A tent in no man’s land
A personal account of the Incident Prevention and Response Mechanism in Georgia
By Siegfried Woeber
It is early morning when I arrive at Tbilisi airport: a quick passport control; friendly smiles from the border officials; inside, large groups of relatives waiting for their returning loved ones. This at least is one scene that has remained the same in Georgia over the past decade, I tell myself. Peering through the crowd, I finally spot Gocha holding up his sign with the OSCE logo.
Gocha began working for the OSCE more than a decade ago, when the Mission to Georgia was still in operation. Since it closed, following the 2008 armed hostilities, he has been providing logistical support for the OSCE activities that are still going on in the country. Among his latest guests were Conflict Prevention Centre representatives that monitored the successful completion of the disposal of cluster munitions. As he calmly manoeuvres the shiny white OSCE car out of this busy theatre, I see tired-looking passers-by staring at the big blue letters painted on the sides – one of the few remaining visible signs of the Organization.
I am here to represent the Conflict Prevention Centre at the 36th round of the Incident Prevention and Response Mechanism (IPRM), the main tool on the ground of the Geneva International Discussions, which deal with the consequences of the war. Whereas the discussions in Switzerland remain largely abstract for the outside world, the IPRM yields some concrete results for the local population.
One hour from Georgia’s dynamic capital, a signpost at the side of the road puts things in perspective: “Teheran 1250km; Sukhumi 430km; Tskhinvali 110km; Baku 560km; Yerevan 290km.” And here is Tserovani a camp for about 7000 internally displaced persons, mainly from the Akhalgori area, built by the Georgian government. Several new vineyards and green plots have appeared since I was last here after the war.
I have joined Ambassador Andrii Deshchytsia, the OSCE Chairperson-in-Office’s Special Representative for Conflicts, and his advisor Christina Hayovyshyn. Both have taken this trip along the great Caucasus range a few times already this year. We are travelling on a new highway that will lead us to Gori, where our colleagues from the European Union Monitoring Mission (EUMM) are awaiting us.
The city of Gori was one of the epicentres of the military conflict. Since 2008, the unarmed civilian monitors of the EUMM have been monitoring the situation in areas affected by the war, south of the so-called “administrative boundary line (ABL)”. They have set up a 24-hour hotline which allows parties to transmit findings concerning missing persons, report incidents of concern or provide clarifications about events close to the ABL. And together with the OSCE, the EUMM hosts the meetings of the IPRM.
Ambassador Gerard Fischer, interim Head of the EUMM, and his team present us with their latest observations from the ground. We agree upon agenda items. Maps are circulated around the table. “Let’s go,” someone says, “the delegations will be there around 11:00.”
We continue our journey for another 30 minutes, passing through villages and driving alongside busy farmers transporting their harvest, until our column of cars reaches its goal: Ergneti, just two kilometres to the southeast of Tskhinvali. Until 2004 there used to be a bustling market here, the main trading point among Russians, Georgians, Ossetians and the many other groups that populate the “mountains of tongues”– as a tenth century Arab geographer called the Caucasus due to its ethnic diversity. Now the little village Ergneti serves as the site of the IPRM. Russian and Georgian soldiers have set up camp and greet the arriving group of internationals with obvious routine.
And here it is: the tent. The air inside is pleasantly cool – clearly it is equipped with some sort of air conditioning – and there is a table replete with refreshments: Caucasian hospitality in no man’s land.
Soon the members of the Georgian delegation arrive. Deshchytsia and Fischer, as co-facilitators of the IPRM, are eager to solicit their agreement on some of the points that will be discussed and to create a good atmosphere for the hours ahead.
When the group of Georgian reporters rushes to the other side of the tent, it is a sign that the South Ossetian and Russian participants have arrived from Tskhinvali. They, too, are greeted by the two co-facilitators. Everyone seems to know everyone; the composition of the groups has not changed since the end of last year.
Whereas during the official talks in Geneva the parties sit across from each other 20 metres apart and stick to official statements and diplomatic posturing, the IPRM tent brings them together in a small space. Here they are not expected to find answers to the difficult fundamental issues such as the determination of borders. Over the course of the next six hours, problems of the population on the ground are the object of discussion.
All welcome the quick release of detained farmers and cow herders and inquire about the status of those still imprisoned. “Why did the new amnesty law not have an impact on his case?”–“What is the name of our national you mentioned among the detained?”
“I would kindly ask you to minimize politicizing, and focus on solving problems of the local population as the most important task,” Deshchytsia reminds the speakers when occasionally they drift away from the agenda. The speakers agree to disagree and proceed to the next point.
One of the most sensitive issues is the topic of missing persons. Many disappeared a long time ago, but any effort to investigate their fate represents an important confidence-building measure and is met with appreciation. The Special Representative’s personal involvement in bringing the sides together on this issue is given positive mention: “We were not expecting you to have details today, but we are hoping for an investigation into the matter.” Promises are made and, on some issues, the simple fact that dialogue is taking place makes today’s get-together significant. In times where contacts between Tskhinvali and Tbilisi are rare, every line of communication counts.
An important part of the meeting is a review of incidents. The tone of the conversation stays polite and constructive, but emotions run high when it comes to the issue of fencing and barbed wire installations on the ABL – an “occupation line” according to Tbilisi, a “state border” according to Tskhinvali and Moscow.
“The inhabitants of D. asked me to convey their thanks to you for the fact that a solution to their problem with accessing drinking water could be found during the last IPRM. Now we would like to draw your attention to another issue in this village concerning access to cemeteries,” Fischer states. The co-facilitators appeal to the participants to consider the situation of the people on the ground, to take into account farmers’ increased activity during the ongoing agricultural season. They propose a visit to the villages where there are matters of concern. “We have to develop joint solutions and expect your ideas – via the hotline,” Deshchytsia concludes.
We have reached the final points on the agenda. “No military exercises are planned close to the administrative boundary line in the upcoming weeks. The next IPRM will take place in September.”
Participants bid one another farewell and, escorted by the press, depart in the direction from which they came. In the side mirror of the OSCE car, the white tent gets smaller and smaller. It has proved to be a good home for talks.
Siegfried Woeber first visited Ergneti about a decade ago as co-ordinator of a development aid program in the South Caucasus. In July 2013 he returned for the first time since the 2008 military conflict to represent the Conflict Prevention Centre in the 36th round of the IPRM.