Interview of the Parliament Chairperson to Civil Georgia
On January 28, 2003 Chairperson of the Parliament Nino Burjanadze found time for a quick interview for Civil Georgia readers during the break of the heated parliamentary session. Certainly, most of our questions related to the recent visit of the Georgian MP delegation to Russia, and Chairperson’s vision of the future of Russo-Georgian relations.
Nino Burjanadze said improving Russo-Georgian relations should be the number one priority for Georgia, while Georgian politicians should not forget that this issue only secondary or even tertiary to their Russian counterparts. Burjanadze said she sees flaws in actions of both Georgian and Russian leadership and that the lack of communication between the sides is the main obstacle for the progress in two countries’ relations.
Chairperson also said the relations with Russia would improve if certain preconditions are met on Abkhazia, specifically regarding the mandate of the peacekeepers.
In relation of the Georgian political landscape on the eve of the parliamentary elections, Nino Burjanadze noted that there is a possibility of instability, calling for more responsible stance of the political parties. She also stated she has not yet decided to join any of the political parties to run for the elections.
Q: On January 20-24 you headed the Georgian Parliamentary delegation in its difficult negotiations in Moscow. Having met the key representatives of Russia’s executive and legislative governments, what are the latest trends in attitudes of Russia’s executive leadership towards Georgia?
A: Talks with the Russian executive government were much more positive than negotiations in the State Duma Council [lower chamber of Parliament], where radical and strict statements towards Georgia sound more frequently.
I did not see much of a radical attitude in the executive branch. Russian executives stated that everything should be done to improve our relations. But it is hard to say how sincere these statements were.
However, I believe there are people in the Russian leadership, who realize that Russian-Georgian relations cannot continue like this any more. They understand that it is not in Russia’s interest to have Georgia as a weak and troubled neighbor. Such attitude was quite apparent.
Of course there are a number of issues on which Russians are not willing to compromise. For instance the military bases issue. The Russian side argues that it will require 11 years to close them down, while we believe that 3 years will be more than enough.
I am sure, nevertheless, that all problems can be solved, but this will require serious and deep dialogue between the sides. Of course there will be issues, regarding which our positions will remain very different, but there are many other problems that can be negotiated to defuse tensions.
Today unsolved problems and difficulties are in every aspect and field of Georgian-Russian relations. We need active contacts between Tbilisi and Moscow on every painful issue.
I think that my visit to Moscow might bring some positive results in this regard. However, of course it would not be right to say that this single visit would solve all problems. Real results of my visit will become visible as the time passes I think.
Tensions that exist between Georgia and Russia at present can be explained by strong influence of people with imperialistic philosophy in Russian political circles. These people believe that they can talk with Georgia a language of force. But this definitely will not lead us to the progress.
Uncoordinated steps of the Georgian government are hindering settlement of Georgian-Russian relations as well. We have not decided what our priorities are, what are the issues in which Georgia would cooperate with Russia and what are the issues in which we will not make any compromise.
For us harmonization of relations with Russia is the number one priority, because Russia can and does create many serious problems to us.
At the same time, relations with Georgia are not so important to Russia. For many Russian politicians, who met and listened to us, relations with Georgia are secondary or even tertiary issues.
That is why we have to keep active contacts with Russian leaders and remind them our claims and requests constantly. But we are not doing so. You can ask any of our ministers how many times they have been to Russia during the last two or three years. Then ask them how many other countries have they visited in the same period.
Of course I do not mean that we should not go anywhere except then Russia. Western priorities and visits to Strasbourg, Brussels, Washington are also extremely important for us. But this does not mean that we should not visit Moscow any more. I have to underline once again that it is necessary to have active dialogue with Russia.
Q: What should be Georgia’s position regarding Russian peacekeepers in the Abkhazian conflict zone? The Georgian Government has been repeatedly accusing them of, as a minimum, inefficiency.
A: I am sure that the Abkhazian conflict is and will remain a core issue in Georgian-Russian relations. If Russia makes concrete and positive steps towards resolution of the conflict, relations between the two countries will also start to improve rapidly and I have told this to many politicians in Moscow.
Concerning the Russian peacekeeping forces, three conditions have to be matched to extend their mandate.
These conditions are: expansion of the security zone to include Gali region, so that IDP would be able to return at least to Gali; secondly, distribution of Russian passports among Abkhazia’s residents must stop. By the way, the Russian executive government members promised me, that they would stop granting Russian citizenship in Abkhazia. And the third condition is to stop railway communications between Russia and Abkhazia, which were restored by Moscow deliberately, without consent of the Georgian side. This was yet another demonstration of Russia’s aggressive approach to Georgian issues.
If all these three conditions are met, I do not see a reason why should not we extend the mandate of the Russian peacekeepers. Members of our Parliament also are not opposed to such approach. Although they voted for removal of the Russian peacekeeping forces from Abkhazia, I do not think that they would object extension of the mandate if the three conditions were fully met.
Nevertheless, statistics show that this mandate has been ineffective so far. Since 1994, when the peacekeeping forces were deployed, 1700 civilians were killed in the security area, controlled by the Russian peacekeepers.
Q: What is your vision of Georgian state’s territorial arrangement in the future? What would be Abkhazia’s place in such system?
A: This issue is directly linked with the Abkhazian conflict resolution problem. We need to know what our system would be, to propose relevant status to the Abkhaz side within the Georgian state.
Generally I agree with the federal system, followed by creation of the two-chamber parliament. I think this would be a great step forward.
We are ready to provide Abkhazia with the widest autonomy model known to the world, so that this nation [Abkhaz] could maintain their identity. The Georgian side is fully prepared for this, while the model is a subject of negotiations. We, Georgians and Abkhazians have to sit down [at the negotiation table] and decide how such model would fit into Georgian reality and Georgian-Abkhazian relations. We have to resolve all these questions only together with the Abkhaz side.
But problem is the Abkhazian position: they say “we have won the war, why should we give up anything now?” Such attitude leads to the dead end and kills even an attempt at negotiation.
I have told the Abkhazians many times that they did not win this war. Russia won and Georgians and Abkhazians have lost.
Q: During the local elections of 2002 confrontation between the parties peaked and many violations of the election procedure were registered. Such experience made the opposition parties to come up with idea of creation of a code of ethics, believing that this would facilitate normal conduct of the upcoming parliamentary elections. What is your opinion on this idea and do you think that there is a risk of destabilization in the country before the elections?
A: Indeed, if we look back at last year’s [local government] elections, threat of instability is very real before the new parliamentary elections [scheduled for autumn 2003].
I share concerns that many have about upcoming elections. It is very probable that some outside forces might use the situation to provoke disorder in the country.
The government must do everything to exclude such possibility. The political parties must not facilitate destabilization as well. The country’s interests must not be sacrificed for a party’s political goals.
Frankly speaking, I am skeptical about the code of ethics, signed by the opposition parties. Although I completely agree with ideas of the code, I do not think that anyone would follow it.
Q: Have you decided with which party will you cooperate during the elections?
A: No, not yet.
Related Story:
Nino Burjanadze, Waiting
