As far as such element as the will of the whole international
community is concerned, one would come to a more pessimistic
conclusion. For example, although the peace-keeping operation in
Abkhazia is conducted by the Commonwealth of Independent States
actually only Russian troops carry out peace-keeping operations. Thus,
only Russia out of all CIS Member-States is directly involved in peacekeeping
operations.
There is a lot of criticism towards Russia which is not the only
country directly involved in peace-keeping operation in Abkhazia, but
also the country assigned the role of a facilitator in the conflict
resolution process.
Many legal and political scholars doubt the role of Russia in
conflict resolution generally and particularly in Georgia. The primary
reason for this criticism is that the state which has political and
economic interests in the country with the ongoing conflict should not
be directly involved in the conflict resolution process since its attitude to
the outcome of the conflict will be preconditioned by its own interests
rather that interests of the international community as a whole. The
impartiality of the state with historical interests to the conflicting
country and existence of military bases in that country should be
doubted while assessing its neutrality to the conflict.
As noted, composition of the peace-keepers is also an important
element of legality assessment. While CIS peace-keepers are only
mononational (Russians) putting their impartiality under doubt, the
same cannot be said with regard to the UN observers working in these
regions. For instance, composition of the United Nations Observer
missions in Georgia and Tajikistan is truly multinational. There are 102
observers in Georgia from 23 countries and 170 observers in Tajikistan
from 14 States.
Thus, the CIS peace-keeping in practice raise many doubts as to
its neutrality and impartiality
და კიდევ
Although formally the CIS instruments are in compatibility with
the UN requirements, the practice of CIS peace-keeping operations is
still unsatisfactory. The basic principles such as legality and impartiality
in the context of CIS peace-keeping operations brought about many
doubts. In practice only Russia with its peace-keeping forces is involved
in these operations, thus failing to meet the criteria of international
character of peace-keeping with multinational personnel. A state having
its own strategic interests in the conflicts excludes its neutrality and
objectivity.
The practice of deployment of the United Nations Observer
Missions and the Collective Peace-Keeping forces of the Commonwealth
of Independent States is significant in term of effectiveness of the peacekeeping
operation in the zones of conflicts. There is a sound ground to
state that the conflict resolution process in the Commonwealth of
Independent States although successful with regard to localization of the
conflicts and cease-fire, failed to settle the disputes. Due to these factors
the CIS Member-States can seek new possibilities of cooperation in the
field of conflict resolution with other regional organizations such as
OSCE and NATO.
ესაა გაპრავება თუ როგორც ეძახით?
ჩვეულებრივი სპეციალისტის მშრალი ობიექტური ხედვაა
კონსტანტინე კორკელია 2008 წ. რუსებზე მუშაობდა, ლატვიაში ელჩობისას საქართველოს რეპუტაციას ლახავდა
