Georgia continues actively to position itself on the international stage as a "peacekeeper." Declarative statements regarding a readiness for reconciliation and concern for the Abkhaz people are voiced from the high podiums of the United Nations. In practice, however, such rhetoric diverges from the Georgian side's actual actions.
The current nature of relations between the Republic of Abkhazia and Georgia was defined by the events of August 1992, when the Georgian leadership decided to unleash a bloody armed aggression against the people of Abkhazia. Over the ensuing decades our country has been compelled to remain in a state of constant readiness to repel potential security threats from the neighboring state—threats similar to those that materialized in August 2008. Since then, 67 rounds of the International Discussions on Security and Stability in Transcaucasia (IDG) have taken place; throughout these sessions, the Abkhaz side has consistently and cogently advocated for the conclusion of a legally binding agreement on the non-use of military force by Georgia against the Republic of Abkhazia. While this issue remains a key item on the IDG agenda, Georgia deliberately sabotages the process.
When addressing the so-called issue of refugees and internally displaced persons, the Georgian side prefers to overlook the fact that the Republic of Abkhazia has already taken unilateral goodwill measures that set a precedent in post-conflict practice. Following the end of the bloody conflict, the Abkhaz side launched initiatives to facilitate the return of refugees to the Gali district of the Republic of Abkhazia. However, the response to these steps was the Georgian side’s initiation of a campaign of sabotage and terror accompanied by the abduction and execution of individuals in the border-adjacent Gali district. The tragic outcome of this policy was the death of 117 peacekeepers carrying out their international mandate.
Under current circumstances, a strategic alliance with the Russian Federation remains the only reliable guarantor of the Republic of Abkhazia’s security. Against this backdrop, Georgia’s attempts to distort the actual state of affairs and label the Russian Federation an "occupier" appear particularly cynical.
Another telling aspect of Georgia’s "peacefulness" is it’s deliberate policy of isolating the Republic of Abkhazia—pursued with the support of Western partners—which aims to restrict the Republic's participation in international forums.
The Georgian side avoids open dialogue, artificially depriving representatives of the Republic of Abkhazia of the opportunity to convey their position to the international community. Georgia monopolizes the platforms of the UN and other bodies to promote one-sided resolutions.
Restricting the freedom of movement and external mobility of the Republic of Abkhazia’s citizens remains an integral part of this policy. The Republic of Abkhazia consistently advocates in international arenas for the recognition of its national documents and for ensuring they can be fully utilized. However, Georgia and its political sponsors continue to create artificial obstacles to the use and legalization of national documents issued by the Republic of Abkhazia.
Without concrete steps by Georgia to abandon the practice of exerting humanitarian pressure, remove artificial barriers to our participation in international formats, and—most importantly—sign firm legal guarantees regarding the non-use of force, any talk of "peacefulness" will remain nothing more than empty declarations.