 |
INTRODUCTION
The two sets of papers presented here were once simply an idea that seemed perhaps crazy. Without an introduction, the reader may find this volume schizophrenic. Holding the book in one direction, the reader will find three articles by Georgian researchers. Holding the book in another direction, the reader will find three articles by South Ossetian researchers. To read the other perspective, the reader must change orientation. Different terminology is used in each chapter, and contradictory statements appear from one chapter to another.
All this makes sense in the context of the initial question raised as people with good intentions brainstormed potential confidence building steps: Would there be any chance of engaging scholars to bridge across the Georgian-South Ossetian divide with their writing, and offer some contribution to policy makers? Such confidence building measures once seemed almost impossible, when the first Point of View Civic Process discussion convened civil society peacebuilders in the immediate aftermath of the August 2008 war. But, I have been continuously impressed with the resilience, perseverance, and vision of people on both sides who want to create a stable peace in which Georgian and Ossetian children can grow up feeling at home in the world. After one Point of View discussion in Istanbul in October 2010, Kosta Dzugaev and Archil Gegeshidze decided to give this idea a try. The book you hold in your hands is proof they succeeded.
The two research groups worked independently, but coordinated with each other enough to end up with very different articles assembled together in this one book. After discussions together in Istanbul, the two teams of researchers identified different research priorities, which are reflected in the three articles from each group. Each group sought topics that would offer the most constructive contribution to policymakers on both sides, in the views of that group of authors. Each author worked independently to conduct his or her research. My editorial role was limited and did not engage at all with the content of the research. However, the authors did meet in Istanbul again as they completed drafts, and the articles are richer as a result of that discussion.
Readers will quickly notice that the authors agreed to disagree about terminology. What a Georgian author calls “Georgia proper” may be described as “Georgia” by an Ossetian author. What an Ossetian author refers to as “government” may be described as “leadership” by a Georgian author. Geographic names are also different, as are references to displaced people. The same people are referred to by Georgians as Internally Displaced People and by Ossetians as Forcefully Displaced People or Refugees. The word “border” takes on different significance, as the Ossetians describe an international border, and the Georgians see an administrative border.
This project did not attempt to force any standard terminology. Rather, the project goals are to highlight areas of potential confidence building, build a channel of communication amongst scholars bridging across the divide, and contribute policy relevant writing on areas that have been neglected by research in recent years.
All this would not have been possible without the dedication of Kosta Dzugaev and Archil Gegeshidze, each author, the translators, and a project support staff that kept the two separate projects coordinated with each other enough that they have ended up under one cover.
I hope each reader will find something of value in each chapter—even those chapters with which a reader will want to argue. Understanding the arguments across the current divide requires first knowing what they are. May these two sets of articles be a small step in that direction.
Prof. Susan Allen Nan
School for Conflict Analysis and Resolution,
George Mason University
FOREWORD TO THE GEORGIAN COLLECTION
The following collection of articles by notable Georgian researchers George Tarkhan-Mouravi, Ivlian Khaindrava and Revaz Gachechiladze was prepared as part of the project - “Georgian-Ossetian Conflict: Researching Peace,” implemented by the Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies in 2011. The articles discuss the perspectives of the displaced population, restoring the peacemaking potential of civil society, and the role of the human factor in confidence building between Georgians and Ossetians. The selection and focus of the research areas was defined by two considerations. On the one hand, the results of the August war, which had a profound impact on the life of the population living in the conflict zone, required serious reconsideration. Considering the sharp political standoff between the conflicting parties, the emphasis was placed on the humanitarian and social problems left by the war. On the other hand, the spirit of the project suggested identifying the potential for confidence building between the parties and thus to contributing to the peace process. Accordingly, it was necessary to determine the conditions and resources required for building bridges between Georgian and Ossetian societies in order to identify obstacles on the path to reconciliation.
Considering these circumstances, the Georgian researchers deemed it necessary to look to the future, towards opportunities to escape from the current deadlock. Thus, these articles purposely avoided any political evaluation of the conditions leading to the tragic events of August 2008.
At the same time, the researchers acknowledge the breadth and multidimensionality of the Georgian- Ossetian conflict, and the impossibility of conducting a full and large-scale analysis of the topic under the limited time and other constraints such as the paucity of information available. Simultaneously, we are pleased to note that the following compilation of papers represents the first post-war attempt to scientifically evaluate complicated processes of the Georgian-Ossetian conflict without which it is impossible to find the key to the current state of affairs.
We note that our colleagues from South Ossetia in the framework of a similar project led by the George Mason University (the United States) performed similar research. These two projects together create a platform for dialogue between the Georgian and Ossetian researchers. Two working meetings proceeded with an atmosphere of trust and respect and let the participants clarify the research goals and agenda and create a mechanism for the dialogue and cooperation that is necessary in the current conditions of alienation of these two close people.
Archil Gegeshidze
Project Coordinator
Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies
Tbilisi, June 2011