Abkhazia: a test-tube crisis-3

See part 2 http://vestnikkavkaza.net/articles/politics/40269.html

The only unused tool from the arsenal of political opponents of Ankvab for the coming years is a direct pressure. In December 2009, on the eve of the presidential elections, the radical opposition made no secret of its intention to bring the people to protest rallies, even before it knew how the election would end. The same thing was observed in the summer of 2011, but both times the advantage of the winner in the first round was too great. During the parliamentary elections in 2012, the opposition managed to get only a third of the votes in the parliament; however, on April 3, 2012, the day of the election of the speaker, Khajimba’s supporters gathered outside the parliament building, insisting that Khajimba should be elected. When that did not work, the opposition launched a campaign for the creation of a coalition government. This was a key requirement for the meetings in Sukhumi on February 28 and March 11, 2013.

It is easy to see that attempts to "correct" the results of national elections have been repeated regularly over the past few years. A small number of protesters and a solid advantage of the ruling party in the elections every time allowed Abkhazia to avoid a dangerous scenario. If the winner of a popular election once surrenders in front of pressure, he establishes a precedent that can lead to total chaos in the country. Therefore, Ankvab is uncompromising on the question of forming a coalition government, not because unwillingness to share power. An alternative to today's reality, when in the election observers check literally every voice, and every high-ranking official has absolute legitimacy, is a situation in which any strong group will start to demand a redistribution of power with arms. And no one can guarantee that if tomorrow the opposition, relatively speaking, impose a coalition government on the president, the day after it will not be deposed by the next meeting.

In short, a military solution to the problem is futile, and opposition leaders understand that, as well as Ankvab. But between violent acts and the traditional political struggle there are many intermediate options that have a common denominator: the pressure on the government through street protests. It is necessary to take into account the traditions of the Abkhazian policy: in 1990, when the authorities in Abkhazia were representatives of modern opposition, any meeting with political slogans was a unique phenomenon. On the one hand, the official ideology severely suppressed all attempts to call into question the unity of the people raised to the status of a sacred concept. (No wonder in the 2000s the names of the largest pro-government and the main opposition parties - "United Abkhazia" and "Forum of National Unity" – were similar.) It was emphasized that given the confrontation with Georgia, economic sanctions and non-recognition, Abkhazia cannot afford the luxury of internal political struggle. From time to time there were natural rallies of state employees - because of delays in salary or for other social reasons, but these statements almost never contained political overtones and were not stopped by the authorities.

On the other hand, among the Abkhazians street protests for a long time were not popular at all, because they thought that such actions sre the weapon of the weak, and nobody wanted to show his weakness.

In the 2000s, the situation changed, political rallies were no longer taboo and even were taken up by those who until recently categorically denied them. And yet in the country to this day there is a perception that if even a small group of people comes out to the meeting, the situation is serious. Radicals stake at this. The problem is that in the eyes of the people these ideas are outdated. Something that in 1990 shocked the foundations and was able to lead to a real crisis now leaves the majority untouched. Probably the former leaders and the current opposition have not yet realized that the rules of the game have changed. According to them, the number of meetings would inevitably result in their quality, and they are genuinely surprised when this does not happen.

In recent years, Abkhazia is unfolding struggle not between two political forces - the government and the opposition – but between two political trends. On the one hand, there is legitimacy, when the leadership of the republic is elected by popular vote, on the other hand - the use of force. And at a time when one or the other group ignores the people's will, no matter what it calls on.

Most of the political forces of the republic supports the principle of democratic elections, and it gives hope for preservation of stability, not only in Abkhazia, which has a special significance on the eve of the 2014 Olympics, but also in the Northwest Caucasus, which is closely associated with Abkhazia. Georgian diplomacy in 2008-2012 has made considerable efforts to undermine Russia's position in the region, even though last year's change of government in Tbilisi has suspended the process. However, the full-scale destabilization in Abkhazia could lead to the release of destructive forces to the north of the Caucasus, and the result will be the same. After all, no matter from which side one takes fire.