South Ossetia and Abkhazia: Endorsing rights of self-determination or staging a comeback as superpower?

^{By Sai Wansai
Friday, 05 September, 2008}
 
While there has never been a clear, defined and accepted norms on secession of a non-state nation to break away from an existing nation-state, with the exception of UN decolonization process, quite a few theoretical approach on how such situation should be handled have been advanced.
 
The general principle suppose to be quite simple. If a dominant ethnic group in a multiethnic state, in anyway seek to harm, kill a number or portion of a minority ethnic group to assert its influence by force, instead of providing human security, rule of law and equality, the said ethnic group could opt for secession. This is generally seen within the bounds of rights of self-determination for non-state nations and minorities.
 
In practice, whether the implementation of humanitarian intervention to help free an oppressed people or ethnic group from the tyranny of dominant ethnic group depends on a variety of conditions. But mostly it would roughly fall into the two categories. One is the natural disintegration of central state power, which usually are made up of different peoples, republics or nations like former USSR or Yugoslavia and the other, a super or regional power exerting its will for geopolitical and economical advantages; like Indias invasion of former East Pakistan and consequent recognition of its statehood as Bangladesh, recognition of Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) only by Turkish government after its invasion and, recently, the West recognition of  Kosovo.
 
While the recognition of the break-away states from former USSR and Yugoslavia were relatively smooth and easy for the whole international community or UN, the Kosovo, with only 45 countries recognition,  and Russias sole endorsement of South Ossetia and Abkhazia are faced with lack of full-fledged, de facto recognition, which is most crucial for a nation to exist as an equal partner among international community.
 
It should also be noted that on 28 August, at the annual summit meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, or S.C.O., in Tajikistan, which also includes China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, Russia suffered a significant setback, when China along with four central Asian nations refused to endorse the invasion or recognition of the breakaway provinces from Georgia. To drive their clear message home, statement by the presidents of the member countries reaffirmed their commitment to efforts aimed at preserving the unity of a state and its territorial integrity .
 
Meanwhile, Russias close friends such as Belarus, Cuba and Venezuela have refused to toe the line and shied away from recognition of the breakaway provinces.
 
If we look at the hardship, which Taiwan is facing, in trying to exert its deserved place within international community,  stemming from non-recognition of UN as a member state, with all its economic success and well-entrenched democratic institution, we could realise how essential it is to be integrated and accepted as a full-fledged member within the mould of UN.
 
For all its bravado of protecting its citizenship and hindering genocide and subsequent recognition of  South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Russias real motive is none other than to flex its muscle and reclaim its superpower status, somewhat similar to its heyday of USSR.
 
While Russias comeback dream as a superpower is questionable, its worry of encirclement by NATO and American decision to place missile defenses in Russias neighbouring countries could be genuine. On top of that, the independence of Kosovo was thrust down Russias throat against its will, which is seen as a huge loss of dignity and humiliation.
 
Whatever the case, the whole point has much less to do with humanitarian intervention and rights of self-determination but more with the shoring up of Russias international posture. In other words, the Georgian conflict has been used as a convienent venue to declare its comeback as a superpower and the Georgian president, Mikheil Saakashvili was naive enough to walk into the trap of attacking South Ossetia.
 
Already speculations are rife and according to South Ossetian parliamentary speaker Znaur Gassiyev, it is only a matter of time before the two small breakaway territories will be absorbed within "several years" or earlier into Russia.

As could be seen, the notions of rights to self-determination and responsibility to protect or R2P, which cover among others, all non-state nations, oppressed peoples and minorities   are noble documents internationally endorsed. But the literal implementation of these norms with broad international consensus is still not in sight or rather sketchy. What we have been witnessing are selective endorsement of particular cases like Kosovo, Turkish Cyprus, South Ossetia, Abkhazia and the like, when the actual world situation is demanding for a set of norms and rules, which all international stakeholders could adhere, accept and process the rights of self-determination in an open, transparent and fair manner.

In end effect, there would be no other way around to tackle such aspiration, other than to formulate a set of recognition criteria of statehood, which all could identify with and live up to implement the said commitment. While large scale and continuous dismemberment of existing states is definitely not an ongoing trend, it would be wise to have something to fall back on for another eventuality like the cases of Kosovo, South Ossetia and Abkhazia. For failing to facilitate or regulate such urge or aspiration would mean the continuation of decision-making chaos in international political landscape.

But for the present, the Caucasus crisis and its ramification are pointing towards the renewed escalation of superpower rivalry and resumption of  Cold War scenario in a new setting, rather than the realisation of genuine humanitarian intervention as prescribed under the assumption of responsibility to protect mode - and rights of self-determination. In other words, the statehood aspiration of  South Ossetia and Abkhazia would definitely be a backburner or play a less important role than the Russias exertion of its superpower status to counter the the American, unipolar position, which it has so far enjoyed, following the disintegration of USSR in December 25, 1991.

# End

^{The author is the General Secretary of the exiled Shan Democratic Union - Editor}