Menu
Article originally published on the Echo of the Caucasus website. Text and terminology of article presented without changes. All rights belong to Echo of the Caucasus. Publication date April 2, 2025
Against the backdrop of political crisis and the upcoming local self-government elections scheduled for October, Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze — whose legitimacy is not recognized by the opposition, the fifth president, and part of the public — has once again raised the issue of Georgia’s territorial integrity. Speaking on the Imedi TV channel, he confidently stated that “with consistent policy and patience, any goal can be achieved,” including the restoration of control over the self-proclaimed republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. But behind the bold statements, there was a lack of specifics: no strategy, no action, no negotiation plan.
“With consistent policy and patience, any goal can be achieved, including our greatest dream — the restoration of territorial integrity,” Kobakhidze said during a broadcast on Imedi TV on April 6. The interview lasted about an hour, but the Prime Minister’s words offered little in the way of specifics.
The Georgian Dream leader limited himself to general phrases, without revealing the essence of the so-called “consistent policy” or the processes that, according to him, would determine the future of the country’s territorial integrity.
“Events in the country are developing dynamically, and it’s still difficult to say in which direction they will go,” he said, without specifying which events he was referring to.
Even the key factors on which the resolution of this issue depends were only briefly mentioned — there are many of them, he said.
“But it’s realistic to demonstrate patience and consistently follow our policy,” he repeated during the broadcast.
The reaction didn’t take long. The Abkhazian Ministry of Foreign Affairs saw Kobakhidze’s statements as yet another confirmation that Tbilisi continues to cling to “outdated political approaches.”
“The Republic of Abkhazia is an independent state that determined its status based on the will of its people. Future coexistence with Georgia is possible on the basis of good neighborliness and mutual respect,” the ministry stated.
Instead of declarations about territorial integrity, Sukhumi proposes equal dialogue, real compromise, and the signing of a non-aggression agreement, which, they claim, would help stabilize the situation in the region.
A similar sentiment came from Tskhinvali. In the self-proclaimed Republic of South Ossetia, the Georgian Prime Minister’s remarks were deemed unacceptable and incompatible with the prospect of normalizing relations.
“Tskhinvali has repeatedly voiced its position, which is based on the choice of the people of South Ossetia, enshrined in the country’s Constitution. The lack of progress in international discussions on security guarantees for South Ossetia and Abkhazia, coupled with such statements, does not contribute to regional stability,” the Ministry of Foreign Affairs declared.
The ministry maintained that the course toward independence is enshrined in the Constitution, and any talk of reintegration with Georgia only worsens the situation and undermines prospects for dialogue. Moreover, the statement emphasized that South Ossetia’s priority is to deepen cooperation with Russia, as its main guarantor of security.
The issue of restoring Georgia’s territorial integrity took a prominent place in the rhetoric of Georgian Dream leaders during the 2024 election campaign. Three months before the parliamentary elections, the ruling party addressed voters with a call to turn out at the polls and support their course. In its appeal, Georgian Dream outlined four key reasons why it sought a constitutional majority in Parliament.
One of the stated reasons was the peaceful restoration of the country’s territorial integrity. According to the party, if this goal is achieved, constitutional amendments will be required to adapt the state structure and governance system to the new political situation.
During a regional tour, the honorary chairman of Georgian Dream, Bidzina Ivanishvili, also personally addressed the issue, stating that the question of Georgia’s territorial integrity could appear on the agenda at any moment:
“Today, political processes both globally and in our region are developing rapidly. At any moment, the issue of restoring Georgia’s territorial integrity may appear on the agenda.”
Exactly what circumstances might lead to such developments was never clarified, either before or after the statements. It remains unclear whether any negotiations are underway, whether there is a concrete action plan, or if it’s simply a matter of waiting for a favorable moment.
Opponents have repeatedly accused Georgian Dream of using the issue of territorial integrity for populist purposes. In their view, the party merely creates the appearance of activity without taking concrete or effective steps to resolve the conflict.
According to conflict expert and former State Minister for Reconciliation and Civic Equality Paata Zakareishvili, Kobakhidze’s latest statement was likely also aimed at his voter base ahead of the local self-government elections in October. He noted that before elections, a Georgian politician has to say something about the conflicts:
“I think it was just a statement so that no one could accuse them of saying nothing on the issue,” Zakareishvili believes. “Georgian Dream voters want just one thing: to have some kind of argument. ‘The global party of war,’ the Deep State, ‘do you want war?’ They say: we vote for what they promised, so that the ‘global party of war’ and the Deep State can’t attack Georgia. They need arguments. Now he [Kobakhidze] said something about restoring territorial integrity, while doing absolutely nothing. That’s something new.”
According to the conflict expert, there’s a certain distinction between the statements of Ivanishvili and Kobakhidze. The main emphasis of the election campaign, as expressed by the oligarch, was not so much on restoring territorial integrity, but on making apologies. During a campaign stop in Gori, Bidzina Ivanishvili blamed the 2008 war on “external forces” and Georgia’s former leadership, adding that Georgia “would find the strength to offer an apology.” Thus, Zakareishvili noted, the oligarch was outlining the methods by which they intend to restore territorial integrity. Kobakhidze, on the other hand, did not articulate any such “methods”:
“He simply said that territorial integrity would be restored. And that’s it. Full stop. But how this will happen… Apparently, one day, territorial integrity will just fall from the sky.”
Zakareishvili believes this approach is fundamentally different from that of previous administrations. Unlike Georgian Dream, the latter at least spoke of the need to build an economic foundation, of how EU membership could help restore territorial integrity, or how establishing a common language with Russia would play a key role:
“There were many additional phrases and proposals that gave people hope that they would lead us to restoring territorial integrity. But Kobakhidze’s statement was superficial, mocking, and cynical, like ‘there’s nothing we need to do.’”
According to Zakareishvili, Kobakhidze should not have brought up the topic at all, as Georgian Dream hasn’t seriously addressed Abkhazia or South Ossetia for quite some time. He noted that when Alexander Lukashenko visits Abkhazia, Russia lays claim to Pitsunda, and an investment agreement gives Russia leverage over the Abkhazian economy — and Tbilisi offers no response to any of this.
“Everyone is used to the idea that Georgian Dream has already handed Abkhazia over to Russia,” Zakareishvili maintained.
However, just a year ago, on May 26, in a speech at a ceremonial event marking Georgia’s Independence Day, Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze declared that the “promised land,” or the Georgian dream as such, was a united, strong Georgia — including Abkhazian and Ossetian brothers and sisters. He even stipulated a year when Georgia would be both in the European Union and united — 2030.
Moscow responded to Georgian Dream’s attempts to raise the issue of territorial integrity. Russian diplomat Grigory Karasin called such talk “disingenuous.” Deputy Chairman of the Russian State Duma Committee on CIS Affairs, Eurasian Integration and Relations with Compatriots, Konstantin Zatulin, stated that Tbilisi should not count on the willingness of Abkhazians and Ossetians to “reunite” with Georgians, because “the train has long since left the station.”
“There will be no return of Abkhazia or South Ossetia to Georgia. Russia will not in any way influence the decision of the republics or pressure them, as some may be hoping. We have entirely different principles and a different attitude when it comes to the recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. There is no plan to change our position for any kind of ephemeral benefit — there never was, and never will be,” the deputy maintained.
That reaction from the Kremlin made it clear that Georgian Dream had not been given carte blanche to manipulate the issue of territorial integrity. The statements by Russian officials served as a signal: Moscow is not ready to discuss such scenarios, even hypothetically. The only thing the Kremlin was willing to do was help Tbilisi “restore relations” with Sukhumi and Tskhinvali. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov emphasized that Moscow is ready to support the process of normalizing relations between Tbilisi, Sukhumi, and Tskhinvali, but only if the “countries” themselves are interested in such a process.
“As for methods of reconciliation, Moscow responds positively. There are our apologies, and now Tsulukiani’s commission has begun to examine the 2008 war. Russia likes that Georgia is at least trying to do something. But when it comes to territorial integrity, that’s usually not perceived positively. They always say this is a settled matter, a closed topic, the train has left the station,” Zakareishvili said.
So far, no new reaction has come from Moscow. This time, the conflict expert believes, Moscow may stay silent—possibly because it “doesn’t want to offend Georgian Dream and its prime minister.” Or, in its usual fashion, it may once again remind everyone that for Russia, the issue of Georgia’s territorial integrity has long since been resolved.
i don’t know if this is a headline or a quote, it’s just floating there in the original
