Q&A: SOUTH OSSETIA DISPUTE
By Guardian Unlimited
8/12/2008
The history behind the breakaway region’s push for independence
Why has fighting broken out?
The South Ossetians and Georgians have been sniping at each other for
several weeks, and patience on both sides has finally snapped. Along
with Georgia’s other breakaway region, Abkhazia, South Ossetia has
enjoyed de facto independence since the early 1990s, but Tbilisi
has never recognized the loss of its territory. The dispute between
Georgia and the two regions was called "the frozen conflict" because
the issues remain unresolved, but there was no fighting. The heat
began to rise this year when the west recognized Kosovo, against
Russia’s advice. The South Ossetians and Abkhazians argued that if
Kosovo could be independent, then so could they.
What is the basis of the region’s claim to independence?
The Ossetians are descendants of a tribe called the Alans. Like
the Georgians, the Ossetians are Orthodox Christians, but they have
their own language. In Soviet times, the Ossetians had an autonomous
region within Georgia. The Georgians say the Ossetians cooperated
with the Bolsheviks and tended to be more pro-Soviet. Their ethnic
kin live across the border in the Russian region of North Ossetia,
so today they feel more drawn to Russia than to Georgia, and many
have Russian passports.
Abkhazia, on the Black Sea coast, was also an autonomous region
of Georgia in Soviet times. It has a mixed population of Abkhaz,
Mingrelians, Greeks, Armenians, Russians and Georgians, and a small
but significant Muslim minority. Thousands of ethnic Georgians fled
their homes in Abkhazia during the civil war in the early 90s and
now live as refugees in Tbilisi and Moscow.
Why did Georgia attack in South Ossetia?
On Thursday, Georgian forces launched a surprise attack and briefly
took the South Osssetian capital, Tskhinvali. Georgia said it had
made the assault in order to stop separatist fighters attacking
civilians. The attack followed months of what Georgia described as
Russian provocation, including the firing of Russian missiles at
Georgian territory. Russia also cut off air service and mail between
the two countries, and refused Georgian exports.
Georgia may have hoped that with Vladimir Putin, the prime minister,
away in Beijing, it could successfully reassert control of Ossetia
with a minimum of fuss. If so, it was a colossal miscalculation: the
Russians retaliated with massive force and the tiny Georgian army
was soon forced to pull back from South Ossetia as Russian forces
pressed home their advantage to penetrate Georgia proper.
Russia says it has stopped all operations, but there are still reports
of military activity.
Why did Russia react so strongly?
Russia says it cannot stand aside because many of the people in the
breakaway regions are its citizens. Resorting to apocalyptic rhetoric,
Russia has accused Georgia of committing genocide, drawing comparisons
with Srebrenica, in the former Yugoslavia, where 8,000 Bosnian Muslims
were massacred by Serbs during the Bosnia war.
Georgia, for its part, accuses Russia of meddling in its internal
affairs and supporting the separatists, although Russia’s peace keepers
are supposed to be in a neutral role. Georgia also accuses Russia of
double standards in brutally suppressing its own separatist rebellion
in Chechnya while encouraging separatists in Georgia.
What does Russia want?
In the short term, Russia has made no secret of its desire for
"regime change". Moscow wants a more pliant leader in Tblisi than the
US-educated Mikhail Saaskhasvili, America’s staunchest ally in the
region, who is determined to take Georgia into Nato. He also came
into office pledging to reassert control over Georgia’s breakaway
provinces. More generally, Russia is sending a signal to its neighbors
? which include Ukraine ? that they are still within the Russian sphere
of influence, and that there are clear limits to their rapprochement
with the west. The line in the sand for Russia is that it does not
want Nato in its back yard. Russia has been equally vociferous in
resisting the stationing of parts of a US missile shield in Poland
and the Czech Republic.
What are the wider implications?
The short war has highlighted US impotence in the region, despite its
strong verbal support for Georgia. The EU -and particularly the French
president, Nicolas Sarkozy – has taken the diplomatic lead, leaving
the Americans on the sidelines. Meanwhile, Russia has forcefully made
the point that it is not to be trifled with in its own backyard. More
broadly, South Ossetia highlights the fact that the world community
cannot agree on rules governing the independence of small regions.