Interview with Vano Abramashvili

As usual, one of the main topics of discussion in the pre-election period over the past few months has been conflicts and related issues. Bidzina Ivanishvili, honorary chairman and founder of the Georgian Dream party, touched off a major reaction with a recent speech in which he declared the need to apologize to the Ossetians for the 2008 war.

At the same time, both Abkhaz and Georgian societies are actively discussing news that Russia has partially suspended funding to Abkhazia “due to non-fulfillment of obligations,” signaling a crisis in Russian-Abkhaz relations.

These topics, as well as the influence of the “foreign agent law” on the work of peacekeeping organizations, were discussed by the “Georgian-Abkhazian Context” project with conflict researcher and head of the peacekeeping program at the “Caucasian House,” Vano Abramashvili.

Transcript of the interview:

Badri Belkania: Recently many issues have accumulated related to Georgian-Abkhaz relations. Significant events are happening both in Abkhazia and in our country. Before the elections, the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict, and the overall theme of conflicts, has become especially relevant. But before we delve into these issues in detail, I’d like to discuss something that has completely changed the lives of our non-governmental organizations – the adoption of the so-called “foreign agent law.”

“Caucasian House” has been involved in both formal and informal peace processes for many years. Other organizations also work in this direction. What will change for “Caucasian House” after the law comes into effect, and how will it affect the peace process in the Georgian-Abkhazian context?

Vano Abramashvili: Of course, the law will change a lot. First and foremost, it directly undermines the trust that “Caucasian House” and other peacekeeping organizations have built over decades on the other side of the Inguri. Previously, we were sure that personal data was protected, but now, by law, it must be made public. This is a very sensitive issue. This also puts Abkhaz beneficiaries and partners at risk – since their personal information must also be posted online.

We know very well how pro-Russian or directly Russian special services and Telegram channels try to gather information on every project to find out who is involved. They strive to find compromising material to slander participants, putting people in danger. It turns out that our government is actually doing Russia’s work, helping the Russian special services. We are now forced to voluntarily submit all this information to a registry – not just personal data, but also general information about our activities.

These data allow any of our meetings to be reconstructed. So, the law significantly affects the work of peacekeeping organizations, which have been trying to establish direct connections and build trust with the Abkhaz and Ossetian sides for decades, often without the involvement of international organizations to ensure a higher level of trust. Now, with measures like this, the government is harming this effort and breaking ties. It is clear that most organizations working on these issues will in no way contribute to fulfilling such an unjust decision.

Badri Belkania: It is also important to note that there is practically no formal, official negotiation platform. Yes, there is the consultative platform of the “Geneva Discussions,” but meetings in Gali as part of the IPRM (Incident Prevention and Response Mechanism) are no longer held. The only thing left are meetings that take place regarding Tskhinvali when discussing individual cases. From this perspective, the entire responsibility for maintaining Georgian-Abkhazian and Georgian-Ossetian trust and contacts falls on the organizations affected by the new law. In your opinion, why is there a lack of contact, and what future threats do these contacts face?

Vano Abramashvili: The lack of contact is the natural result of the alienation that is growing between our societies every year. The absence of free movement across the Inguri and towards Tskhinvali has a big impact. The golden formula for resolving and transforming any conflict is the existence of physical connections. For example, the Cyprus conflict only began to transform after 24 years, when the so-called “Green Line” opened. People were able to move from one side to the other, and long lines of traffic formed because interest was so high.

The lack of physical contact in our case makes people think: why should I raise this issue, why should I engage in such a complex area as conflict and peace resolution? So the space and areas we can work on are very limited. Given the specifics, we have always tried to convince our government to use even these small opportunities to discuss certain things, but there has never been much interest on their part. Now It seems that even this remaining space is under a great existential threat.

However, there is a chance that the situation may turn toward democracy. If we manage to turn this crisis to our advantage, our significance in the eyes of the Abkhazians and Ossetians will increase – after all, we will have overcome a deep crisis and continued our work, in spite of everything.

Badri Belkania: Organizations working on conflict resolution, and not just them, but any organization that has connections with the Georgian side, Georgian organizations, or the civil sector, face significant problems in Abkhazia itself.

In recent years, along with things happening in our country, the situation has also worsened there. A striking example of this was the former de facto Minister of Foreign Affairs of Abkhazia, Inal Ardzinba, who openly declared war on non-governmental organizations. And not only on NGOs but also on international organizations operating in Abkhazia. What challenges does Abkhaz civil society face overall, and why are forces fighting against both international and local organizations in Abkhazia?

Vano Abramashvili:Overall, after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the emergence of a new geopolitical situation, democratic processes in the post-Soviet space have come under threat – especially in our region, which is at the epicenter of events. Unfortunately, the trend is that the situation may take on an isolationist nature, and the space for democracy in these regions will gradually shrink.
Events in Abkhazia can be seen as part of this larger picture. In reality, no one there wants critical individuals with resources, driven by democratic values, to be active. After all, they could expose the crisis that, unfortunately, exists at all levels.

In a situation of scarce resources and constant instability, the de facto government there is trying to silence an important part of society and halt the mechanisms that financially support the civil sector and help it function, even if only in some capacity. So this is part of a broader picture, but in the context of the geopolitical situation, control and restrictions are being applied at a micro level.

Badri Belkania: We discussed the so-called “foreign agent law” which was, unfortunately, passed in Tbilisi. This same law has been discussed in Abkhazia for more than ten years now. Civil society there has so far managed to prevent the adoption of this law by the so-called parliament.

Besides this, there are many other issues in which Abkhaz society shows strong resistance to Russian influence. Moscow would like to replicate certain Russian laws in Abkhazia. One of these caused particularly significant public outcry – the so-called “apartment law.” Through this, Russia is attempting to bypass Abkhaz legislation which states that only Abkhaz citizens can purchase real estate in Abkhazia.

The fact that Russia, through the authorities it controls, is trying to impose laws that Abkhazians oppose is creating certain anti-Russian sentiments within Abkhaz society. It must be said that such strong anti-Russian sentiments as are currently observed in Abkhazia have not been seen in previous years. What should we do, based on our national interests? How can we use the growing anti-Russian sentiments to our advantage? What are your thoughts on the Abkhaz public’s dissatisfaction with Russian influence?

Vano Abramashvili: A fairly large part of Abkhaz society did indeed oppose the “apartment law,” which was very cleverly devised. Its second version seemingly only affected the eastern part of Abkhazia, which theoretically shouldn’t have caused significant unrest, as this is a region populated by ethnic Georgians, and one might think, “What’s so special about this?” But the Abkhaz society is very experienced. People clearly understand what truly lies behind any given intention, which is why they resisted this law.

However, I wouldn’t call this a major victory, because Russia tends to bring important topics back to the negotiating table. So a serious and decisive struggle is likely still ahead. But all these growing anti-Russian sentiments, which were also evident in the case of the Bichvinta issue

Badri Belkania: And the issue of dual citizenship…

Vano Abramashvili: Yes, and a number of other problems, especially the issue of reduced funding… All these anti-Russian sentiments do not automatically transform into pro-Georgian sentiments. Likely the residents of Abkhazia would prefer complete isolation rather than being caught between two fires. The Georgian side could have used such opportunities, but this requires leadership skills and responsibility. Strong politicians are needed, politicians with real legitimacy, who are well-versed in the subject, show interest, and have courage.

Unfortunately, those who hold leadership positions can often be characterized by the opposite of the skills I just named. They use false sentiments, false promises, and describe a fake reality, trying to make people think they are allegedly behind the scenes, establishing relations with Abkhazia or Russia. Of course, this is not true – a day does not pass without the falseness of such statements being revealed.

Badri Belkania: Even Russian politicians themselves deny this every time the topic is raised. Statements have been made by Zakharova, Zatulin… Overall, observing Russian-Abkhaz relations during this period is especially interesting.

A few weeks ago, it became known that Russia partially suspended funding to Abkhazia. This was stated by the current de facto Minister of Foreign Affairs, Sergey Shamba – he even called this step sanctions by Russia in one of his interviews. He explained this by saying that Abkhazia had assumed certain obligations towards Russia. Shamba is likely referring to the harmonization document and a number of other signed documents and “obligations” that Abkhazia, allegedly, is not fulfilling. What is happening between Sukhumi and Moscow?

Vano Abramashvili: I watched Shamba’s press conference from beginning to end. The word “sanctions” was used in a very manipulative way. It was more of a message to those opposing the warming of Russian-Abkhaz relations – like, “Look, they are already imposing sanctions on us.” That was approximately the message. In reality, the situation is much simpler.

Remember March 2022, when Dmitry Volvach came to Abkhazia to check how investments were being used. At that time, it was announced that the co-financing of salaries from the Russian side to the de facto state sector of Abkhazia would be reduced by 2025. The deadline has come, and what happened is quite logical. Abkhazia simply got used to constant deferrals from Russia – for example, the payment deadlines on loans…

Badri Belkania: Or electricity supply…

Vano Abramashvili: Yes, it happened constantly. And now, when some issues have been clarified, the topic of limiting co-financing has also come to light. In other words: the deadline has simply arrived.

Badri Belkania: However, it’s not just about the deadline. This coincided with the so-called Bzhania-Kozak protocol, according to which deputies who reject pro-Russian or Russian-funded legislation should be stripped of their Russian citizenship. That means they would be deprived of the ability to travel – because it’s impossible to travel with an Abkhaz passport. So, there are signs of tension. Perhaps this is because Russia is dissatisfied with Bzhania’s administration and his performance.

Vano Abramashvili: Yes, that’s exactly the logic I’m following. The protocol, revealed and dated mid-August as part of the agreement between Kozak and Bzhania, contained a list of obligations Abkhazia took on. Among them were fairly serious commitments, some of which are practically impossible to fulfill. Russia obviously understands this well.

And for the first time in recent times, the issue of fulfilling obligations has been raised so strictly – the topic of co-financing has surfaced. Another difficult issue will soon be raised – the period of energy shortages is approaching. It is unclear what awaits the residents of Abkhazia.

Badri Belkania: Besides, they still haven’t paid their previous debts for electricity.

Vano Abramashvili: Yes, and the grid is in poor condition, while everything depends on electricity because there is no gas supply. So Abkhazia may have to make even greater concessions on some issues to maintain even basic conditions.

Probably both sides are now watching how events unfold, and as soon as winter approaches, Abkhazia may be forced to make more concessions. Maybe the “foreign agent law” or something else, but Abkhazia will have to pay somehow. It seems the economic price will have to be paid politically.

Badri Belkania: Also, elections are approaching…

Vano Abramashvili: Yes, only six months left.

Badri Belkania: What are your expectations?

Vano Abramashvili: From my observations Bzhania’s popularity has fallen sharply, and there are issues of retaining power and restriction of democracy. Popularity may no longer be the only factor – especially in a space with already limited democracy, like in Abkhazia, where Georgians cannot participate in these elections.

We researchers often call such a situation an ethnocracy. Therefore it is important who the opposition candidate will be, and what decisions Russia will make. Russia can easily come to terms with any candidate. If someone appears who will better fulfill its wishes, then Bzhania can easily lose his place.

Badri Belkania: Let’s return to the Georgian-Abkhaz issue and, in general, to the topic of conflicts but from the Georgian side. Usually, in our country, the issues of conflicts and occupied territories become more prominent as elections approach. During this period, all parties try to use this for their internal political interests.

In the current election campaign, it turned out that, while previously the opposition was active on this issue, now the ruling forces have fully taken over all the conversations and speculations about conflicts. One of the most significant events, which received widespread attention in Tskhinvali, Russia, and Sukhumi, and was written about in many articles, is Bidzina Ivanishvili’s proposal to “apologize to the Ossetians.”

To paraphrase, his statement referred to the idea that, once we defeat the radical forces within the country, we will find the strength to apologize to the Ossetian people for dragging them into the 2008 war. How do you assess this statement and the discussions that have unfolded around it?

Vano Abramashvili: I would note that this topic usually comes up not before regular elections, but before decisive ones. It has always happened that when the ruling party feels its legitimacy weakening, it pulls out the last “card.” In principle, the previous two governments made similar attempts. During Shevardnadze’s period, we remember his famous speech that supposedly America promised that after Iraq, it would have time for us and help us restore our territorial integrity, which, of course, was a fantasy.

It also happened after the November 2007 crisis. The former president, Saakashvili, resigned, and early presidential elections were scheduled for January 5, 2008. At that time his popularity and rating were very low. The only topic of the election campaign became the conflicts and issues of territorial integrity.

Badri Belkania: I remember the slogan “You are voting for the restoration of territorial integrity.” And also Okruashvili’s statement that “We will celebrate Christmas at home.” Or was it about New Year ⁠—  not that it matters…

Vano Abramashvili: Yes, there were also meetings with displaced persons, staged scenes, and so on. We remember all of this — it’s not such a distant past, everything is preserved in the archives. And now Bidzina Ivanishvili, who holds no legitimate elected position and is only the honorary chairman of the party, comes out and speaks on behalf of the people, saying we need to apologize, even though we haven’t reached a stage of reflection or rethinking of history. An apology should be accompanied by some facts. One must be certain that this is appropriate, that in some sense, there is something to apologize for. If we apologize now, it’s obvious that no one will take it as sincere. Because everyone sees that nothing has changed in our society — due to the occupation, there is no way to conduct a full investigation of the facts.

Badri Belkania: Moreover, there must be reciprocal steps, as this is a two-way street.

Vano Abramashvili: Of course. That’s why this is more of a weak attempt at manipulation during an election period. Its goal is to make people think that maybe Ivanishvili has resolved some issues with Moscow, and the apology is a guarantee of peace and of not opening a second front, which is rather weakly connected logically.

I think the public’s reaction was adequate. I believe that mistakes made on both sides should be legally investigated, and those responsible should be punished. Society must give these issues an appropriate evaluation. Truth commissions exist that investigate certain matters for years. Another important thing is the introduction of symbols into memory, such as in issues of rehabilitation, and also the issue of property and many other things…

The Georgian government has done nothing on all these issues. First of all, it hasn’t provided basic conditions for displaced persons, hasn’t resolved veterans’ issues, and there’s only minimal progress on the issue of missing persons. So, what apologies are we talking about? Why apologize, to whom should we apologize — the public doesn’t understand this. That’s why the pitched reaction from people was appropriate, because the topic was raised at the wrong time and wasn’t politically calculated for the electorate.

Badri Belkania: Could you briefly comment on the reaction from Abkhazia and South Ossetia?

Vano Abramashvili: I think their reaction was also adequate. Judging by what was written in their press, it was said that no one believes these apologies. And that’s true. If Russia apologizes to us now, I don’t think we would accept it. Some problems in our relations with Russia are so difficult to resolve and what kind of apologies can there be when absolutely nothing has been done? Abkhazian and Ossetian societies perceive us in much the same way — as an aggressor.

If you look at their reaction through this lens, it becomes clear why they didn’t believe in the sincerity of any apologies. Another type of reaction from their side was that apologies should be followed by legal mechanisms — if that’s the case, sign the Geneva agreement on the non-use of force, recognize our independence, and establish good-neighborly relations. From the Ossetian side, there were even comments like “Add the Truso Gorge as well, etc.”

That’s why such untimely statements are dangerous, as they can trigger a chain reaction, especially when passions are running high in society. Legally, at this stage, this is probably unlikely, but such words can roll the situation back and make the current, less aggressive sentiments turn more radical. Moreover, the word “apology” itself, which carries a significant symbolic burden in conflict resolution, was discredited. In the future, at some point, this might indeed be necessary for one side or the other, especially in the final stage of transformation. So, to talk about it now, out of context, is unjustified.

Badri Belkania: In conclusion, I’d like to ask you a summarizing question. We are recording this interview a few days before the day marking the fall of Sukhumi. This is, of course, one of the most tragic dates in the history of modern Georgia. As someone who has worked for many years in conflict resolution and peacebuilding, what do you think the state should do to rectify what happened that day and prevent its recurrence?

Vano Abramashvili: There are a number of issues to address. The central government must take care of the people who were directly affected by the conflicts, and there are many such people in our society — internally displaced persons and other groups. What can you discuss with the Abkhazian and Ossetian sides if these people, although under your roof, are left unattended? These are people who belong to socially unprotected groups. They haven’t gone through a stage of rehabilitation, reflection, or worked through their trauma. The lack of psychological rehabilitation has led to a whole series of problems.

So, first of all, this issue must be addressed — attention should be focused on these people, to care for them, to bring them back into the political field. They are not economic migrants; they lost their homes because of a political situation. Their current condition is caused by political processes. I won’t go too far, but this is clearly visible in the example of our displaced persons.

The next stage is having a clear idea of what we want. What kind of peace do we want to achieve? Do we simply not want war, or do we want development? If we want development, then it must be rapid development because we’ve lost so much time. There’s not much time left, because generations have changed, and alienation has reached such a degree that we may find ourselves in a situation that is at least as dangerous, if not more so, than occupation. So, if we really want to ensure that this never happens again, we need to look forward.

It’s also necessary to correctly assess a number of key historical moments, the context that led to the conflict. We haven’t conducted objective studies of recent history, at least not those that would bring society to a consensus. We talk about the Abkhazians and Ossetians, but we still haven’t evaluated the civil war in Tbilisi. And today, those who participated in that war call others radicals.

Badri Belkania: The guilty were not punished, the victims were left without compensation.

Vano Abramashvili: So there are many problems. To solve them, a solid foundation is needed. A proper evaluation of history, then its corresponding reflection in the education system so that generations know and have a correct understanding of that period. And finally, there needs to be a vision of how to use peacebuilding resources in the future. I think we should offer the Abkhazians and Ossetians a working alternative for development, but again, in the current situation, this is not easy.

Because it’s important that such alternative development is based on growing economic progress and integration into a normative civilizational space, like the European Union. We need to invite these people to a place where human rights and minority rights are protected, not leave them in the Russian abyss. On the contrary, we should strive to establish our relations in the civilized world. This, I believe, is the most important and major topic for ensuring that such events never happen again. By resolving these issues, we can build a strong, united, democratic state where every voice is considered.