Abkhazia Institute for Social and Economic Research

Ganmukhuri is a village situated on the very frontier of the territory controlled by the Abkhazian rebels who enjoy support of Kremlin and the Russian troops stationed in the area. Despite its geographical location, Ganmukhuri was a site of a Georgian youth camp in the summer of 2007. On October 30 Russian soldiers approached the empty camp, encountered the five Georgian policemen that were guarding it, bullied them, and took as prisoners, severely beating them in the process. In less than an hour Georgian Special Forces and police arrived at the spot and the stand off began. It appeared to be so serious that the president of Georgia Michael Saakashvili decided to go to Ganmukhuri and establish control over the situation personally. Subsequently the Russians freed Georgian policemen and left the scene.
    This was not an isolated incident, but rather a logical development of the political situation that currently exists in the region of Caucasus. One of the key components of this situation is an amounting Russian pressure on Georgia. On March 11 2007 Russian helicopters bombed the Georgia-controlled Kodori gorge in Abkhazia. On August 6 Russian plane dropped a rocket in the Georgian-controlled part of another rebellious region of the country – South Ossetia. A more than one year-old Russian embargo against Georgia, which includes cutting all sorts of economic ties, trade, and transportation either by land or air, has already become a mere fact of life for Georgia. Russian pressure is not new for this country. The incident of October 30, however, has come too close to a direct military confrontation. It has proved that Russia is unpredictable and its direct aggression against Georgia is not totally unlikely, to say the least.
    What is position of the West in these circumstances? Existing experience demonstrates that usually the Western countries do their best not to emphasize Russia’s aggressive actions towards Georgia. As a result, Russian activity of this sort is steadily increasing. This Western policy of appeasement towards Russia is counter-productive from various points of view. It only increases the risk of destabilization in the Eastern Europe, which would create very serious problems for the Western Europe. The Western Europeans had a good opportunity to understand this when they experienced interruptions of the natural gas supply during the Russian-Ukrainian crisis in January of 2006. That was a mere symptom of the troubles that may occur if Russian bullying towards its neighbors is further tolerated.
    Georgia is a strategically vital country if the stable transport route between Europe and Central and Eastern Asia is ever to be established. This route cannot go through the Russian region of North Caucasus, ravaged by the guerilla war. Iran also cannot be considered to be a stable territory for such a route to go through. With the Armenia-Turkey and the Armenia-Azerbaijan borders closed, Georgian territory seems to be the only possible route for the European-Asian transportation, including the potential direct European access to the vast natural gas reserves of the Central Asian countries. It is not reasonable to let Russia – largely a monopolist gas supplier to Europe – destabilize Georgia, which is essential for the direct natural gas supply from Central Asia that would seriously lessen European dependence on Russian gas.
    There are still other reasons for the Western countries to pay more attention to the Russian aggression towards Georgia. Europe has an extremely bitter experience of leaving small democracies alone to face aggression of the tyrannies. Turning the blind eye and appeasement of Russia can bring only an increased danger of destabilization and violence in the Eastern Europe, since such a policy gives Kremlin an impression that even their most violent actions will not result in strong reactions from the Western countries. If so, Kremlin may not see any reason to abstain from aggression. Western silence provokes Kremlin to become further less democratic inside Russia, to strengthen its Cold War style rhetoric, and to continue its aggressive actions  towards Georgia and other neighbors (like Ukraine) which can potentially result in an armed conflict, as the Ganmukhuri incident has demonstrated in a very obvious way.
    Most of the Western countries do not seem likely to change their policy of not opposing Russia in its political, diplomatic and economic attacks on its neighbors. This may create an impression that Russian military attack will be tolerated in just the same way. This impression, in turn, would dramatically increase the chances of such an attack to occur. There is a hope that Russian policy towards its neighbors will not result in the catastrophic consequences, but considering the current Western attitude, such a hope does not have a sound logical base.