Georgia Russia War

The competing theories of state recognition and their failings actively demonstrate that recognition of a state does not have any normative content per se, but rather, that the rules of state recognition, although legal rules, are legal vehicles for political choices. We have the dilemma of concurrently wanting the right cases to result in independent states while prohibiting the wrong ones from becoming so, and so we sail between political choices, using the language of law. The state is neither truly free to recognize another entity nor entirely bound. Differing cases require different legal criteria and different legal results. This flexibility in state recognition theory though, while depriving the act of any inherent legal meaning, has value in its utility for establishing lawful relationships.

This paper will argue that the reason we find it difficult to resolve the controversy over state recognition theory is because the international legal system translates political controversies into legal questions that can then be addressed through legal means. Legal actors, by announcing preference for one side of the question, often reveal certain legal and moral choices they are making about the nature of the state and the legitimacy of the international legal system - law and politics. In the area of state recognition, no theory of recognition has extinguished competition because no political choice has gained universal acceptance. The predominant political choice is most frequently deliberate indeterminacy, a co-existence of mutually opposing arguments. This indeterminacy is most likely deliberate because it permits the underlying rationale for the legal actor’s policies to change and evolve to suit the situation.

A case study analysis of Russia's employment of Information Operations against Georgia during the 2008 war.  Categories examined include Computer Network Operations, Electronic Warfare, Psychological Warfare, military deception, and operational security.  Authors:  Kenneth Fermaint, Matthew D. Neff, and Daniel Barker

Since antiquity, information has been used in conflict to deceive, to demoralize, to sow fear among enemy troops. Not until the twentieth century, though, did information operations become so central to war. In Info Ops, the authors assess the evolving role and increasing relevance of information operations from the leaflet bombardments of World War I to the present digital age.

In December 2008, the EU launched its new program "Eastern Partnership" (EaP) as a continuation of the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP), which due to the extensiveness of the EU's borders does not allow full commitment to the countries of the eastern neighborhood. The main agenda of the program is to stabilize and democratize countries through a deeper and more substantial link with the EU. The program includes association agreements, creation of a deep and comprehensive free trade area, training for administration and civil society, financial assistance, visa liberalization, but not the strongest instrument of EU foreign policy, which is the enlargement policy for entry into the Union. Through these "soft power" foreign policy instruments the expectations are that the countries will achieve rule of law, democracy and respect for human rights, as well as high standards in the economy and institutions. For the situation to be even more complex, there are frozen conflicts in many of the countries where the EU should play a role in the reconciliation and preservation of the sovereignty of the states.
The paper will review the mechanisms available to the Union in the "Eastern Partnership", its attempts to resolve conflicts, and the potential for enlargement in the countries of the East. For the presentation of this foreign policy of EU, we will be guided through the theoretical prism of realism and its concepts to measure or put into context the effects on frozen conflicts in the countries.
The main goal will be to answer the question what is the effect and success of EU foreign policy in resolving frozen conflicts in the countries of the "Eastern Partnership" through the prism of realism? Does the foreign policy so far have the capacity to overcome obstacles and achieve its underlying goals? Can the basic concepts of realism be transformed by liberal concepts and constructivist visions of international relations in the countries from this region?
The basic guides of realism and neo-realism clearly identify the need for "hard power politics" as the primary instance in resolving and transforming conflicts as a catalyst and instrument for change to the desired direction from the big players. The main hypothesis that will guide the structure of this thesis is that the absence of hard power politics and the changing and vague attitudes of EU’s foreign policy are the main reason for the failure to resolve frozen conflicts in the countries of the "Eastern Partnership".
All countries covered by the program differ and bear their own specific characteristics. Every country has problems with non-democratic and non-liberal practices that are the remnants of the previous system. This means that everyone has a difficult and long-lasting transition process. Many of them have unresolved conflicts and divided societies. Some have an open desire to join the Union and are in a long waiting period to open their negotiations. While the Union has variable attitudes towards the enlargement process and sends mixed signals and does not provide enough stimulation to transform countries with clear and firm stances in their foreign policy.
Lastly, there is Russia, which has its influence and interests in the countries covered by this program. Realism and neo-realism are not sufficiently included in the academic circles to describe the functioning of the EU, but Russia's intensified policy towards its neighbors and the poor efficiency of the Union's underlined objectives are sufficient justification to consider the impact of this theory in this new context. Also, to give some insights on some of the new components needed to resolve the status of these countries because the situation and geographical proximity with Russia is very different than with the big enlargement in Central and Eastern Europe in the past.
The work will be processed through the methodology of a critical approach by interpreting the sources and arguments guided by the theoretical framework of realism and neo-realism. As with the comparative method in the argumentation of the EU's success with the countries of the region.

ÖZET
      Soğuk savaş dönemi bitti denmesine ve hatta tarihin sonu senaryoları yazılmış olmasına rağmen dünya bir olaya şahit olmuştur ki ezberler bozulmuştur. 2008 yılında yaşanan Rusya-Gürcistan Savaşı beş gün gibi kısa bir süre sürmesine rağmen etkileri uzun süreli olmuştur hatta kendinden sonra Ukrayna’da yaşananlar gibi benzer karışıklıklara da belki yol göstermiştir.
      Bölgede yaşanan olaylar göz önüne alındığında, Güney Kafkasya ve komşuları gelecekte de enerji politikaları açısından büyük güçlerin mücadelesine sahne olacak gibi görünmektedir.
      Özellikle Türkiye’nin konumu ile doğrudan ilgili olan bu çatışma kısa zamanda tüm dünyanın dikkatlerini bölge üzerine çekmeyi başarmıştır. Bu çalışma 2008 Rusya-Gürcistan Savaşı’nı öncesi ve sonrası ile dünyadaki büyük ve bölgesel güçlerin perspektifinden incelemektedir.

      ABSTRACT
      It is said that the cold war era has ended and even scenarios about end of history are written. Despite these facts there is an event that the world witnessed and it changed the minds. The war between Russia and Georgia in 2008 has taken just five days but it has long-term effects. Maybe it has led a way to the similar conflicts like Ukraine.
      Considering these events in the region South Caucasus and its neighbours seem to witness struggling great powers in the matter of energy policies.
      This conflict especially related to Turkey’s location attracted attention of the world in a short time. This study analyzes 2008 Russia-Georgia War with its pre and post period from the great and regional powers’ perspectives.

While working to seal off Abkhazia and South Ossetia from Georgia after the 2008 war, Russia
promised to play a constructive role in Nagorno-Karabakh and the Transnistrian conflict. This
paper aims to assess how Russia delivered on its renewed peace-making pledge. It also will
spell out how Armenia, Azerbaijan and Moldova have reacted to the new Russian undertaking
to revive negotiations within the Minsk Group, the “5+2” format or other formulas with the
direct participation of Moscow. The paper will address how other international stakeholders
have adapted to the 2008 post-conflict situation and will uncover the developments relevant
for the conflict resolution process in the breakaway regions. It will conclude with an analysis
on prospective strategies to be employed by all sides and regional players in dealing with the
conflicts in the Eastern neighborhood and what could be done in 2013 to push the negotiations
forward.

This paper analyses the various economic, political, and military pressure points that Russia can target. Georgia has decreased its dependency on Moscow substantially since its last dramatic conflict with Moscow in 2007. However, this memo argues that Russia still has the means to influence Georgia’s foreign policy choices by attacking strategic bilateral
vulnerabilities that include wine exports, remittances, investment, winter oil supplies, domestic divisions, and the occupied regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. While few of the pressure points that Russia can push are lethal in and of themselves, their cumulative impact could have a profound effect on Georgia’s domestic political stability and economic viability. All the more worrisome after the Crimean annexation is Moscow’s substantial sway in Georgia’s occupied regions, which provides the Kremlin with great destabilising potential. Therefore, the Georgian government’s confidence that it is better able to withstand Russian pressure than Ukraine is misguided and deeply dangerous.

Wie kam es zu einer Entfremdung zwischen Russland und Georgien, zweier Länder desselben chalkedonensisch-orthodoxen Glaubensbekenntnisses, deren kulturelle Verbindungen bis ins Frühmittelalter zurückreichen? Georgische Einflüsse lassen sich bereits am glagolitischen Alphabet der Slawenapostel (9. Jh.) und der altrussischen Nestorchronik (12. Jh.) ablesen. Ebenso alt ist die russische Sehnsucht nach dem georgischen Paradiesgarten, dem Vyrïj-sad, dem Wohnsitz der Seelen der Verstorbenen, wohin die Vögel alljährlich zum Überwintern ziehen, welcher erstmals in der Belehrung Vladimir Monomachs (vermutlich 1117) Erwähnung findet. “Indeed, we began to believe that most Russians hope that if they live good and virtuos lives, they will not go to heaven, but to Georgia, when they die”, schreibt John Steinbeck 1948 in seinem Russian Journal von seiner Russlandreise mit Robert Capa.
Bei seiner Kirchenreform schwebt dem russischen Patriarchen Nikon (1605-81) die georgische Kirchenverfassung mit ihrem Ehrenvorrang der geistlichen Macht als sakrale Utopie vor. Nach der petrinischen „Enthauptung“ der Kirche übernimmt im 19. Jh. die russische Literatur die Rolle des geistigen Gegengewichts zur weltlichen Macht und säkularisiert das Sehnsuchtsbild des großen Patriarchen zum arkadischen Traum. Pathetisch gesprochen, ließe sich die russische Hinwendung zu Georgien ähnlich der deutschen Liebe zu Italien als „Sehnsucht der Mitternacht nach dem Licht“ bezeichnen.
Nach dem Fall Konstantinopels ersuchten georgische Könige erstmals 1483 das „weiße Russland des großen Nordens“ um Schutz, welchem nach der geschichtstheologischen Überhö-hung des Pleskauer Mönchs Philotheos zum „Dritten Rom“ (um 1500) die Rolle zufällt, das Böse der Welt in Schach zu halten und die Schutzherrschaft über die orthodoxe Christenheit wahrzunehmen. Als Alexander II. von Kachetien 1586 angesichts der türkischen Bedrohung den Sohn Ivans des Schrecklichen Fëdor um Schutz für sich und sein Volk bittet, kann dieser die Zusage seines militärischen Beistands zwar nicht einhalten, doch führen er und seine Nachfolger fortan den Titel „Herrscher des iberischen Landes und der georgischen Könige“. Für die Georgier beginnt „die Sonne im Norden aufzugehen“, wie es der Dichter Mamuk´a Barat´ašvili (18. Jh.) formuliert. Gänzlich entgeht den Georgiern die Säkularisierung Russlands seit Peter dem Großen. An die Stelle der „Heiligen Rus´“ tritt die „Große Rus´“, welche sich nicht mehr von eschatologischem Sendungsbewusstsein und religiöser Affinität, sondern von strategischen Interessen und der Staatsräson leiten lässt. Das Missverständnis bedingt eine Entfremdung und eine Tragödie, die bis heute währt.

The purpose of this manuscript is to critically examine the legal findings of the Tagliavini Report in hope of contributing to the debate on its principal conclusions. The establishment of an independent fact-finding commission to explore the origins and course of the conflict marked the first time in its history that the EU, key mediator in concluding the Georgia-Russia conflict’s ceasefire, intervened actively in an armed conflict.
The author, disparate from the Fact-Finding Mission, does not find Georgia to have the right of self-defence in regard of attacks by Ossetian secessionist forces preceding the Russian invasion. The author argues, analogously to the Tagliavini Report, that Georgian offensive on Tskhinvali in South Ossetia represented an excessive use of force which violated Article 2(4) of the UN Charter.

In regards to the central issue, the author contends that the Russian military intervention in Georgia on 8 August 2008 following Georgian offensive on Tskhinvali was not justified under the scope of reinforcing its peacekeeping force, or on the grounds of humanitarian intervention, intervention by invitation, or protection of citizens. Distinct from the Tagliavini Report, this manuscript reaches the conclusion that Russia was neither entitled to invade Georgia for protecting its peacekeeping contingent that comprised part of an international peacekeeping force.

This publication includes lessons from the following FHA operations: the USG response to the Ebola epidemic of West Africa in 2014-2015; disaster relief for the Philippines in the aftermath of the November 2013 super typhoon; assistance to Japan following the 2011 earthquake and tsunami; disaster relief for Pakistan after the July 2010 floods; disaster relief for Haiti following the January 2010 earthquake; and, assistance to Georgia in 2008 in the wake of the Russia-Georgia conflict.

2008 Rusya-Gürcistan Savaşı’ndan sonra Kuzey Osetya’nın Güney Osetya ile entegrasyon faaliyetleri gündeme gelmiştir. Bu faaliyetler arasında Rusya ile yapılan siyasi, ekonomik ve askeri işbirliği anlaşmaları yer almaktadır. Özellikle askeri bütünleşmeye yönelik girişimler bölgedeki güvenlik algılamalarını etkilemektedir. Bölgedeki entegrasyon faaliyetlerinde liderlerin ve üst seviye yetkililerin söylemleri etkili olmuş, bu söylemler ve işbirlikleri Kafkasya’yı uluslararası mecrada dikkat çeken bir bölge haline getirmiştir.

This paper analyzes the potential for maintaining the post-August War 2008 status quo in Abkhazia and explores possible transformation scenarios of the existing situation. The present study will attempt to investigate the remaining seeds of prospective conflict, as the current reality might contain some potential for the eruption of violence; namely: the construction of the Sochi Olympic complex which irritates Georgians and Circassians as well as portion of Abkhazians; the North Caucasian new policy line, initiated and followed by the central Georgian authorities: and Georgia’s recognition of the Russian Genocide of Circassians in the 19th century, which should become leverage against the Russian Federation in the wider Caucasus region. All of these aspects make up the present security dilemma in the region. It is interesting to see whether changes in the Abkhazian-Georgian and Abkhazian-Russian relations could be expected in the foreseeable future.

The international order has entered a new era that is characterized by dramatic changes, in terms of both structure and process. Within this evolving non-polar world, the emergence of the Black Sea as a region and as a geopolitical hub is undeniable; yet the issues at hand are many, complex and challenging. A number of key paradoxes that have shaped the profile of the region to date, and will continue to define its future, are ever more clearly making their presence felt. This article attempts to illustrate and bring to the surface these paradoxes, namely the interplay between economic growth/subregionalism versus ethnonationalism/security dilemmas and the 'neighbourhood perception paradox'. The purpose is to help assess the current state of play and address the key questions for the future of the region.

Стараясь закрепить отделение Абхазии и Южной Осетии от Грузии после войны 2008
г. Россия обещала сыграть конструктивную роль в решении нагорного-карабахского
и приднестровского конфликтов. Цель этой статьи - дать оценку тому, как Россия
выполнила свои обновленные миротворческие обязательства. В ней также будет идти
речь о том, как Армения, Азербайджан и Молдова отреагировали на новые обязательства
России по возобновлению переговоров в составе Минской группы, на формат «5+2» или
иные формулы с непосредственным участием Москвы. В статье будет рассмотрено
то, как другие международные заинтересованные стороны адаптировались к пост-
конфликтной ситуации 2008г., а также раскрыты события, имеющие отношение к
процессу урегулирования конфликта в сепаратистских регионах. В завершение будут
проанализированы стратегии, перспективные для использования всеми сторонами и
региональными игроками в борьбе с конфликтами в странах Восточного партнерства,
а также, что можно предпринять в 2013 году для дальнейшего продвижения вперед
переговорного процесса.

The article analyses a rather vapid contribution dedicated to the shaping of the Georgian identity. Actually, this analysis reveals the faulty methodology of the contribution which invalidates its outcome. Such flaws are to be identified in the author’s lack of knowledge of the Georgian language, which leads to serious misinterpretations as well as to a significant number of factual errors. The consequence of such ignorance, even though more reasons could be added, is that the author has access to very limited and partial sources. To be more specifi c, it is obvious that she draws on only one source and the data that it offers is considered in a distorted manner or, in the best of cases, referred to in an equivocal manner. Without wishing to engage in controversy, the present article dissects these elements, deeming them so serious that they may harm the reader’s comprehension of the subject.

L'articolo risponde all'esigenza di corretta divulgazione scientifica di problematiche dell'attualità. Analizza, in particolare, un contributo dedicato alla costruzione dell'identità georgiana molto velleitario, mettendo in evidenza alcune mancanze metodologiche del contributo che ne inficiano le risultanze.

... Some subsequently blamed Georgia; the British Foreign Secretary David Miliband, however, said 'the rights and the wrongs both, of each side's actions need to be investigated, but they mustn't occlude the fact that a neighbour with 800,000 people in uniform then invaded a ...

Öz
      2008 Rusya – Gürcistan savaşı ve 2014 Ukrayna krizi büyük güçlerin her iki olayda da ciddi anlamda sorunlar yaşamasına yol açmıştır. Kafkasya ve Karadeniz gibi iki önemli enerji hattının geçiş güzergâhında olan Gürcistan ve Ukrayna hem NATO hem de AB için önemli ülkeler olarak görülmüştür. Ancak Rusya’nın bu konuda yakın çevresini korumak için izlediği siyaset onun küresel bir güç gibi davrandığı izlenimini vermiştir. Bu izlenim dünyada Rusya ile ABD arasında bu iki olay sebebiyle yeni bir soğuk savaşın başladığını anımsatmıştır.
    Bu makalenin yazılma amacı somut veriler ışığında Rusya ile ABD arasında yaşananların soğuk savaş olup olmadığının incelenmesidir. Bu kapsamda Rusya’nın tekrar büyük devlet statüsüne geçmesi durumu ve AB’nin bu konudaki yaklaşımı da değerlendirilmiştir.
      Anahtar Kelimeler: 2008 Rusya-Gürcistan Savaşı, 2014 Ukrayna Krizi, Soğuk Savaş, Büyük Güç Statüsü, Yakın Çevre Politikası
      Abstract
      2008 Russia – Georgia War and 2014 Ukraine Crisis caused the great powers to have some serious problems in each other. The Caucasus and the Black Sea zone are both transit routes for the energy lines. The two zones are very important for NATO and EU as well. However, to protect the near abroad in this regard, Russia has given the impression that it acts as a global power. This impression reminded the world that these events between Russia and USA may have started the new cold war.
    The purpose of writing this article is to examine in the light of concrete data whether the events that took place between Russia and USA  is a cold war or not. In this context Russia’s switch to the great power status and the EU’s approach to this issue is evaluated too.
      Key Words: 2008 Russia - Georgia War, 2014 Ukraine Crisis, Cold War, Great Power Status, Near Abroad Policy

Amaç: AB üye devlet sayısı ve karmaşık kurumsal yapısından
dolayı AB karar alma mekanizmasında çeşitli sorunlar
yaşamaktadır. Karar alma mekanizmasında yaşanılan bu sorun,
AB’nin kendi bölgesinde şahit olduğu çatışmalara karşı gösterdiği
tutumu da etkilemektedir. Aynı problem AB içinde liderlik
sorununu da doğurmaktadır. Bu iddiayı sağlam temellere
dayandırmak için çalışma AB’nin Rusya ile yaşadığı sorunları
incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Tasarım/Yöntem: Araştırmada nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden
yararlanmış ve örnek olaylar üzerinden (Rusya-Gürcistan
Çatışması ve Rusya-Ukrayna Çatışması) AB’nin liderlik anlayışı
incelenmiştir. Bu çalışma derleme makale niteliğindedir ve
literatür inceleme tekniği kullanılmıştır. Bulgular: Sovyetler Birliği’nin dağılmasından sonra Gürcistan ve
Ukrayna yönlerini Rusya’dan ziyade Batıya ve özellikle de AB’ye
dönmüşlerdir. 2008 yılında da Gürcistan, Güney Osetya ve Abhazya
bölgelerinden kaynaklanan sorunlardan dolayı Rusya ile direk karşı
karşıya kalmıştır. Fransa AB içinde Rusya’ya karşı ortak tutumda
AB içinde liderlik etmiş olsa da istenilen başarı sağlanamamıştır.
Ukrayna ise 2013 yılının sonlarında ise özellikle Kırım ve Donbas
bölgelerinden dolayı da Rusya ile çatışma yaşamıştır. Bu krizde AB
içinde liderliği Almanya üstlenmiş ama istenilen başarı yine de
sağlanamamıştır. Kendi yakın çevresinde etkili olmayan AB’nin
uluslararası politikada aktörlüğü bu durumlardan dolayı oldukça
tartışılmıştır. Sınırlılıklar: Rusya, Gürcistan ve Ukrayna ile çeşitli sorunlar ve
çatışmalar yaşamıştır ve bu durum AB’nin kendi güvenliği içinde
tehdit oluşturmaktadır. Bu yüzden örnek olayların sadece RusyaGürcistan Çatışması ve Rusya-Ukrayna Çatışması olması çalışmanın
sınırlarıdır. Özgünlük/Değer: Araştırmanın özgün değeri; Fransa ve
Almanya’nın liderlik anlayışını incelemesi ve buradan hareketle
AB’nin Rusya-Gürcistan Çatışması ve Rusya-Ukrayna
Çatışmasında liderlik anlayışını incelemesidir.

Prof. Dr. Zaza TSURTSUMIA’nın “Gürcistan’daki Rus “Yumuşak Gücü’nün” Tarihi (XIX-XX. Yüzyıl)” başlıklı makalesi dergimizin bu sayısında yer alan bir başka çalışmadır. 1783 yılında Petersburg ve Tiflis arasında imzalanan Georgiyevsk Anlaşması ile Gürcistan Krallığı, Rusya
İmparatorluğu’nun himayesi altına girmiş, 1801 yılında I. Aleksandr tarafından yayınlanan bir manifestoyla da bir eyalet olarak Rusya sınırlarına dahil edilmiştir. Bundan sonraki süreçte Çarlık hükümeti, gerek Kuzey Kafkasya’nın güvenliği, gerekse güney istikametinde sınırların genişletilmesi açısından stratejik olarak önemli gördüğü Gürcistan toprakları üzerinde idari, siyasi ve kültürel düzenlemeler başlatmıştır. Sovyetler Birliği döneminde de Moskova’nın Gürcistan’a atfettiği önem azalmamış, aksine artarak büyümüştür. Dolayısıyla Rusya’nın Gürcistan politikası, stratejik değişikliklere rağmen temelde aynı esaslar üzerinde şekillenmiştir. Biz Rusça bilen Türk araştırmacılar, Rusya’nın Güney Kafkasya politikasını anlama açısından en önemli örneği teşkil eden Gürcistan’da yaklaşık iki yüz yıl süren Rus hâkimiyetinin etkilerini genel itibarıyla Rusça kaynak ve kaynakçalardan öğrenmekte ve analiz etmekteyiz. İşte bu makale, söz konusu tarihi süreci ve neticelerini bir Gürcü akademisyenin bakış açısıyla ortaya koyması bakımından değerlidir. Makalenin bölgeye dair çalışmalar yürüten araştırmacılara karşılaştırmalı analiz imkânı sunacağını ummaktayız.

Более 100 экспертов по странам Восточной Европы из числа немецких ученых, политиков и журналистов подписались под ответом на открытое письмо "Новая война в Европе? Не от нашего имени!", опубликованное 5 декабря. Авторы ответного обращения подчеркивают, что Москва выступает в роли агрессора, призывают не жертвовать территориальной целостностью Украины, смотреть в лицо реальности и не предаваться иллюзиям.

The subject of the evaluation was post-conflict reconstruction and stabilization programming in Georgia, supported by Section 1207 funding in FY 2008 and 2009. The evaluation purpose was to assess whether the full set of 1207 program activities implemented through USAID and DoS/INL, PRM, and PM achieved their stated objectives. The evaluation was also intended to extract lessons learned from its findings and conclusions to help inform decision-making regarding future conflict stabilization initiatives.
https://2009-2017.state.gov/documents/organization/245878.pdf

The explanation for why NATO gave me a research fellowship is simple. In the mid-nineties, I proposed to the alliance a research project dealing with a future scenario that amounted to nothing less than a scripture for a third world war involving NATO. Specializing in the re-emerging extreme right of the post-Soviet period and comparing the developments in the Russian Federation to the rise of German fascism in the Weimar Republic, I asked NATO to co-finance a larger investigation into the early political biography, ideology and activities of Vladimir Zhirinovskii.

Es geht letztlich um das Unterdrücken von europäischer Integration und die Sabotage liberaler Gegenmodelle zum russischen Autoritarismus, also von alternativen Entwicklungsszenarien, welche dann auch in Russland populär werden könnten. Zusätzlich führen einige Beobachter geopolitische Argumente an, die sich auf die Projektion militärischer Macht über den Kaukasus hinaus beziehen, besonders in Verbindung zur Lage im gesamten Mittleren Osten. Russland will als Regionalmacht in Nahost präsent sein, und der fortgesetzte Einfluss im Südkaukasus ist dafür eines von vielen Instrumenten.

Philipp Ammon - "Georgien zwischen Eigenstaatlichkeit und russischer Okkupation. Die Wurzel des russisch-georgischen Konflikts vom 18. Jahrhundert bis zum Ende der ersten georgischen Republik (1921)"
2015 Kitab-Verlag Klagenfurt - Wien
www.kitab-verlag.com
Office@kitab-verlag.com
ISBN 978-3-902878-45-8
Buchpräsentation in der Botschaft Georgiens zu Berlin
Begrüßung: Kulturattaché Dudana Mazmanishvili
Moderation: Ekkehard Maaß
Vortrag: Philipp Ammon
Dankeswort: Botschafter Georgiens in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Prof. Lado Chanturia
29.11.2016
Veröffentlicht am 02.12.2016 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXSoswMZhus)

„Buchvorstellung von Philipp Ammon in der georgischen Botschaft.
Am 29. November 2016 hat der junge Historiker Philipp Ammon den zahlreich erschienenen Gästen in der georgischen Botschaft sein äußerst spannendes Buch -"Georgien zwischen Eigenstaatlichkeit und russischer Okkupation" vorgestellt. Nach der Buchvorstellung gefolgt von Publikumsfragen hatten die Gäste die Gelegenheit georgische Köstlichkeiten zu probieren und sich über das Buch auszutauschen.“ (http://germany.mfa.gov.ge/index.php?lang_id=GER&sec_id=243&info_id=39065)

Internally polarized counter-elites, that are often involved in corporate interests, do not have enough power to oppose the negative manifestations of economic transformation. In the countries of the South Caucasus, there are two types of business elites, the internal and the external ones, which "grew up" from the economic transformation. The external elites result from the privatization process, in which primarily Russians and Kazakhs are engaged. Concerning  their interests in the region, they are lobbying the decision-making processes, while the local elites create the aforementioned mentioned "representative system." The wealth factor is therefore the way to exercise  power. The research on  business elites remains a discursive issue, which seems to be an endless subject to develop . its analysis  opens a broad discussion on the methodology of the study of elites, both in terms of their mechanisms and characteristics, as well as the theory itself.