About us   Editorial Board   Advisory Board   Subscribe   Contact us  
 


CAUCASUS UPDATE

In this section, we publish the weekly analysis of the major events taking place in the Caucasus and beyond. The Caucasus Update is written by our Senior Editor Alexander Jackson. Click here to subscribe.

What has changed since the August war?, CU Issue 41, August 3, 2009

On August 8, it will be a year since the fighting around South Ossetia intensified into a full-out war between Russia and Georgia. With the anniversary of this geopolitical earthquake approaching, what has changed in the Caucasus since?

Surprisingly, not much. Certainly, not a lot considering the predictions that many commentators made at the time: The conflict was the biggest threat to world peace since the end of the Cold War. It was “the week that buried the new world order”, as the first attempt to change borders in recent European history (The Guardian, August 31 2008). The Caucasus had become “the new battleground between world powers” (a point of view which seemed to ignore the past few hundred years (The Times, August 30, 2008)). The motif that recurs most often is that of a crossroads, a rupture, an irrevocable break in relations between Moscow and the West.

A year later, it would be fair to say that business as usual has been resumed between Russia and Western leaders, in both Brussels and Washington. Tensions persist, but most of these points of contention were there before the August war. NATO expansion had been a source of irritation to Vladimir Putin for years: so had ballistic missile defences in Eastern Europe, and oil and gas routes which bypassed Russian soil. In fact, as the Economist argued in early July, the 2003 war in Iraq was “the real breaking-point” in US-Russia relations (Economist, July 2), demonstrating America’s willingness to act unilaterally without even consulting Russia.

So problems in the Moscow-Washington relationship (and much the same can be said of the EU) were not new; neither was the need to work around them. President Obama’s visit to Moscow was just the most obvious example of ‘resetting’ ties with the Kremlin. This may have pained pro-Western leaders in Kiev and Tbilisi, who were slightly reassured by Vice-President Joe Biden’s recent blunt messages, but the need to secure Russian assistance on Afghanistan and Iran was far more important than Ukraine or Georgia. After the initial fury over the August war had died down, who could be surprised by this?

In Georgia itself, few would have thought a year ago that President Saakashvili would still be in power, still trading barbs with the Russian leadership and still insisting that Abkhazia and South Ossetia would be re-integrated (RFE/RL, July 26). He owes his survival to, chiefly, the incompetent and divided opposition movement, as well as the calculation by Russia that overthrowing him would be too much trouble. Constant tension in the border zones around Abkhazia and South Ossetia – both sides traded accusations of shelling in late July (Bloomberg, August 1) – should not detract from the lack of any major clashes since the end of the war. This miracle is attributable, firstly, to Russia’s lack of interest in a new war; secondly, to the much-maligned EU observers there. Even if the monitors have been powerless to influence Russia and its local proxies, they have certainly helped to hold back Saakashvili. This should be recognised.

Moscow’s recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent states was expected to open a hornet’s nest of ethnic separatism in the North Caucasus, as secessionists demanded the same treatment given to their cousins just across the border (NY Times, September 10 2008). A year on, this has not happened. The insurgency in Chechnya and Ingushetia remains brutal and unmanageable, but there is no serious indication that Russia’s actions in Georgia are responsible. The violence there is no longer much of an independence struggle, but part of a wider religious battle, fuelled by poverty and repression. It continues on its downwards spiral, regardless of the outside context.

Armenia and Azerbaijan remain locked in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Here, as elsewhere, the last year has been marked by inactivity. The war in Georgia, demonstrating Russia’s willingness to militarily intervene if war broke out in the South Caucasus, appeared to make both sides more wary of a new round of fighting. Although there has been no large-scale fighting, this is hardly progress from the previous stalemate. The high-profile Moscow Declaration, in November, was portrayed as a success for the Kremlin’s strong-arm diplomacy: it turned out to be hot air. Subsequent meetings between Presidents Sargsyan and Aliyev have made achingly slow progress towards a resolution, the broad outlines of which had been known for some time before the August war. The diplomatic traffic between the two sides has increased over the last year, to be sure, but there has been no breakthrough.

Much of that traffic is attributable to Turkey’s drive to thaw relations with Armenia, a drive which began in early September 2008 and culminated with rumours of a ‘road map to peace’ in April. Although planned in advance of the August war, the ‘football diplomacy’ which began the rapprochement was part of a wider post-war attempt by Ankara to reduce regional tensions. Improved relations with Armenia seem closer than ever before – this progress, a direct result of the August war, should not be underestimated.

But for now, the border is still closed. Turkey’s much-hyped ‘Caucasus Stability and Cooperation Platform’ has failed to materialise in any meaningful way. There have been some technical meetings of experts from the five countries involved (Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Russia), but these have not achieved much. It is fanciful to argue, as one Turkish analyst connected with the Platform did recently, that the initiative has triggered an acceleration of the Karabakh peace process (Sundays Zaman, August 2). Disputes between Baku and Yerevan, and Moscow and Tbilisi, still cripple any multilateral peace-building efforts.

There are other longstanding dynamics in the Caucasus which have not significantly changed. The Nabucco project is still struggling, although keeping it alive at all has been something of a miracle. The Caspian has still not been satisfactorily divided up between the littoral states. Turkmenistan’s renewed claims to certain oil fields in the Azerbaijani sector of the Caspian Sea create additional obstacles for the Nabucco project. Iran’s warm relationship with Armenia and the latest intensification of the Azerbaijani-Israeli relations have contributed to arguments between Baku and Tehran.

The August war was indeed a geopolitical crisis on a rare scale. But any long-sighted analysis of the region reveals that the conflict did not come out of nowhere. It was merely the low point of the festering relationship between Russia and Georgia, which has been worsening since 1991 (if not earlier). In this regard, the lack of subsequent change in the Caucasus is not surprising. The region’s volatility is, ironically, the one reliable constant. Most of the disputes are so deeply ingrained that a short, bloody war was simply not enough to remove them. In another year’s time, it is worth betting that most of the conflicts and rivalries will still be rumbling along.



"What has changed since the August war?, CU Issue 41, August 3, 2009" | 0 comments
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.
PREVIOUS ISSUES

  Caspian Compromise Backfires for Russia and Iran, CU Issue 83, November 24, 2010
  Turkey in a Tight Spot on Missile Defense, CU Issue 82, November 11, 2010
  The OSCE and Kyrgyzstan’s Election, CU Issue 81, October 30, 2010
  Unblocking the US-Azerbaijan Relationship, CU Issue 80, October 07, 2010
  Nabucco Pipeline: Quo Vadis?, CU Issue 79, September 30, 2010
  Russia tightens its grip in the South Caucasus, CU Issue 78, August 23, 2010
  Armenian Politics: Rigidity Versus Flexibility, CU Issue 77, August 10, 2010
  Russia and Georgia: Ready To Talk?, CU Issue 76, July 21, 2010
  Can the US walk and chew gum at the same time?, CU Issue 75, July 9, 2010
  The Kyrgyzstan Crisis – A Qualified Success for Turkish Diplomacy?, CU Issue 74, June 24, 2010
  Brussels downgrades the Caucasus, CU Issue 73, June 07, 2010
  NATO’s New Strategic Concept and the Caspian Region, CU Issue 72, June 01, 2010
  Joe Biden and European Security, CU Issue 71, May 13, 2010
  Behind the US-Azerbaijan row, CU Issue 70, May 6, 2010
  Turkey and Iran: The risks of failure, CU Issue 69, April 30, 2010
  Kazakhstan, the OSCE, and the crisis in Kyrgyzstan, CU Issue 68, April 19, 2010
  The Implications of the Moscow Bombings, CU Issue 67, April 12, 2010
  Iran Manoeuvres for a role in Karabakh, CU Issue 66, April 5, 2010
  The EU and Abkhazia: Between a rock and a hard place, CU Issue 65, March 16, 2010
  Fallout from the US ‘Genocide’ vote, CU Issue 64, March 9, 2010
  Ukraine's elections and future of GUAM, CU Issue 63, February 10, 2010
  Less Democracy, More Security: Kazakhstan and the OSCE, CU Issue 62, January 18, 2010
  Tackling the North Caucasus Insurgency: Development or Rhetoric?, CU Issue 61, January 11, 2010
  The Caspian Region in 2010, CU Issue 60, January 4, 2010
  The Caspian Region in 2010, CU Issue 59, December 31, 2009
  The Turkmenistan-China Pipeline Changes the Energy Balance, CU Issue 58, December 21, 2009
  Russia’s European Security Treaty, CU Issue 57, December 7, 2009
  The ‘Kidnapping War’ in Georgia and its Implications, CU Issue 56, December 3, 2009
  Azerbaijan Shifts its Energy Priorities, CU Issue 55, November 23, 2009
  The South Caucasian States and Afghanistan, CU Issue 54, November 11, 2009
  Is Turkey turning East?, CU Issue 53, November 2, 2009
  What is Russia’s Gameplan for Iran?, CU Issue 52, October 26, 2009
  Turkey, Armenia and Azerbaijan: Where Next?, CU Issue 51, October 19, 2009
  The Armenians of Georgia: A New Flashpoint in the Caucasus?, CU Issue 50, October 12, 2009
  Turkey’s EU Membership: Will The ‘Armenian Opening’ Help?, CU Issue 49, October 5, 2009
  The Missile Defence Shift: Implications for the Caucasus, CU Issue 48, September 22, 2009
  Rising Tensions in the Black Sea , CU Issue 47, September 14, 2009
  Armenia, Turkey, and Azerbaijan: The Clock Is Ticking, CU Issue 46, September 7, 2009
  The Battle of the Bases in Central Asia, CU Issue 45, August 31, 2009
  Russia, Israel, and the S-300s, CU Issue 44, August 24, 2009
  The motivations behind Turkey's 'Kurdish Initiative', CU Issue 43, August 17, 2009
  The Implications of the Turkmenistan-Azerbaijan Dispute, CU Issue 42, August 10, 2009
  What has changed since the August war?, CU Issue 41, August 3, 2009
  The Internal Dynamics of Armenia’s Karabakh Policy, CU Issue 40, July 20, 2009
  Gazprom’s Baku Triumph, CU Issue 39, July 06, 2009
  Ingushetia: The New Chechnya?, CU Issue 38, June 29, 2009
  Georgias Economy - A Matter for Diplomats, CU Issue 37, June 22, 2009
  ‘Progress’ In The Nagorno-Karabakh Peace Process, CU Issue 36, June 08, 2009
  Iran's Azerbaijanis and the presidential election, CU Issue 35, June 01, 2009
  Nabucco and South Stream - The Race Heats Up, CU Issue 34, May 25, 2009
  China and Central Asia, CU Issue 33, May 19, 2009
  Russia, Georgia, and NATO - A Bad Week, CU Issue 32, May 11, 2009
  The Obama Administration’s Emerging Caucasus Policy, CU Issue 31, April 27, 2009
  Integration and Division in the Caspian Sea, CU Issue 30, April 20, 2009
  The Turkish-Armenian Rapprochement - Implications for the South Caucasus, CU Issue 29, April 13, 2009
  Turkey's local elections and Armenian issue, CU Issue 28, April 6, 2009
  Is There Life Left In The Nabucco Project?, CU Issue 27, March 30, 2009
  Problems and Prospects for Russian Military Reform, CU Issue 26, March 23, 2009
  Russia and Georgia: Not back to war, CU Issue 25, March 16, 2009
  Armenia: Heading towards crisis?, CU Issue 24, March 9, 2009
  Drug trafficking in the Caucasus, CU Issue 23, February 23, 2009
  Russian-led military block: A real counterweight to NATO?, CU Issue 22, February 16, 2009
  Are the International Missions in Georgia still relevant?, CU Issue 21, February 9, 2009
  Israel and Azerbaijan: Baku’s Balancing Act, CU Issue 20, February 2, 2009
  The North Caucasus in 2009: A Bleak Forecast, CU Issue 19, January 26, 2009
  The Military Balance in Nagorno-Karabakh, CU Issue 18, January 19, 2009
  Russia, Iran, and Barack Obama in 2009, Part II, CU Issue 17, January 12, 2009
  Looking forward to 2009 in the Caucasus and beyond, Part I, CU Issue 16, January 5, 2009
  The opportunities and the risks of NATO’s new supply routes, CU Issue 15, December 22, 2008
  The Black Sea Ambitions of Armenia, CU Issue 14, December 15, 2008
  Another Small Step for Nabucco, CU Issue 13, December 8, 2008
  Will Saakashvili survive politically?, CU Issue 12, December 1, 2008
  The latest fashion: conflict mediation, CU Issue 11, November 24, 2008
  The Baku Energy Summit, CU Issue 10, November 17, 2008
  Obama and the Caucasus, CU Issue 9, November 10, 2008
  Kazakhstan's oil options, CU Issue 8, November 3, 2008
  Is the Minsk Group being sidelined?, CU Issue 7, October 27, 2008
  Gas and oil developments in the Caspian region, CU Issue 6, October 20, 2008
  Where next for the Georgian peace process?, CU Issue 5, October 8, 2008
  Unrest in the North Caucasus, CU Issue 4, September 29, 2008
  Saakashvili's future, CU Issue 3, September 22, 2008
  Iran after the Georgian War, CU Issue 2, September 15, 2008
  Football diplomacy, CU Issue 1, September 8, 2008
       
 
  © 2006-2010 CRIA
  All rights reserved

Editorial Board
Advisory Board
Our Authors

Back Issues
Caucasus Update
Current Issue

Contact Us
Subscribe
Join us on Facebook