pensions and government salaries to the level of Russia’s Southern Federal District. There will also be a five billion ruble sweetener handed to the government once the document is signed.

The critics are in mourning for what they see as missed opportunities, both inside and outside Abkhazia, to strengthen its sovereignty. In Nezavisimaya Gazeta Arda Inal-Apa writes, “Unfortunately, a detailed reading of all points of the treaty, beginning with defense and ending with social guarantees, says that, in the thinking of the team of Russian authors, for Russia the further existence of the state under the name ‘Republic of Abkhazia’ is not needed. Most likely, the name of the republic will be preserved but essentially, as many Russian experts write, it will become a Russian region over time.”

Abkhazia’s de facto foreign minister Vyacheslav Chirikba disagrees. No one in Abkhazia liked the first draft, he says, but the new one does not threaten Abkhazia’s sovereignty. “We have 135 agreements with Russia. This will be the 136th, so what’s the problem?” he says.

Meanwhile, the international community is a bystander in this drama of Abkhazia’s future. European Union high representative Federica Mogherini made only routine remarks about support for Georgia’s territorial integrity and made no mention of what this move means for the people living in Abkhazia.

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.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    Europolis, Where Europe Ends

      Thomas de Waal

  • Commentary
    Taking the Pulse: Is It Time for Europe to Reengage With Belarus?

      Thomas de Waal, ed.

Thomas de Waal
Senior Fellow, Carnegie Europe
Thomas de Waal
Political ReformForeign PolicyRussia

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 Endowment for International Peace

  • apan's 8,900-ton Maritime Self-Defense Force supply ship Oosumi leaves Muroran port escorted by the 4,550-ton destroyer Murasame bound for Kuwait February 20, 2004 in Muroran, Japan.
    Article
    Japan’s Security Policy Is Still Caught Between the Alliance and Domestic Reality

    Japan’s response to U.S. pressure over Hormuz highlights a broader dilemma: How to preserve the alliance while remaining bound by legal limits, public opinion, and an Asia-centered security agenda. Tokyo gained diplomatic space through an alliance-embracing strategy, but only under conditions that may not endure.

      • Ryo Sahashi

      Ryo Sahashi

  • Article
    Kenya’s Health Deal Is a Stress Test for the America First Global Health Strategy

    U.S. agreements must contend with national data protection laws to make durable foreign policy instruments.

      • A Black woman with long hair wears a black blazer

      Jane Munga, Rose Mosero

  • Trump seated and gesturing while speaking
    Commentary
    Emissary
    The Iran War Is Making America Less Safe

    A conflict launched in the name of American security is producing the opposite effect.

      • Sarah Yerkes

      Sarah Yerkes

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Taking the Pulse: Is it NATO’s Job to Support Trump’s War of Choice?

    Donald Trump has demanded that European allies send ships to the Strait of Hormuz while his war of choice in Iran rages on. He has constantly berated NATO while the alliance’s secretary-general has emphatically supported him.

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz, ed.

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    After Ilia II: What Will a New Patriarch Mean for Georgia?

    The front-runner to succeed Ilia II, Metropolitan Shio, is prone to harsh anti-Western rhetoric and frequent criticism of “liberal ideologies” that he claims threaten the Georgian state. This raises fears that under his leadership the Georgian Orthodox Church will lose its unifying role and become an instrument of ultraconservative ideology.

      Bashir Kitachaev

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600Fax: 202 483 1840
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.