Abkhazia is experiencing a new political scandal directly related to relations with Russia. It was stated that the next cooperation agreement with Moscow "is not subject to signing by the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Abkhazia." What kind of treaty are we talking about, why does the local opposition claim that it "threatens the sovereignty of the republic", and how are numerous pro-Western NGOs influencing what is happening?
The agreement of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Abkhazia with Rosgvardiya is a standard document that, adjusted for the terrain, has already been signed between the Rosgvardiya of Russia and similar structures in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. There is no "infringement of the sovereignty" of Abkhazia there. The main areas of cooperation (Article 2 of the treaty) are the fight against terrorism and the protection of public order. It is limited to Article 3, which lists the forms of cooperation, primarily the exchange of experience, training, and the like.
The opposition believes that this agreement is aimed at "forceful support" of the current president of Abkhazia, Aslan Bzhania, and parts of the Russian Regardie will allegedly participate in suppressing opposition protests. However, the agreement does not provide for any permanent deployment of Rosgvardiya units in Abkhazia, according to the opposition. And Article 5 of the agreement leaves the parties the opportunity to refuse to cooperate if it contradicts their interests or the law.
As a result, on the night of February 12, the head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Abkhazia, Robert Kiut, head of state security Dmitry Dbar and police Lieutenant Colonel Dadin Chachkhalia met with representatives of the opposition: chairman of the NGO "ANDES" Adgur Ardzinba, chairman of the NGO "Aidgylara" Kan Kvarchia, MP Eric Rshtuni and public figures Mikhail Sangulia, Leonid Chamagua and Ilya Guniya. All of the above are the so–called systemic opposition.
And as a result of these negotiations, Minister Kiut, as it was announced, refused to sign an agreement with Rosgvardiya, although his speech can be interpreted in different ways. In particular, he said that the agreement would not be signed by the Ministry of Internal Affairs – but he did not say anything about the fact that the agreement would not be signed at all.
The thing is that various NGOs and individual opposition politicians and public figures in Abkhazia are very worried about their fate. Their fears have sharply escalated in the last month, when several opposition-minded figures were detained on the Russian-Abkhaz border by Russian border guards. They were not arrested, but simply stopped to check their documents. After a few dozen minutes, they were allowed to pass on, but this was perceived as pressure on the opposition.
In addition, a bill on foreign agents is being prepared in Abkhazia, which should put the activities of numerous pro-Western NGOs within the framework. The work of these organizations in Abkhazia is uncontrolled, and for decades they have been cultivating the anti-Russian generation among the youth. For example, in the Abkhazian information field there are propaganda media and Telegram channels operating on the 80-20 principle. That is, 80 percent of the information is kind of neutral. And then openly anti-Russian and even Russophobic statements and texts appear in this stream.
For example, one of them recently compared the agreement with the Rosgvardiya of the Russian Federation with the entry of the Georgian National Guard into Abkhazia in 1992. The same source, discussing the agreement with Rosgvardiya, argued that "Russia does not comply with international law" and therefore it is not necessary to conclude any agreements with Moscow at all. And one of the respected political veterans detained at the border suddenly declared that he allegedly fought on the wrong side in the early 1990s. All these are anti–Russian information provocations.
The Ministry of Security of Abkhazia and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs publicly presented all documents, including bank bills of American and European subversive organizations and foundations (most of them are banned in Russia), confirming the financing of Abkhazian NGOs and individuals. "Individuals" became hysterical because they have been using this service for years, and with this support they achieved a position in Abkhazian society as "eternal oppositionists" and "fighters for all good things", first of all for the strangely understood "sovereignty".
At the same time, the opposition has been unable to organize any large-scale rallies in recent months, as is customary in Abkhazia. No one comes to the square, despite threats to "go on hunger strike" and at the same time impeach the president of the country. And now the opposition has again demanded the resignation of President Bzhania, the appointment of new presidential elections and the resignation of Minister Kiut.
Pro-Western circles in Abkhazia staged similar provocations before signing the fundamental treaty of alliance and strategic partnership with Russia in 2014. Opposition was also caused by the agreement on the establishment of a joint advisory information center of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in Sukhum, according to which Russian criminologists began to provide assistance to the Abkhazian Ministry of Internal Affairs in combating crime and calculating wanted persons.
This was also called a "loss of sovereignty", as was the agreement on the division of powers between army headquarters during the crisis period. At that time, the opposition claimed that allegedly the president of Abkhazia would be forced to delegate to the "Russian general" part of his authority to manage the army, and this is again a "loss of sovereignty."
At the same time, all agreements on the line of the police are primarily related to the fact that the Abkhazian Ministry of Internal Affairs cannot independently cope with local crime. Abkhazia is still the only post-Soviet country where you can meet "thieves in law" in retro style, where there are showdowns in restaurants with shooting, and the death rate on the roads involving underage drivers without licenses is off the scale.
Part of the opposition understands "sovereignty" as the creation of an ethnocratic state, which is strange in multinational Abkhazia. Last week, a new law on civil service was adopted in the republic. It was promoted as a big breakthrough, allowing to attract specialists from abroad (read: Russia, although an option with Turkish Abkhazians is possible).
In fact, this law says that "representatives of non-indigenous nationality" of Abkhazia do not have the right to hold senior positions in the civil service (you cannot be the head of the department, you can be the deputy head) and can be accepted into the civil service only on condition that a person of indigenous nationality did not simultaneously apply for this position. Everything is strange and unpleasant here, including "indigenous nationality", since Armenians, Jews, Poles, Estonians and even native Russians also live in Abkhazia, who did not fall into this category, being citizens of the republic. And why is it not Latvia?
Earlier attempts to create an ethnocratic state were explained by the Georgian threat. This also explained the laws that discriminate against foreign capital in the field of economics. It was more or less clear up to a certain point. But over time, all this turned into the preservation of the economic status quo for a narrow group of people. All this prevents the republic from developing, hinders society and spoils the image of Abkhazia.
Against this background, a pro-Western group of individuals has formed, which uses "hysterical sovereignty" as a form of anti-Russian agitation. NGOs have raised young people in such an atmosphere (by coincidence, these structures in Abkhazia are run entirely by young girls – the audience most receptive to some Western values). Seminars on aggressive feminism, juvenile justice and the like are actively held in Abkhazia, which was previously unthinkable in such a traditional society.
All this is happening against the background of the most severe energy and fuel crises. Unlimited mining has undermined the republic's energy networks.
There are rolling blackouts almost every day now. There is a problem with the supply of fuel, a sharp increase in prices is visible. Moscow warned in advance that relations with Abkhazia and South Ossetia in the economic sphere should be rethought. So far, attempts to reach an agreement have yielded little result, including because there are no guarantees that mining will stop, and smuggling will be effectively combated.
The opposition uses difficulties in the energy sector to fight President Bzhania, but it is the behavior of the opposition that largely prevents Abkhazia from developing. Discriminatory initiatives – from economic to social – are ultimately aimed at undermining Russian-Abkhaz relations, although they are presented mainly under the guise of "protecting sovereignty." For some, these are purely economic interests (Russian business does not need competition), for others - social interests (Russian specialists do not need competition for qualified jobs), and for others just a thirst for power.
And the worst thing is that the struggle for the "sovereignty of Abkhazia" directly undermines this sovereignty. At least by the fact that the very independence of this small Black Sea republic depends entirely on good relations with Russia (including in terms of cooperation with Rosgvardiya). Only Moscow guarantees this independence.
Evgeny Krutikov