The EU and Civil Society in the Georgian-Abkhaz Conflict
This paper deals with the role of the EU in supporting civil society in the case of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict. It analyses the patterns of development of civil society actors that played a direct or indirect role in the development of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict. In the case of Georgia the paper focuses on NGOs representing the interests of internally displaced persons and civil society players involved in promoting dialogue with the Abkhaz. In the case of Abkhazia, the paper focuses on the development of Abkhaz civil society, the relative strength of which is a mini-phenomenon in itself, as well as the Abkhaz approaches to dialogue with Georgia. The paper then outlines the main EU activities vis-a-vis the civil society actors on both sides of the conflict. The paper concludes that in the absence of strong EU political engagement in conflict-resolution, EU assistance to civil society could not prevent the re-escalation of the conflict and the radicalisation of the Abkhaz and Georgian societies. However EU assistance to civil society contributed to the (parallel and separate) strengthening of civil society on both sides of the conflict lines, which can be considered an achievement in itself, however modest.
EU support to civil society organizations in conflict-ridden countries: A governance perspective from Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cyprus and Georgia
ABSTRACT From a peacebuilding perspective, EU support for civil society organizations (CSOs) in conflict-ridden countries can be criticized for artificially boosting a liberal, ‘bourgeois’ civil society at the expense of more representative initiatives at the grassroots level. Seen from a governance perspective, however, this criticism is lacking in nuance and conceals the actual rationale and effects of the support. To advance a realistic debate on international peacebuilding as a form of governance, this article investigates what the character and effects of EU support for CSOs in conflict-ridden countries actually are: how does it affect the relations between the supported organizations and (1) the wider society, (2) the state and (3) between the recipient country and the EU? We consider four ideal types of EU conflict governance: ‘liberal peace’, ‘hollow hegemony’, ‘vibrant hegemony’ and ‘post-liberal peace’ and compare them to empirical data from Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cyprus and Georgia. We find that while the objectives of promoting peace and democracy through CSO support tend to fail, the strategic interests of the EU are still maintained.
Second Track / Citizens' Diplomacy : Concepts and Techniques for Conflict Transformation, John Davies and Edward (Edy) Kaufman (eds.) : book review
As the subtitle indicates, this book is about concepts and techniques for conflict transformation. But as the title shows, it is especially about getting more people involved, and about taking culture seriously.