This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Eurasia Daily Monitor

September 11, 2009-Volume 6, Issue 166

U.N. GENERAL ASSEMBLY ADOPTS GEORGIAN RESOLUTION ON REFUGEES’
RETURN

by Vladimir Socor
On September 9 the United Nations General Assembly condemned the
"forced displacement" of the population from Georgia’s Abkhazia and
South Ossetia territories, strongly upheld the displaced populations’
right to return there, and defined these territories as parts of
Georgia.

Georgia had initiated the General Assembly’s resolution in the
framework of debate on "Protracted conflicts in the GUAM area and their
influence on international peace, security and development," an agenda
item that Azerbaijan and Georgia have actively promoted at the U.N. in
the last three years. The September 9 resolution is the first to address
this issue since Russia’s August 2008 invasion, which resulted in
another round of forced displacement, after that triggered by Russia’s
1993 military intervention in Georgia.

The resolution’s phrases "Abkhazia, Georgia and South Ossetia,
Georgia," "Georgia including Abkhazia and South Ossetia," and
"throughout Georgia," repeatedly underscore the international
recognition of Georgia’s territorial integrity as legally continuous
(notwithstanding its unilateral de-recognition by Russia since 2008).

The resolution registers "concern [over] forced demographic
changes resulting from the conflicts in Georgia," as well as the
"further forced displacement of civilians" in August 2008. It
"recognizes the right of return of all internally displaced persons and
refugees and their descendants, regardless of ethnicity, to their homes
throughout Georgia, including in Abkhazia and South Ossetia." It
"stresses the need to respect the property rights of all internally
displaced persons and refugees" and to "refrain from obtaining property
in violation of those rights" (this is an ongoing concern in Abkhazia in
particular, whereas Georgian villages in South Ossetia have in many
cases been simply destroyed). It "reaffirms the unacceptability of
forced demographic changes." And it "underlines the urgent need for
unimpeded access for humanitarian activities…in all conflict-affected
areas throughout Georgia."

On a practical level the resolution "underlines the need for the
development of a timetable to ensure a voluntary, safe, dignified and
unhindered return of all internally displaced persons and refugees
affected by the conflicts in Georgia to their homes;" and requests the
U.N. Secretary-General to submit to the General Assembly’s next session
a comprehensive report on this resolution’s implementation (Text in UNGA
document A/63/L.79).

The Assembly adopted this resolution by a recorded vote of
48–mostly Western countries–in favor, 19 against, and 78 abstentions.
Presenting the case for approval, Georgia’s Ambassador Alexander Lomaia
underscored how little progress had been made in helping Georgia’s
displaced persons return to their homes over the past 15 years.
Moreover, he noted, last year’s armed conflict and the new wave of
displacement gave ample cause for the General Assembly to take a
principled stand on this international legal and humanitarian issue.

The voting breakdown reflects some stable and some shifting
international alignments. The United States, all European Union
countries but one, all NATO countries but one, and all GUAM countries
but one, voted in favor. The exceptions are NATO member Turkey, E.U.
member Cyprus, and GUAM member Moldova, all of which abstained. Turkey’s
AKP government apparently bowed to its current "strategic partnership"
with Russia, in preference to Turkey’s traditional strategic partnership
with Georgia. The caretaker Moldovan government toed outgoing President
Vladimir Voronin’s rapprochement with Moscow. And Cyprus–itself
interested in upholding the principles of territorial integrity and
reversal of ethnic cleansing–may have allowed its own non-transparent
financial ties with Moscow to influence its foreign policy. For their
part, the U.S.-protected governments of Afghanistan and of Iraq ducked
the vote by registering as absent (UNGA, 63rd session, Status of
Internally Displaced Persons resolution, plenary meeting 104, record of
debate September 9).

Russia tried hard to resist the resolution’s adoption, but only
managed to delay it by several weeks. In a last-ditch attempt Russia
raised a procedural issue in proposing that the General Assembly’s
debate be discontinued and no vote be taken. This no-action motion lost
when sixty-four countries voted against it — a setback of unusual
proportions for Russia in this forum. Moscow then brought up 17
amendments to the draft resolution, but did not manage to affect its
content. Russia’s permanent representative to the U.N., Vitaly Churkin,
and the ministry of foreign affairs in Moscow took the position that the
resolution was "politicized." This is Moscow’s standard rejection
formula when legal issues inconvenient to itself are actually involved.
The Russian side also warned that the resolution’s adoption would
jeopardize the ongoing Geneva talks on stability and security and
undermine "confidence-building" — an implausible warning since the
talks and "confidence" measures are deadlocked in any case by Russia
itself (Interfax, RIA Novosti, September 10).

Moscow will undoubtedly continue stalling for as long as it can
the return of the internally displaced persons and refugees it has
itself created through its 1993 and 2008 military operations. The
September 9 resolution, inevitably, stops short of naming Russia as the
responsible party and also refrains from using the term ethnic
cleansing. Nevertheless, this resolution marks at least a conceptual
breakthrough toward acknowledging the legal grounds for rectifying this
situation.

The document defeats Moscow’s political and legal goal to have the
"new realities" — occupation/annexation and ethnic cleansing of
Abkhazia and South Ossetia –acknowledged even de facto at an
international level. On the contrary, the resolution upholds Georgia’s
legal title to its territorial integrity as well as the right of
refugees to return home and their right to their property there. The
resolution lays the basis for a legal and political commitment to these
principles and it introduces a reporting mechanism that can lead to
practical actions to that effect.

–Vladimir Socor