RUSSIA - ABKHAZIA: HISTORY AND THE PRESENT
Abkhazia in XIX century - a time of struggle by the Russian and Turkish empires for influence in the region
The successive policies of Russia, going on the offensive in the Western Caucasus and particularly in Abkhazia, had started to develop in XVIII century, after the assertion of Russia into eastern Georgia where in 1801 the Kartli-Kakhetian Kingdom had been abolished.
With the coming to power in Abkhazia of Sovereign Prince Keleshbei Chachba-Shervashidze, a wise and charismatic politician, the vector of rapprochement with Russia began to increase. Realising his responsibility towards his people, and at the same time seeing increasing attention to the region from its neighbouring great powers, for a long time he successfully manoeuvred between the interests of Turkey and Russia.
In 1803 Keleshbei took the first formal step towards rapprochement with Russia, intending with its help to get rid of the protectorate of Turkey. In 1806 the Sovereign Prince applied for the adoption of Abkhazia as a subject of Russia, but Emperor Alexander I hesitated with an answer to this question. In the sudden Russian-Turkish war of 1806-1812 Russia tried to use Keleshbei in its own interests. So in 1807 the sixty-year-old Prince was requested to repel the Turks from the Poti fortress, but he avoided any actions in this respect, believing that he would incur big losses. At the same time, having collected 25000 troops, Keleshbei stopped Turkish attempts to force a landing in Abkhazia.
Soon after the death of the Sovereign Prince of Abkhazia, namely on August 12th, 1808, his son Seferbei (George) Shervashidze addressed the Emperor with new “pleading points” on the adoption of his country as a protectorate of Russia, and on February 17th, 1810 Alexander I confirmed this document, recognising George as “the hereditary Prince of the Abkhazian possession under the Supreme patronage, power and protection of the Russian empire” . However to dominate on the eastern coast of the Black Sea, it was necessary to expel the Turks from this region, and it was known that their influence and presence here was very strong (Turks named Sukhum old Istanbul).
The struggle between the two empires continued for more than 50 years, and was ruthless and bloody, most particularly for that population which lived here. However the opinion of some radical national patriots that Russia was at war with the people of the Western Caucasus was wrong, as obviously the Russian Empire was at war not with the people, but with Turkey for influence in this region. Both empires were among the most powerful super-states of that time and before them there were great historic tasks, therefore struggle for territorial domination between them was inevitable.
In May, 1812 the Bucharest Peace Treaty was concluded, in which Russia obtained all the coastline of Abkhazia and Mingrelia, from which it was possible for it to strengthen the safety of the Crimea, and the main strategic problem for Russia was also solved - Napoleon lost the allegiance of Turkey.
In 1829 the Adrianople Treaty was concluded, according to which Porte conceded all the eastern coast of the Black Sea, as well as Circassian lands, to Russia. However this concession mattered only on paper, because in practice the Turkish Empire did not stop trying to return Abkhazia and all the southern Caucasus under its protection. This region had always been strategically significant (it is known that the Great Silk Route passed through here) and it was important to Turkey to cut the communications connecting Russia with the southern Caucasus, and also with the west. In this respect it is possible to compare the situation with recent events. In the modern history of the Caucasus we also observe a struggle between super-states for this part of the Black Sea coast, which is strategically important in a geopolitical sense.
However we will return to the history of mutual relations between Russia and Abkhazia, which especially in XIX century were rather ambiguous. It is obvious that the claims of both Turkey and Russia were perceived by the people historically living in the territory as an encroachment upon the national independence of the whole ethnic group. In addition, during this historical period the western Caucasus appeared to be without any real leader capable of making independent decisions and consolidating Adyg-Abkhazian society. Dissonance among the elite, a split in society, and the absence of a leader capable of taking control of the government of the people, led to internal struggle. The solution of global and national problems, and questions of war and peace, depended at that time on members of high society, who peasants traditionally trusted. But princes and noblemen were divided in their opinions, and a national leader commanding general respect and widespread trust no longer existed. As a result of non-coordinated actions and wrongly-chosen approaches, a mass exodus from their lands of Adyg-Abkhazian sub-ethnoses occurred.
Relevant to this, it is necessary to consider also the ethno-psychological condition of the people, who whilst not wishing to recognise any outside authority, appeared without a real leader to be between two fires, the interests of the Russian Empire on the one hand, and the Ottoman on the other. The statement of a Turkish officer about the policy of Porte in the Caucasus is very true, and equally true in relation to the policy of the Russian Empire: “In Constantinople minds have been obscured to such an extent that they did not understand what they were doing in the Caucasus and played with the destiny of the whole people… Intending to support the Circassians, they began by destroying their social and political life; inciting them to struggle against the Russians, at the same time they cut off any opportunity for them to retreat.”2
We are often engaged in creating myths about that really terrible period in our history and idolizing people, shutting our eyes to the facts. And the facts given in historical and documentary materials, and in military publicity of XIX century, testify that in the region there was a struggle not against people, but against Empires for spheres of influence and territorial domination. Peoples of the Western Caucasus appeared as hostages of the time, hostages of a great re-partition. As further evidence of that, English and French agents appeared here who promised the mountain people to “relieve” them forever of Russians if they accepted the protection of England. The people of the Western Caucasus appeared at a point of collision of great powers which were following their global strategic interests. So it has been throughout all the history of our people. For this reason generations of mountain people were brought up in war conditions. Taking lessons from the past it is necessary for us to move on further.
Today, when the interests of world super-states face each other yet again in our region, it is important for us to conduct a balanced and more pragmatic policy. The heroic history of our people has always been connected with world civilization processes. However, bitter experience has taught us that with a force of only weapons it is impossible to achieve well-being for our people. It is necessary to build our state on the basis of good neighbourliness and mutual trust.
Abkhazia at the end of XIX to beginning of XX century - a struggle for survival
For thirty years, from 1877 to 1907, Abkhazians because of numerous perturbations and revolts were considered in imperial Russia as “the guilty population”. Till 1864 a mono-ethnic country, in the second half of the XIX century Abkhazia had undergone colonisation not only by Russians, but also Greeks, Armenians, Bulgarians, Germans, Estonians and others who had newly settled here. Since 1870-1880 from adjoining regions of western Georgia representatives of Kartvelian people, mainly Mingrelians, rushed here also. Then in 1877, in the newspaper ‘Tiflis Bulletin’, a policy statement from Georgian public figure Jacob Gogebashvili appeared. In this, it was said that “Mingrelians should be the first substitutes for the moved Abkhazians”3. As a result of prompt processes of movement of the population the ethno-demographic situation in the country had sharply changed. So, although in 1886 Abkhazians comprised 85.7% of the population, by 1897 they were only 55.3%.
Kartvelian colonisation of Abkhazia was so swift that the Imperial authorities were on their guard. Russian interests in Abkhazia directly clashed with those of Georgia, which had taken advantage of the results of the war for the achievement of its own interests. Representatives of the Georgian church, the intelligentsia, and various political parties and movements all showed their distinct claims to Abkhazia.
During revolutionary events in Russia, the Georgian-Abkhazian contradictions became excessively aggravated. Abkhazians perceived all events in their native land as the ‘Georgian revolution’ and supported the government against these ‘revolutionaries’.
This led to the result that in 1907 at the initiative of the Chairman of the Government of Russia P.A.Stolypin, by special decree from Tsar Nicolas II the word “guilt” was removed in connection with Abkhazia. Since that moment the relation with Russia has improved even more. In the name Abkhazia, Russia started to see a reliable partner and ally. Time and again inhabitants of Abkhazia proved their fidelity to Russia and assisted during hard times, to which participation of Abkhazian civil guardsmen in the First World War also testifies, as with bravery and eagerness they strove to protect people friendly to them from the enemy. According to sources, during the First World War in the Caucasian horse division of the Abkhazian volunteers 500 persons were fighting. The Abkhazian ‘hundred’ (the code name of a fighting division) were named ‘the hundred crusaders’ as all these horsemen were awarded military medals. The strength of mind and boldness of the brave mountain people impressed both Russian researchers and military men. The Russian researchers noted that among those who were at war for the Russian army were the sons of enemies of Russia, bringing honour to the Russian state as much as to their own.
Earl Paletski in particular noted: “…the division has been to different fronts, German, Gallic, and Romanian, and everywhere manifested miracles of bravery … the division has incurred many losses during the fighting activity … But the Caucasian mountaineers were filled and are filled till now with huge courage and unshakable hardness. It is one of the most reliable sections - the pride of the Russian army. Caucasians had the full moral right not to accept any participation in the war. We have taken away everything from Caucasians: their beautiful mountains, their wild nature, the inexhaustible riches of this fertile country. And now war has flared, Caucasians have voluntarily gone to the protection of Russia and protected it selflessly, not as a malicious stepmother, but as a real mother… They battle together with the Russian army and ahead of everything, and most bravely die for our freedom.”4
After the disintegration of the Russian Empire, Turkey and Germany supported the occupation of Abkhazia by Georgian troops, which led to a national liberation war of the people of Abkhazia against Menshevist Georgia.
Abkhazia as a part of the Soviet state in the XX century
On March 31st, 1921 the Revolutionary Committee of Abkhazia accepted the Declaration on formation of the Soviet Socialist Republic of Abkhazia (the SSR Abkhazia). However in 1931 the status of Abkhazia was, by Stalin's command, reduced to autonomous republic status and included within the composition of the Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic. A mass national meeting of 20,000 in the village of Duripsh was a reaction to this decision. By the way, Abkhazians became the only people in the USSR who dared to hold mass national protests on political grounds (1931, 1947, 1956, 1967, 1978, 1980, 1989, 1991), demanding restoration of their status as a union republic. The incorporation of Abkhazia within Georgia has been seen as the beginning of a whole series of actions aimed at the violent assimilation of Abkhazians, the after-effects of which are well-known.
By the end of the 1940s little remained of Abkhazian political and cultural autonomy. In such circumstances Abkhazia met the start of the Great Patriotic War, in which the population of Abkhazia participated most actively. More than 55,000 inhabitants of Abkhazia (including 18,000 ethnic Abkhazians) bravely fought on different fronts. 22 Abkhazian soldiers were awarded the rank of “Hero of the Soviet Union”, however even this could not stop the repressive policy of Stalin and Beria in the region.
After Stalin’s death the aggressive policy of Georgia concerning Abkhazia continued, and the statehood of the Abkhazian АSSR was in essence a mere formality. During the final years of existence of the USSR, the authorities of Georgia began a process directed towards the exit of Georgia from the composition of the USSR. This process was accompanied by extremely nationalist propaganda. Leaders of national movements of Georgia acted with public appeals for the liquidation of the autonomous statehood of Abkhazia. This situation caused serious concern not only for Abkhazians, but also for all the non-Georgian population of Abkhazia. The building up of this confrontation led to the Georgian-Abkhazian war of 1992-1993.
Upon the termination of operations with the assistance of the Russian Federation a peacekeeping process began, under the aegis of the United Nations. Further, up to the events of August, 2008 Russia remained the intermediary in the conflict, and peacekeeping forces of the Russian Federation carried out the mission assigned to them in the zone of disconnection of forces, and for a long time were the guarantor of non-resumption of war. Regularly within post-war years Georgia under different pretexts made attempts to replace the peacekeeping forces of Russia with NATO troops. Tbilisi constantly spoke about the necessity for internationalisation of the settlement of conflicts, and the ruling clique of Georgia, to keep events in the country within the focus of constant international attention, undertook various measures and did everything they could to change the format of the presence of Russia in the Caucasus. Georgia was completely consolidated with the forces which desired the creation in the Caucasus of a state which would be aggressively hostile to Russia (in addition, there was a direct attempt to blackmail Russia by strengthening the Chechen Republic, counting on concessions being made regarding Abkhazia). However, the authorities of Abkhazia firmly stood by their position.
The XXI century - the policy of Russia concerning Abkhazia and South Ossetia - a new arrangement of political forces in the region
The recognition by the Russian Federation of the independence of the Republic of Abkhazia in August, 2008 became a turning-point in the history of our mutual relations. This event has affected not only the internal situation in our country, but has also made a special impact on the processes occurring in world politics. If at the beginning of the XXI century the interests of the USA in the region were defined, today the arrangement of political forces has changed.
Not casually Russian experts and political scientists have called the action of Russia, in its recognition of the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, an answer to the purposes of protection of the national state interests of Russia, and consider that the given action will strengthen the rights of Russia to control over all the territory of the Caucasus. Russia has commenced the development and application of a complex, universal and long-term geo-strategy in the region, and Abkhazia can become a binding, unifying link on the way to strengthening the position of Russia in the region as a whole.
As to the interests of the West here, the well-known American political scientist Ariel Cohen has accurately enough expressed the American approaches to the settlement of conflicts in the Caucasus. They are defined, first of all, by an interest in the energy resources of the Caspian basin, a desire to isolate Transcaucasia from the influence of Russia, and maintenance of the interests of their main partners - Turkey and Israel. In this context the strategic interests of the USA are also observed by its maintenance of assurances of the independence and territorial integrity of Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia.
We are on the threshold of an establishment of new political realities in international relations. The USA continue to consider themselves as a unique super-state, and Europe remains the basic arena of the international interests of America. Changes in the relationship of political forces on the European continent will also finally have a crucial importance in how the updated picture of the southern Caucasus will look. In this context, it is impossible to forget about the long-term interests of one more traditional participant in regional processes - Iran.
Policy of Turkey at the present stage
Turkey historically and demographically has always been involved in events in the Caucasus. As to the present stage, since 1991 Turkey has considered Georgia as a valuable strategic partner. The close partnership was formed because Georgia has been seen in the capacity of an economically important ally since it gave the channel for transportation of Caspian energy resources to international markets through Turkey, bypassing Russia and Iran. Designs of an oil pipeline via Baku-Tbilisi-Jeikhan, a gas pipeline via Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum and a railway service via Baku-Tbilisi-Kars had an objective to strengthen the links of Turkey to the Caucasus and the Caspian basin. Thus, in conditions when Georgia has been included in these projects in the capacity of a key player, the necessity of support for a policy of Georgia was not a subject for discussion, even during the civil war in Georgia and wars with Abkhazia and South Ossetia. For the same reason Turkish armed forces supported their Georgian partners in their aspiration to reach NATO standards in military and defensive areas, which was the obligatory requirement for entrance into the alliance.
However all this could influence the relations between Turkey and Russia, which is the major world economic and energy partner. Recently observing the pragmatic, well balanced policy of Turkey, especially in its relation with Russia, should call for optimism. Many analysts note that Turkey is starting to take an independent position, especially in the upholding of its own interests. In July, 2008 an official visit to Turkey by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Russia Sergey Lavrov took place. In political and state circles of both countries, a special significance was attached to Russian-Turkish negotiations. The head of the Turkish Republic particularly emphasised the importance of strengthening regional cooperation between Moscow and Ankara, which, according to the words of Abdullah Gule, is today an important factor in the preservation of stability in Eurasia and in the world as a whole.
In May, 2009 the Prime Minister of Turkey Redjep Erdogan met his Russian colleague Vladimir Putin in Sochi. The Ex-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Turkey Hikhmet Chetin connected the Sochi visit of the head of the government mainly with settling problems in the whole Caucasus, in which increasing activity by the USA, NATO and OSCE was taking place. However analysts not unreasonably connected the aims of the meeting with the desire of Turkey on the one hand to keep the Russian project “Blue Stream”, and on the other not to lose NABUCCO. It is necessary for Ankara to react in a well balanced manner, and to operatively adjust to the quickly changing situation both in the Caucasus and in Europe, to make correct decisions without delay.
The reaction of Turkey to the events of August 2008 differed considerably from that of NATO as a whole. Having appeared in the epicentre of the NATO and Russian disagreement which originated in the Black Sea region, the government of Turkey manifested its adherence to principles and, despite its membership of NATO, did not allow any violation of the “Convention of Montreux”. Thereby Turkey has given to the world a signal that it is ready to interfere with economic and political processes in the Caucasus if such is demanded in the interests of the country, even if it runs counter to the advancement of Euro-Atlantic interests in the region.
In Turkey the Caucasian Committee of Solidarity with Abkhazia, which deals with problems of our compatriots, continues to function actively, and protects the interests of the Republic of Abkhazia among the higher echelons of power in the Turkish Republic. The Turkish government, thanks to lobbying by the Abkhazian diaspora, even in the conditions of the most severe blockade of post-war years shut its eyes to the delivery by sea to Abkhazia of the most necessary cargoes. The authorities realise that the numerous Adyg-Abkhazian diaspora living in Turkey cannot stand aside from those processes which are occurring now in Abkhazia. Besides, there is a considerable potential for development of economic relations between Abkhazia and Turkey, especially in those areas where Turkey occupies a strongly competitive position - tourism, building, logistics, retail trade, communications and the food-processing industry. Abkhazia can also give transit for an entrance to the prospering and rapidly growing markets of the Russian Federation and other countries in the region. Realising this, the Prime Minister of Turkey Redjep Erdogan has marked out a new approach in the foreign policy of his country, having presented the initiative of creation of the Caucasian platform of stability and cooperation which was hailed by practically all states in the region. Such a union should include representation from all countries in the region, and should also be open to Iran.
It is necessary for Turkey to take into consideration that it has close historical, strategic, economic and ethnic connections with all countries of the Caucasus. It is preordained for our countries to be neighbours, and we believe that the interests of Turkey consist not only in a strategic partnership with Russia, but also in the development of civilised political relations with Abkhazia, thereby correcting the historical errors of the past.
Russia and Abkhazia on the way towards closer cooperation
The recognition by Russia of the independence of Abkhazia has marked out a transition to a new, totally different level of relations - relations at the level of independent states equal in rights. At this stage we are engaged in the development of new mechanisms for interacting at state level. There was a necessity for the formation of institutes of interstate relations.
Abkhazia is aiming towards close cooperation with the Russian Federation, our immediate neighbour and strategic partner. Our policy is directed at cooperation, first of all in the fields of security, economy and education. Russia is the guarantor of safety for Abkhazia.
Russia is also our main trade and economic partner. We continue to work towards a deepening of interaction with the Russian Federation, and simultaneously we are trying to create partnership ties with other world states.
During the national-liberating war of 1992-93, Abkhazia connected its hopes with Russia and, despite difficult and at times inconsistent actions by the former Russian government, firmly stood by its own position. The Abkhazian side gave an accurate signal that under no circumstances would it be drawn away from its accepted decisions. Even under conditions of the hardest blockade, Abkhazia continued to show its durability in maintaining its position and showed its inexhaustible potential. I think Abkhazia in all the years since then has proved its consistency, first of all in its capacity as a reliable partner.
The Abkhazian kingdom attained its blossoming under the wing of a two-headed eagle of the Byzantian Empire. Today we have a chance to achieve its revival under the wing of a two-headed Russian eagle. Our policy is directed towards rapprochement with our neighbours, countries where our numerous diaspora now live. Abkhazia can serve as a bridge for the rapprochement of Turkey and Russia.
Russia has already taken the plunge and has declared to the whole world its recognition of the sovereignty and independence of Abkhazia, having executed its historical responsibility. Now it is the turn of Turkey to equally share responsibility for the tragic events which occurred at the time of the Russian-Turkish war.
S. M. Shamba,
Minister of Foreign Affairs
2009
