Skip to main content

On the Front Lines in the Near Abroad: the CIS and the OSCE in Georgia’s Civil Wars

  • Chapter
Beyond UN Subcontracting

Part of the book series: International Political Economy Series ((IPES))

  • 79 Accesses

Abstract

As is pointed out by Muthiah Alagappa’s framework analysis for this volume, that regional organizations1 might relieve some of the burden on the United Nations (UN) in the area of conflict management gained new currency after the Cold War. As Boutros Boutros-Ghali pointed out, the goal of such task-sharing was not only to distribute management burdens more effectively by taking advantage of hitherto under-utilized regional capacities, but also to democratize international relations through the devolution of power to regional entities.2 In addition, some would argue that regional organizations are better prepared than global ones to address specifically regional problems.3

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 29.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, An Agenda for Peace, reprinted in An Agenda for Peace 1995 (New York: United Nations, 1995), paras 63–4.

    Google Scholar 

  2. For a summary of such arguments, see S. N. MacFarlane and T. G. Weiss, ‘Regional organizations and regional security’, Security Studies, 2 (1), Autumn 1992, pp. 10–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. A situation in which ‘a single powerful state controls or dominates the lesser states in the system’. See R. Gilpin, War and Change in World Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), p. 29.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. For more substantial background on these conflicts, see S. N. MacFarlane, L. Minear and S. Shenfield, Armed Conflict in Georgia: A Case Study in Humanitarian Action and Peacekeeping (Providence, RI: Watson Institute, 1995), Occasional Paper No. 27;

    Google Scholar 

  5. S. Goldenberg, Pride of Small Nations: The Caucasus and Post-Soviet Disorder (London: Zed Books, 1994), pp. 81–114;

    Google Scholar 

  6. and S. Hunter, The Transcaucasus in Transition: Nation-Building and Conflict (Washington, DC: CSIS, 1994), pp. 100–41.

    Google Scholar 

  7. On this point, see S. M. Chervonnaya, Abkhazia-1992: Post-kommunisticheskaya Vandeya (Moscow: Mosgorpechat’, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  8. According to Russian military sources, Russian troops deploying to the line of contact initially faced some hostile fire. This was suppressed through the use of superior firepower, a process facilitated by the force’s rather broad rules of engagement. One Russian military officer characterized the latter in the following form: any violation of the ceasefire would be ‘immediately and severely punished’. See P. Baev, Russia’s Peacekeeping in the Caucasus, a discussion paper for the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs/Western European Union Conference on ‘Peacekeeping in Europe: Assessing UN and Regional Perspectives’, Oslo, 17–18 November 1994, mimeograph, p. 14.

    Google Scholar 

  9. For more general discussion of Russian peacekeeping, see A. Raevsky and I. N. Vorob’ev, Russian Approaches to Peacekeeping Operations (New York: UNIDIR, 1994), Research Paper No. 28;

    Google Scholar 

  10. M. Shashenkov, ‘Russian peacekeeping in the “near abroad”’, Survival, 36 (3), Autumn 1994, pp. 46–69;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. and S. N. MacFarlane and A. Schnabel, ‘Russia’s approach to peacekeeping’, International Journal, 50 (2), Spring 1995, pp. 294–324.

    Google Scholar 

  12. On this point, see CSCE, Third Meeting of the Council: Summary of Conclusions (Stockholm: CSCE, 1992), p. 12.

    Google Scholar 

  13. V. P. Lukin, ‘Our security predicament’, Foreign Policy, 88, Fall 1992, pp. 57–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. See, for example, S. Neil MacFarlane, ‘La CEI et la sécurité regionale’, Etudes Internationales, XXVI, 4, décembre 1995, pp. 785–97; Andrei Zagorsky, ‘Die Gemeinschaft Unabhaengiger Staaten: Entwicklungen und Perspektiven’, Berichte des Bundesinstituts fèr Ostwissenschaftliche und Internationale Studien, 50, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 1998 Third World Quarterly and Academic Council on the United Nations System

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

MacFarlane, S.N. (1998). On the Front Lines in the Near Abroad: the CIS and the OSCE in Georgia’s Civil Wars. In: Weiss, T.G. (eds) Beyond UN Subcontracting. International Political Economy Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-26263-2_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics