‘Peacekeeping or Keeping in Pieces’? – The Legacy of Three Decades of Russian-brokered Ceasefire Agreements in the South Caucasus
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE
Style
Format
‘Peacekeeping or Keeping in Pieces’? – The Legacy of Three Decades of Russian-brokered Ceasefire Agreements in the South Caucasus
German Yearbook of International Law, Vol. 66 (2023), Iss. 1 : pp. 105–128
Additional Information
Article Details
Pricing
Author Details
Dr. Michael Riepl, University of Cologne ,
Abstract
Abstract: This article explores the legacy of five Russian-brokered ceasefire agreements in the South Caucasus: South Ossetia (1992), Abkhazia (1993 and 1994), and Nagorno-Karabakh (1994 and 2020). It analyses and compares their legal provisions as well as their practical impact on a region marked by ethno-territorial conflict. The article argues that the five Russian-brokered agreements offered a reduction of violence at a high cost. While these ceasefires undoubtedly curbed violence in the short run, they did not lead to any lasting stabilisation. One main reason for this is that the agreements were never designed as balanced instruments of peacekeeping. Rather, the provisions mainly reflected Russian State interests in the ‘near abroad’. As this article shows, Russia virtually acted as the exclusive broker of the above-mentioned ceasefires and thus had free reign to tailor the legal provisions to its needs. Other international involvement was kept to a minimum or gradually eliminated. In combination with the exceptional longevity of the ceasefires, the lack of interest from third States, and an increasingly aggressive Russian foreign policy under Vladimir Putin, the ceasefire agreements kept the South Caucasus in a protracted state between war and peace.
Table of Contents
| Section Title | Page | Action | Price |
|---|---|---|---|
| Michael Riepl\n‘Peacekeeping or Keeping in Pieces’? – The Legacy of Three Decades of Russian-brokered Ceasefire Agreements in the South Caucasus | 105 | ||
| I. Notion of a Ceasefire – ‘War Is not Dead but Only Sleeping’ | 107 | ||
| II. Russian-Brokered CFA Since 1991 – What’s the Price for Ending War? | 109 | ||
| A. South Ossetia | 110 | ||
| B. Abkhazia | 112 | ||
| C. South Ossetia and Abkhazia After the Russo-Georgian War (2008) | 115 | ||
| D. Nagorno-Karabakh | 117 | ||
| III. Critical Assessment – ‘Peacekeeping or Keeping in Pieces’? | 120 | ||
| A. Russia’s Role as a Broker – Partially Impartial | 122 | ||
| B. Russia’s Position in the CFA – a Pax Russica | 123 | ||
| C. Longevity of the CFA – Drôle de Paix | 125 | ||
| IV. Conclusion and Outlook | 127 |