Background on the Russo-Georgian Conflict


In 1991, after the Fall of the Soviet Union, as we witness Georgian independence,  secessionist conflicts emerge almost immediately in Abkhazia (1992-1993).

Indeed, separatist movements in Abkhazia and South Ossetia began to flourish and were heavily supported by Russia, specifically by federal subjects near the Caucasus region. This was due to the fact that some people groups from neighbouring Russian provinces were more similar ethnically with these minorities in Georgia. Tensions quickly escalate over the years.

This leads to 2008; after years of tensions and feeling of disconnection between ethnic Georgians and minorities such as Abkhazian and Ossetian people, Russia accuses Georgia of “Aggression against Ossetians”, and proceeds to launch a full-scale land, air and sea invasion of Georgia, referring to it as a “peace enforcement”.

In August of 2008, Russia unilaterally recognizes Abkhazia and South Ossetia as Independent and declare them as autonomous republics, however, this is still to this day not recognized by most member states of the United Nations. This crisis has had, to this day, a huge Humanitarian Impact, with tens of thousands of people displaced.

Accordingly, since the 2008 war, there have been no diplomatic relations between Moscow and Tbilisi, no flights between the two countries, and a hard border at the Caucasus Mountains. Despite not being recognized as legitimate entities by most, the Georgian government has had no control over the two self-proclaimed republics since that time, with both of these entities being heavily supported (and to some extent controlled) by Russia.

Overall, South Ossetia and Abkhazia are only recognized as of 2022 by Russia, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Nauru, and Syria.

Over the years, the country of Georgia has experienced big migration waves across its territory due to the War, mainly from the autonomous republics to Tbilisi and other parts of Georgia proper, where ethnic Georgians do not feel threatened; especially following the attempt of ethnic Georgian cleansing in Abkhazia. and Sout Ossetia.

What is interesting to point out after this whole situation is that Russia, although heavily criticized by governments and media across the world at the time, got out of this situation almost intact, with barely any substantial sanctions or long-lasting ones.

Background on the Russo-Ukrainian Invasion

History of Ukraine

When considering the war with Russia, it is important to consider the history of Ukraine. This will help us to understand why Russia considers their territory as rightfully theirs.

The name ‘Ukraine’ comes from the old Slavic term for ‘Borderland’ which was Ukraina. And the land has been home to the Slavic people since the middle ages, and it was contested for around 600 years. The Ukrainian people were ruled by many external powers such as the Polish-Lithuania Common-Wealth, the Austrian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, and the Tsardom of Russia. After briefly becoming the Cossack Empire of Central Ukraine in the 17th century, Ukraine was partitioned by  Russia and Poland, before being completely absorbed by the latter as part of the 1654 Pereiaslav Agreement.

Ukrainian nationalism began in the 19th century in Galicia, a western area of modern-day Ukraine, then owned by Austro-Hungary. This in turn lead to the formation of the Ukrainian People’s Republic in 1919 following the Russian Revolution. However, this new state was forcibly reconstituted into the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic as a founding member of the Soviet Union. During the early period of the USSR, Ukrainians as well as other Soviet citizens, suffered from horrific famine including the Holodomor (terror famine) in which 3.9 million Ukrainians died.  

Ukraine was finally united under its modern day borders in 1939 when it’s western regions were annexed from Poland by the USSR as part of the Warsaw Pact with Nazi Germany. It became the most populous Soviet Nation outside of Russia.

Modern Ukraine

Ukraine regained independence in 1991 following the dissolution of the USSR. 300,000 Ukrainians organized a human chain for Ukrainian independence between Kyiv and Lviv, in memory of the 1919 unification of the Ukrainian People’s Republic and the West Ukrainian National Republic.

Since independence in 1991, Ukraine has been governed as a unitary republic, and declared itself a  neutral state. It did however form a limited military partnership with Russia and other members of the Commonwealth of Independent States, as well as establish a partnership with NATO in 1994. Additionally, Ukraine became a member of the United Nation, the Council of Europe, and the Organization for Security and Co-Operation.  

Despite these western alliances and partnerships, Ukraine is one of the poorest countries in Europe, and suffers from widespread corruption, having lost 60% of GDP between 1991 and 1999.

2014 Conflict

In 2013 the Euromaidan protests began in Kyiv and spread across the nation. They were protesting the government’s decision not to sign the EU-Ukraine Association agreement, instead choosing closer relations with Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union. This was due to Russian pressure, despite Ukrainian parliament overwhelmingly approving the agreement. These protests lead to  the Revolution of Dignity (the Maidan Revolution)  in February 2014, which saw the ousting of President Viktor Yanukovych.

This lead to the invasion and annexation of Crimea. On February 23rd, there were pro-Russian demonstrations in the Crimean city of Sevastopol, and on the 27th, masked Russian troops without insignia took over the Supreme Council of Crimea as well as other strategic points on the peninsula. This was swiftly followed by the installation of a pro-Russian Sergey Aksyonov government.

A Crimean Status referendum was held, which saw 96.77% vote to join the Russian Federation. This vote was hugely disputed internationally, with a UN General Assembly voting 100 to 11 to declare the referendum invalid, and confirmed Ukraine’s territorial integrity.

The annexation of Crimea was however a precursor for the war in Donbas in March 2014. This occurred in the area encompassing the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts. Separatists took control of large areas in the region, using a hybrid approach of  both regular and irregular troops, the spread of disinformation, as well as conventional military support.

A joint EU, Russia, Ukraine and US Diplomatic Statement known as the 2014 Geneva Act requested all unlawful militias lay down their weapons, to vacated seized buildings. This was successful in achieving more autonomy for Ukraine’s eastern regions.

Inter-war period

In May 2014, the pro-western Petro Poroshenko won the presidential election, and later in the year he ratified the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement, setting 2020 as the target for EU Membership application. Additionally, in February 2015 Poroshenko negotiated the Minsk Protocol, which was an official ceasefire that gave Ukraine control of their Russian border and ensured the withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukrainian territory.

This was the start of what was supposed to be the gradual integration of Ukraine with the EU and NATO. In 2016 Ukraine joined the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area with EU, and 2017 the EU approved visa—free travel in the Schengen area for Ukrainian citizens.

2022 Russian Invasion of Ukraine

In late 2021 Russia began to amass 190,000 troops by the Ukrainian’s northern and eastern borders.

Shortly before invasion, Putin televised irredentist views, questioned Ukrainian statehood and falsely-accused the government of being neo-Nazis who persecuted ethnic-Russian minorities. On February 21st, Putin officially recognises the Donetsk People’s Republic and the Luhansk People’s Republic as sovereign states.  He accused NATO of expanding eastward since 2000, which NATO denied, in turn accusing Russia of intending to invade Ukraine. Russia denied this until February 23rd.

On February 24th, Russia invades Ukraine via ground assault and aerial bombardment. This leads to Ukraine applying for EU membership 4 days later, who agree to supply $540m worth of military supplies.

As of 5th of May, there have been 5.7m refugees have fled Ukraine, at least 3,200 civilians have been killed, and there is no end in sight.

Why?

Putin claims that his motivation is to “de-nazify and demilitarise Ukraine” and to ensure Ukraine’s neutral status, and claims he was protecting people subjected to 8 years of bullying and genocide. However, in reality he believes Ukraine’s territory to be Russian, he’s intimidated by NATO expansion, and he wants Ukraine’s resources and strategic positioning.

Ukraine and Georgia: The Parallels

Russia’s role: Political objectives  

  • Driven by political objectives rather than material security  
  • 2007 Munich Security Conference:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTvswwU5Eco
    • Putin insisted on the urgent need to counter NATO’s further eastward expansion  to protect his political objectives 

Russia’s Role: Regime Survival 

Before Putin’s invasion, both countries had significant economic  development and  democratic  contagion -> Putin’s fear of regime survival 

Does Ukraine and Georgia have the potential now to survive without a Russian alliance system? 

 

Georgia’s economic growth averaged 10.5% per year between 2005 and 2007 (right)

In 2021, right  before the Ukraine invasion, Ukrainian GDP expanded 5.9% at the end of  the year (right)

 

America’s Role: The same for Ukraine and Georgia 

  • The US ignoring warnings from Russia and Western policy experts  
    • George W. Bush  + Georgia and Ukraine = potential valued US political and military allies 
    • Bush urged  NATO in 2008 to admit Ukraine and Georgia -> Further NATO expansion beyond the already admitted European countries would pose a threat to  Russian national interest
  • French and German wariness delayed Ukraine and Georgian admittance  -> the Nato  summit affirmed that both countries would eventually achieve that status …  

America’s Role: Similar Patterns?

  • However, since the 2008 NATO summit in Bucharest, neither Georgia nor Ukraine  succeeded in securing a  NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP) -> Unlikely for them to  join in the foreseeable future  … -> Putin invades

Overall similarities: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KQDn-oFStw

Introduction

sbeeckmans on

Hi Everyone!

We are Vassili Boletsis, Joshua Day, Luca Hemsen, Aniqah Nashiat and Simon Beeckmans and here is our website/multimedia project:

Comparing the Russo-Georgian and Russo-Ukrainian Conflicts: Has History Repeated Itself?

In this project, we will explore the Russo-Georgian conflict of 2008 and analyze the parallels between this conflict and the Russo-Ukrainian conflict that continues to ensue.  The actors at play are the overbearing hegemonic powers — Russia and the United States — and the country of Georgia.  The project will prioritize the historical context and background of the conflict as much as it seeks to reveal the devastating effects of the invasion, which occurred over the course of 12 days.  This involves discussing the tensions and cleavages in the complex relationship between Russia and Georgia, as well as what role the NATO and EU expansion played.  We seek to expose the true intentions of these actors, and in doing so we will ask ourselves: What are Vladimir Putin’s intentions in acting so brutally? Why is the U.S. so keen on making a western bulwark out of these eastern European countries in the Russian orbit? What does the future hold for nations such as Georgia and Ukraine? And finally, what did and did not learn from these interventions?

Georgia and Ukraine: Reaction and Resolution of the Conflict

First, the International Community is essential for the resolution of conflicts in these regions. In August 2008, the absence of collective sanctions forced Georgia to quickly come to the negotiating table. On August 16, a peace agreement was signed between Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. On August 26, Russia recognized the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. In unison with the West, US President George W. Bush called on the Kremlin to “reconsider this irresponsible decision” but this was not followed by any concrete measures. Conversely, countries around the world reacted strongly to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in order to isolate Putin on the international scene: on February 27, in a joint action, the European Union, the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada announced that they would prevent the Russian Federation’s Central Bank from using its foreign assets.

Therefore, Russia is being challenged, but that is not enough to make Putin back down. Russia was already under sanctions since the annexation of Crimea in 2014. However, it is not impossible that the severity of the new sanctions will force Moscow to seek a negotiated solution. If a world war were to break out, the imbalance would be stark between, potentially, Nato forces and Moscow’s troops. It will surely not be able to assert its power to the end as it did in Georgia because the international community does not seem to want to let go. 

.

What future for the war in Ukraine? Conclusions from Georgia and new elements

A few days ago, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned NATO and the United States of the “serious” and “real” danger of a third world war. Knowing this, Ukraine and its partners must add diplomatic levers to the sanctions. That is why, in an interview with ABC on 7 March, Ukrainian President Zelensky quickly said he was ready for a “compromise” on the status of the separatist territories in eastern Ukraine. He also said that he tempered his position on NATO. In response, Russia has also called for the withdrawal of Nato troops from Romania and Bulgaria and an end to Western military cooperation with Ukraine. As in Georgia, it seems that the solution must involve consideration of Russia’s interests, because Russia doesn’t seem ready to back down.

Nevertheless, it is also worth asking whether harsher sanctions should be applied. For example, the dependence of several EU member states on Russian hydrocarbons prevents the organization from agreeing on a collective embargo over one of Moscow’s main sources of income.

Finally, the case of war crimes, mainly committed by the Russian armed forces, must also be addressed. For several weeks now, NGOs have been deploring atrocities, executions of civilians and rapes committed by the russian army. In order to ensure a lasting resolution to the conflict, it will be essential to collect the testimonies and bring the perpetrators to a court.

Holding the West Accountable: Why We Must Consider NATO and the EU’s Role

To preface, it is important not to undermine Russia’s role in these invasions, and the Russian government should be condemned globally for their acts of inhumane violence and war crimes. 

That said, it is important to acknowledge what role the expansionist efforts of the West play in these wars.  The stage is set at the dissolution of the Soviet Union when Russia and NATO made an agreement for NATO expansion not to reign over the nations of eastern Europe that bordered Russia.  This policy of neutrality for these eastern nations was broken however in 1996 under the Clinton administration when the United States led the charge of recruiting Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary into NATO.  The involvement of these three countries were not enough to provoke a response from Russia however the tensions did rise with the recruitment of Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, and Slovakia.

In his lecture at Yale University, Vladimir Pozner noted the Russian attitude towards the United States under Vladimir Putin in the early 2000s.  There was never an antagonization of Americans during this period — in fact, there was a desire to develop a sort of partnership between Russia and the United States.  This attitude radiated throughout the population of Russia and in the Russian government and was exemplified by Putin’s sympathy towards the United States after the 9/11 tragedy.  Putin went as far as to aid the Bush administration in Afghanistan.  His diplomacy with the West stretched as far as efforts to join NATO and the European Union during this period, however he was denied in numerous instances.

Vladimir Pozner – Yale University Lecture – 2018

NATO expansionist efforts foreshadowed a desire to involve Ukraine and Georgia, and eventually made the motion official in the 2008 Bucharest Summit when NATO announced that these two nations would eventually become a part of NATO.  Putin noticed these efforts and in his speech in Munich in 2007, and questioned who this NATO expansion was against.  

The decision to include Georgia and Ukraine is what Dr. John J. Mearsheimer refers to as the West’s efforts to forge a western bulwark out of these two nations in the Russian orbit.  Dr. Mearsheimer, along with other scholars and journalists such as Mr. Pozner label NATO’s efforts as neo-liberal expansion into Eastern Europe.  This expansion to Georgia and Ukraine proved to be an existential crisis to Russia, and as characterized by their efforts to invade both nations.

Professor John J. Mearsheimer –  Chicago University Lecture – 2015

 

It was made unequivocally clear by Russia prior to their invasion of Georgia in 2008 that this expansion was an existential threat, and Mearsheimer characterizes the Russian response as preferring the destruction of the military and government of these nations as opposed to conceding them to NATO.  

This is where the parallels between the two invasions align: the move for Russia to invade these nations was purely strategic in effort not to allow their recruitment into NATO.  It is difficult to conclude that misconceptions such as the desire for Putin to create a “better Russia” are credible since there is not substantial evidence to support this.

The difference between both wars is that the West did not support Georgia as much as they are now with Ukraine, and in a way they abandoned Georgia.  The West continues to supply Ukraine with weapons and intelligence in this war in order to stand against Russia however refuses to fight alongside them.  This is where Dr. Mearsheimer says that it seems the West will supply Ukraine in this war until “the last Ukrainian.”  

While it is true that Russia’s foreign policy behaves hegemonically, we must consider, is this war worth the countless lives lost by the Ukrainian population?  There are those like Dr. Mearsheimer and Mr. Pozner that suggest that it is within Ukraine’s best interest to abandon the efforts of joining NATO, and maintain their policy of neutrality for the sake of their people.  To put an American’s view into perspective, what would the United States say if Russia were to declare an alliance with Mexico?  What type of reaction would that foster from the United States?

The only truth that remains definite is that these wars are unjust and have taken a criminal amount of lives.  The acts of war crime and inhumanity demonstrated by Vladimir Putin’s Russia are to be condemned globally, and the West should hold itself accountable for its participation as well.