Since its inception in 2008, in the immediate aftermath of the Russia-Georgia war, the EU Monitoring Mission has played a key role in ensuring stability and security around the occupied regions of Georgia – Abkhazia and the Tskhinvali region. Tasked with monitoring and facilitating dialogue, the Mission is one of the many tangible manifestations of the EU’s support for Georgia’s security and stability. Civil.ge had the privilege of speaking with Bettina Patricia Boughani, the new head of the EUMM.
Prior to her appointment as head of the EUMM, Ms. Boughani held various senior positions within the United Nations and the French Ministry of the Interior/Gendarmerie. Before that, she worked in peacekeeping in sensitive political and security contexts, including as Police Commissioner in MINUSMA (United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali).
We asked her views about the mission’s work and challenges it faces, the situation on the ground, the role of the civil society and the media in maintaining security and stability, and other issues.
Civil.ge: Madam Boughani, congratulations on your new role as the Head of the EUMM Mission in Georgia, and thank you for answering our questions. You were appointed Head of the EUMM in April of this year. The Mission has been operating almost since the end of the 2008 Russian-Georgian war. Can you tell our readers what your main goals are as Head of Mission and what you would like to achieve during your tenure?
Thank you for this opportunity. It’s a pleasure to discuss the work of the European Union Monitoring Mission and share our insights with your readers.
My main goals as the Head of the Mission of course revolve around our core mission mandate, which is to make sure the security situation in Georgia remains stable. I want to build on the 15-year legacy of our Mission and ensure that we continue to fulfill our vital role effectively and efficiently.
…My goal is to see that our work leads to concrete, meaningful improvements in the lives of the conflict-affected population. That’s why I place a strong emphasis on actively engaging with the local communities along the Administrative Boundary Lines (ABLs).
First and foremost, my goal is to see that our work leads to concrete, meaningful improvements in the lives of the conflict-affected population. That’s why I place a strong emphasis on actively engaging with the local communities along the Administrative Boundary Lines (ABLs). Our monitors talk to the local people to understand their needs and concerns. When it’s appropriate, we share this information with those who can provide help. Ultimately, my hope is that by the end of my tenure, we will have helped to improve the situation for those people who are still very much affected by the conflict.
When they [local residents] feel secure, they can go about their daily lives without fear or intimidation – cultivating their lands, caring for their animals, and visiting religious sites and relatives with confidence.
I also aim to enhance the sense of safety and security among the communities along the Administrative Boundary Lines by ensuring our 24/7 monitoring presence is maintained. Our monitors frequently hear from local residents that our patrols make them feel safer. When they feel secure, they can go about their daily lives without fear or intimidation – cultivating their lands, caring for their animals, and visiting religious sites and relatives with confidence.
Regarding the operation of our Mission, my focus is on ensuring everything runs smoothly. This means providing leadership and guidance to our dedicated team of international and Georgian staff. They are the ones on the ground, day in day out, responsible for monitoring and reporting on the security and humanitarian situation. Their work is the bedrock of our mission’s credibility and impact. Finally, I want to further reinforce the excellent cooperation that already exists within the EU family in Georgia.
Now that you have spent the first few months in Georgia, have you been able to study the situation more closely? What are your first observations? Is there anything that stands out? Anything you did not expect?
Since the day I took office, my primary focus has been to gain a thorough understanding of the security situation in Georgia and of the problems that people living close to the Administrative Boundary Lines face. I’ve achieved this by engaging in discussions with my team and holding meetings with a range of stakeholders, including government officials, local leaders, and representatives from international organisations. This approach has allowed me to gather diverse perspectives on the current security landscape and humanitarian situation. Equally invaluable have been the patrols I’ve undertaken alongside the dedicated teams from our three Field Offices. I made it a priority to get my boots on the ground as soon as possible and immerse myself in the work of our monitors, who patrol the Administrative Boundary Lines 24/7.
...Our mission is truly the eyes and ears on the ground regarding the security situation and can help improve the lives of these affected communities.
What impressed me most were the firsthand observations I made during those patrols. While I had an idea of what to expect, seeing the detrimental effects of “borderisation” activities on the lives and livelihoods of the local population left a significant impact on me. Speaking with local people about their daily challenges further underscored the extent of their situation. These experiences have strengthened my belief that our mission is truly the eyes and ears on the ground regarding the security situation and can help improve the lives of these affected communities.
While the key security threat for Georgia is the same as in 2008, the overall security situation in Europe, and especially its assessment of Russia’s role has changed significantly by 2024. How does this affect the security situation along the occupation line and within the occupied territories of Georgia? What do you see as the immediate and long-term risks?
In fact, the security situation in Georgia has not evolved in recent years. While security incidents were frequent in the immediate aftermath of the 2008 war, the risk of such incidents has now decreased. The broader security context in Europe, particularly due to Russia’s unjustified aggression against Ukraine, has however evolved significantly.
While the risk of incidents is lower, it’s important to note that the situation also remains volatile, and the presence of this conflict nearby adds an extra layer of complexity.
This changing landscape inevitably impacts the security situation along the Administrative Boundary Lines. While the risk of incidents is lower, it’s important to note that the situation also remains volatile, and the presence of this conflict nearby adds an extra layer of complexity.
In terms of immediate risks, the current stability along the Administrative Boundary Lines cannot be taken for granted, as the situation can change rapidly. It is crucial for all parties involved to act responsibly to prevent any incidents. Continuous meaningful engagement in our confidence-building mechanisms, such as the EUMM-managed Hotline and the Ergneti Incident Prevention and Response Mechanism (IPRM), is essential. These mechanisms facilitate communication between the parties, helping to prevent incidents and avoid escalations.
As a long-term risk, I would like to point out the growing sense of separation and isolation felt by the people in these breakaway regions from the rest of Georgia.
As a long-term risk, I would like to point out the growing sense of separation and isolation felt by the people in these breakaway regions from the rest of Georgia. This isn’t a new development; it’s been happening since the 2008 war, and I’ve seen it firsthand in the past couple of months. This deepening divide erodes social cohesion and fosters an environment where misunderstandings and mistrust can thrive. Over time, this isolation, particularly affecting the younger generations raised in these regions, can lead to a hardening of attitudes, making reconciliation and peaceful conflict resolution more challenging.
To address these risks, it is crucial to encourage initiatives that promote dialogue and people-to-people contacts that transcend political boundaries. In this regard I would like to highlight our Confidence Building Facility within EUMM. This section focuses on facilitating initiatives that connect people living on both sides of the ABL. The aim of these projects, which cover various topics such as the environment, culture, and support for vulnerable people, is to rebuild trust between communities that have been forcibly separated, despite having lived together in the past.
Although EUMM is mandated to operate throughout the territory of Georgia, it has been unable to do so due to access denial by the de-facto authorities in Tskhinvali and Sokhumi. Would you be working to ensure the EUMM access to Georgia’s occupied territories? What is your message to the de-facto authorities in Tskhinvali, Sokhumi, and the government of Russia in this regard?
Indeed, lack of access to the breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia remains the single biggest challenge of our Mission. I know for a fact that our patrols have a positive impact on the communities near the Administrative Boundary Lines. People have a greater sense of security and trust when we are around. And the risk of incidents and detentions is lower. As I mentioned before, local residents frequently share these sentiments with our monitors. And the surveys assessing our work echo the same findings.
Indeed, lack of access to the breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia remains the single biggest challenge of our Mission.
I really hope that Russian and de facto officials would recognise these realities, allowing the Mission to replicate this increased sense of the security on the other side of the Administrative Boundary Lines. In all possible forums we keep repeating that we are a civilian, unarmed and operationally impartial mission. There is a tremendous potential benefit from our presence on the other side of the Administrative Boundary Lines, in support of the people living in those areas.
Therefore, EUMM, EU Institutions and EU Member States continue to advocate with relevant stakeholders for unrestricted access to Abkhazia and South Ossetia, in line with the Mission’s mandate. As the Head of Mission, I also always attempt to explain to everybody the benefits of us having access to Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
The Russian occupying forces have frequently conducted illegal detentions of Georgian citizens both along the occupation line and inside the occupied territories. In addition, there have been cases of brutal killings of Georgian citizens, such as the killing of Tamaz Ginturi during an attempted illegal detention by the Russian occupying forces in November last year. What additional measures, if any, could the EUMM take to further strengthen its role in eradicating this practice?
Regrettably, detentions indeed continue to occur along both Administrative Boundary Lines. This leads not only to a tragic situation for the people involved, but also carries the potential to further escalate into larger-scale security incidents. Our constant presence along the Administrative Boundary Lines is crucial in deterring such incidents and maintaining stability. And during the meetings of the Ergneti IPRM, we continue to call on participants to discontinue the practice of detentions, together with our co-facilitator the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). At the same time, we advocate for the swift release and humane treatment of detainees. The EUMM-managed Hotline is also indispensable for handling detention cases, as it facilitates the exchange of crucial information about ongoing detentions. This includes identifying the detainee, providing updates about their trial, and coordinating the practicalities of their release. Though it may seem like a small action, this information is invaluable and greatly appreciated by the detainees’ relatives.
How do you assess the current situation when it comes to the problem of illegal “borderization” by the occupying forces?
“Borderization”, such as the installation of fences, barbed wire, observation cameras, and watchtowers, is an ongoing issue that severely impacts residents on both sides of the Administrative Boundary Lines. These restrictions limit their movement, making it difficult for people to stay connected with friends and family, look after their property, earn a livelihood, and ensure their children receive education in their own language. Along the South Ossetian Administrative Boundary Line, the situation is exacerbated by the closure of crossing points for the first twenty days of each month, further restricting freedom of movement.
Addressing these ongoing challenges is crucial, as freedom of movement restrictions deeply affect the daily lives of the local population. Helping these people return to a more normal life is a key priority for me and the mission. Our monitors are on the ground 24/7, engaging with residents to understand their needs. When appropriate, we relay this information to those who can provide assistance. Additionally, we leverage tools like the Incident Prevention and Response Mechanism (IPRM) and the EUMM-managed Hotline to find practical solutions that benefit the conflict-affected communities.
Georgia has recently faced harsh criticism from its Western partners, including the EU and its individual member states, for adopting the highly controversial law on foreign agents. Does this legislation or the resulting strain in relations between Georgia and the EU affect your work in any way, directly or indirectly? If so, how?
While we closely follow current developments, our mandate is strictly focused on the security situation near the Administrative Boundary Lines and requires us to always maintain operational impartiality.
Regardless of external circumstances, our objective remains steadfast: to contribute to stability in Georgia through our 24/7 monitoring presence, confidence-building initiatives, and informing EU policy.
Regardless of external circumstances, our objective remains steadfast: to contribute to stability in Georgia through our 24/7 monitoring presence, confidence-building initiatives, and informing EU policy. Of course, when the situation requires, we adapt our strategies and approaches as needed to continue to effectively fulfill this objective.
What confidence-building measures, including those focused on people-to-people trust, are you currently implementing as part of your mandate to build trust between the parties to the conflict? What are the differences in this respect when it comes to interaction with Tskhinvali vs. Sokhumi?
I have previously mentioned the Ergneti Incident Prevention and Response Mechanism (IPRM), which is facilitated by both EUMM and OSCE and brings together participants from Georgian, Russian, and de facto South Ossetian authorities on a regular basis. These meetings provide a platform for in-person exchanges on ‘borderization’ issues, freedom of movement, and detention cases along the South Ossetian Administrative Boundary Line (ABL). They have led to meaningful achievements, including detainee releases and cross-ABL cooperation on irrigation, fostering greater confidence and trust among participants.
The topics discussed over the Hotline include a wide range of issues, such as exchange of information on detentions, irrigation flows, needs for medical crossings, etc.
Connected to the IPRM is the EUMM-managed Hotline. It is a way to reduce tensions by phone: it allows the conflict parties to exchange information around the clock, seven days a week, whenever an issue or incident requires immediate attention. The topics discussed over the Hotline include a wide range of issues, such as exchange of information on detentions, irrigation flows, needs for medical crossings, etc. It plays a vital role in establishing a shared understanding of incidents and has frequently de-escalated tensions. The Hotline is activated approximately 2,500 times annually, with the number of activations increasing each year. Each activation represents an issue, incident, or problem being addressed and discussed.
Unfortunately, the main difference is that the IPRM for Abkhazia, known as the Gali IPRM, remains suspended. While the meetings are halted, I think they could be resumed at short notice if the parties involved agree to do so.
How do you see ordinary citizens, civil society organizations and the media contributing to the common goal of maintaining security and stability?
I strongly believe that ordinary citizens, civil society organisations, and the media play pivotal roles in our collective efforts to maintain security and stability in Georgia. Their contribution is invaluable in many ways, but let me address their contribution directly related to our mandate.
Civil society organizations act as vital partners in promoting dialogue and building trust between the communities.
Ordinary citizens living along the Administrative Boundary Lines are the backbone of our mission, as they provide invaluable insights into the local security and human rights situation on the ground. Their information helps guide and shape our work. Civil society organizations act as vital partners in promoting dialogue and building trust between the communities.
Finally, the media has a crucial role to report about the ongoing conflict in an ethical, independent and conflict-sensitive way. They can build bridges between divided communities – thereby contributing to reconciliation and conflict resolution. Together, these stakeholders form a robust network that strengthens our mission’s impact and reinforces our commitment to security and stability in Georgia.
*****
Thank you!
Thank you for having me. Didi madloba.
