SUKHUMI’S ANTI-GEORGIAN STANCE JEOPARDIZES INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC INITIATIVES
By Zaal Anjaparidze

Eurasia Daily Monitor, DC
July 10 2006

Monday, July 10, 2006

The promising movement toward reopening railways to link Russia,
Georgia, and Armenia via Georgia’s breakaway Abkhazia region is now
in jeopardy. The $300 million project to restore the Abkhaz section of
the Russo-Georgian railway after it was cut in 1992-93 appears to have
stumbled over the mutual animosities between the Georgians and Abkhaz.

The first hints that the issue was moving toward resolution began
last summer, when Tbilisi backed away from its initial tough
stance regarding restoration of the rail link (see EDM, June 17,
2005). Georgian officials and specialists subsequently participated
in talks about the rehabilitation of the Abkhaz section of the rail
link and onsite technical inspections.

Last December EU officials visited Sukhumi, the Abkhaz capital, and
offered Abkhazia an impressive package of economic aid if it toned
down its secessionist agenda (see EDM, December 12, 2005). Some
Georgian officials and pundits believed that reopening the railway
could become an organic part of a large, Western-sponsored plan
of economic rehabilitation for post-war Abkhazia, and help move
the region toward eventual reintegration into the Georgian social,
economic, and political space.

On January 20, leaders of Georgian, Armenian, and Russian railway
companies signed a protocol on establishing an international consortium
to eventually open the rail link between Ingiri (Georgia) and Veseloe
(Russia). The document appealed to the Abkhaz leadership to join
the cause.

On May 4 in Moscow, officials from Georgia, Armenia, Russia, and
Abkhazia signed a protocol establishing the Black Sea Railways
consortium. The consortium, set up as an open joint-stock company,
must rebuild the Abkhaz section of the railway. Andrei Turukin,
Abkhazia’s representative in Russia for railway issues, said that
members would discuss where to register the consortium during its
next meeting, scheduled for late July in Tbilisi, and underlined that
"the Abkhaz side was represented as a full-pledged party."

Some Georgian pundits and officials assessed this remark as one more
step facilitating the acknowledgement of Abkhazia’s independence.

Symptomatically, prior to the Moscow talks on the consortium,
Sergei Bagapsh, the self-styled "president" of Abkhazia, told Abkhaz
parliamentarians that Sukhumi must agree to resume railway traffic,
which requires making Abkhazia an independent member of the project. He
also declared that no political demands should be put forward as a
precondition for the project (Apsnypress, Regnum, April 26).

Georgian officials connected with the consortium initiative are
tight-lipped about the political and economic details of the
deal. Irakli Ezugbaya, director of Georgia’s state-run Railway
Company and the chief Georgian negotiator at the Moscow talks, told
Georgian lawmakers last December that a political decision about
the consortium is still pending (Civil Georgia, Regnum, Apsnypress,
May 5; Akhali Taoba, June 3). Parliamentarian Shota Malashkhia,
chair of the Commission for Territorial Integrity, expressed doubts
about the expediency of the consortium due to the remaining legal
questions. Meanwhile, according to a poll commissioned this April by
the International Republican Institute, 75% of the 1,500 Georgians
polled thought the restoration of the railway would "suit Georgian
national interests" (, Civil Georgia, May 30).

But now, as Sukhumi appears to be stepping up its secessionist agenda,
the Georgian government is reconsidering whether to give a green light
to the railway project. Kakha Bendukidze, Georgian state minister
for economic reforms, responded to reports from Russian and Abkhaz
sources about the Abkhaz separatists’ intention to rehabilitate the
railway on their own. He said that the rehabilitation of the railway
"is an issue of goodwill and politics," and it is up to the Georgian
government to decide whether to use the railway or not" (Kavkaz Press,
June 26).

The Abkhaz increasingly regard the railway project as a political
trap set by Georgia. Meanwhile, the Abkhaz also likely fear excessive
integration into Russia, which the railway project might entail and
prefer to take a "wait-and-see" attitude. There have been reports that
Russia is pressing Sukhumi to reopen the railway link (Alia, June
27), while a July 4 statement by the Abkhaz government states that
Abkhazia will contribute to the project only if it serves Sukhumi’s
interests. (Apsnypress, July 4).

The statement follows a June 27 roundtable by the Forum of Abkhaz
People’s Unity, which includes opposition parties and public
movements. Forum participants noted that Abkhazia should not join
international consortiums until the international community recognizes
its independence. They said that the railway consortium aligns
with Russia’s geopolitical interests, while neglecting Abkhazia’s
interests. The Forum particularly disliked the wording of the May
4 protocol that, they argued, considers the Abkhaz railway to be a
"portion" of the other [Georgian] railway route. Some opposition
parliamentarians suggested that Abkhazia should join the consortium
only after international recognition of its independence. A Forum
statement issued on June 30 stressed that the international railway
consortium poses a threat to Abkhazia’s sovereignty. The influential
Abkhaz public-political movement Aidgilara (Unity), which is linked to
the government, recently called on Bagapsh "to disavow" the protocol
on creating an international consortium on the issue. On July 3 still
more Abkhaz civic groups came out against the railway consortium
(Apsnypress, July 7).

Bagapsh, who apart from security issues wants to discuss with Georgian
President Mikheil Saakashvili (EDM, July 6) reopening closed air,
sea and rail routes with Abkhazia to relieve the region’s economic
blockade, downplayed the Forum’s concerns. He told a news conference
on June 29 that the project is beneficial for Abkhazia in an economic
sense and that Russia needs this strategic railway (Kavkaz Press,
Apsnypress, Civil Georgia, Regnum, June 28-30).

Although the Abkhaz government formally denounced the Forum’s
allegations as groundless and said that agreements regarding the
consortium are not legally binding, it seems that the Abkhaz government
is using the Forum to send a message to all stakeholders; to put them
on notice that they must accommodate Abkhaz interests.