Aug 19, 2010

Azerbaijani expert: Abkhazia, South Ossetia remain Russia’s puppets

News.Az interviews Nasib Nasibli, member of the interparliamentary group of Azerbaijan-Georgia friendship, deputy of Milli Majlis.

How do you assess Russia’s recognition of ‘independence’ of two formations in Georgia upon completion of two years after those events?

This was the act of aggression, this war has become an act of intimidation and punishment of Georgia. At the same time this act was aimed at intimidating Azerbaijan. I think Russia has reached its goal to a certain extent. But as is known, few states recognize independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia today. Along with Russia, their “independence” was recognized only by Nicaragua, Venezuela and Nauru, an isle state in the Pacific. That is “the independence” of these formations along with Russia was recognized only by those insignificant countries that have no influence in the world society. Read more..

How can Russian benefit from this “recognition?

Naturally, the recognition of “independence” of Abkhazia and South Ossetia has reduced the authority of Russia in the world. Russia’s actions of this kind were not aimed at establishing peace in the region. Undoubtedly, this step was aimed at strengthening Russia’s hegemony in our region.  The world has again accepted Russia as an aggressor. The world has an opinion that Russia will never be changed for better and remain the same. Russia considered that by recognizing “independence” of Abkhazia and South Ossetia it will be able to overthrow Saakashvili. However, this did not happen since despite Saakashvili’s mistakes, the way of strategic development of the country he has chosen is correct. Georgia continues developing on the selected way. I think in this case Russia has lost more than Georgia. Certainly, the results of the five-day war for Georgia itself were also negative since another state recognize separatist regimes in its territory. This is a loss for Georgia.

Do Abkhazia and North Ossetia benefit from their recognition by Russia?

Certainly, this recognition has become successful for those who have chosen the separatist way of development. Anyway, despite the formality of this affair, their independence was recognized. But, at the same time, Abkhazia and South Ossetia have turned into the poppet regimes of Russia. Naturally, if you ask them, they will say that recognition of “independence” of Abkhazia and South Ossetia by Russia is a historical event.

Which influence did the “recognition” of “independence” of Abkhazia and South Ossetia had on other separatist regimes?

They have welcomed the recognition of “independence” of Abkhazia and South Ossetia by Russia. The separatist regimes in Nagorno Karabakh and Transdniestria even did not try to conceal their joy. They believed that this precedent can also be applied to them but no such double standards were applied. The world community did not take these intentions for serious. The interests and the power of states play a greater role in the world than such precedents. In other words, recognition of “independence” of Abkhazia and South Ossetia by Russia has not created the due precedent on recognition of separatist regimes.

Did the West show enough resistance to recognition of “independence” of Abkhazia and South Ossetia by Russia?

Certainly, no. If you ask Georgian politicians about it, they will also say no, but if you ask Russian politicians, they will certainly said that the West tried much but could not achieve anything. I think the West could have taken more determined steps in those tragic days of 2008. Georgia itself expected this step from the West. On the whole, the region expected the West to avert Russia’s actions of this kind. The West was expected to take adequate measures against Russia. The West could have been more determined in protection of the country which declared integration with the European area and NATO its strategic goal.