Journals / Uluslararası Hukuk ve Sosyal Bilim Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 1

The Alternative of Confederalism: A New Constitutional Order for the Resolution of the Georgian- Ossetian Conflict

Konfederalizm Alternatifi: Gürcü-Oset Çatışmasının Çözümü İçin Yeni Anayasal Düzen

Pages
66–88
Publication Date
2022-06-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The article taking into account various matters, e.g. the current Georgian and Ossetian standpoints as well as the present military, financial and political capabilities of the Georgian state, recognises its confederal formula as a worth-examining alternative.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This article examines the Georgian-Ossetian conflict by considering recent developments and comes up with a formula for the resolution of the conflict.
📊
Key Findings & Data:According to the article, a new confederal order that takes its shape at the constitutional level would contribute to the cessation of the rooted hostilities and the elimination of the institutionalised doubts between the two communities.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The article taking into account various matters, e.g. the current Georgian and Ossetian standpoints as well as the present military, financial and political capabilities of the Georgian state, recognises its confederal formula as a worth-examining alternative.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Gürcistan · Güney Osetya · Donmuş İhtilaf

Abstract

This article examines the Georgian-Ossetian conflict by considering recent developments and comes up with a formula for the resolution of the conflict. According to the article, a new confederal order that takes its shape at the constitutional level would contribute to the cessation of the rooted hostilities and the elimination of the institutionalised doubts between the two communities. South Ossetia would benefit from the confederal order in the short run; however, the order would, in the long run, create a public area where the two communities would coexist in a peaceful manner. Collaborationist and integrationist steps taken by the Georgian and Ossetian authorities after the construction of the confederal order would gradually cease the hostilities and eliminate the doubts, ultimately leading to the transformation of regional or national loyalties into confederal allegiances. These allegiances would establish an environment of mutual trust encouraging the communities to turn their confederal union into a federation or unitary state. Such unionist and holistic transformation processes have been completed by historical confederations. Furthermore, present confederal organisations are also carrying out such processes. The article taking into account various matters, e.g. the current Georgian and Ossetian standpoints as well as the present military, financial and political capabilities of the Georgian state, recognises its confederal formula as a worth-examining alternative.

Özet

Bu makale, Gürcü-Oset ihtilafını güncel gelişmeleri hesaba katarak incelemekte ve ihtilafın çözümüne ilişkin bir öneri sunmaktadır. Çalışmamıza göre, Gürcistan ve Güney Osetya tarafından anayasal düzlemde ete kemiğe büründürülecek konfederal düzen, iki toplum arasındaki husumetleri ve güvensizliği bertaraf etme sürecine katkı sunabilir. Konfederalleşme, kısa vadede Güney Osetya’nın menfaatine bir durumdur; ancak konfederalleşme adımları vasıtasıyla uzun vadede tezahür edecek pek çok potansiyel gelişme, iki toplum için birlikte yaşamı devam ettirecekleri kamusal alanın inşasına yardımcı olabilir. Gürcü ve Oset otoriteleri tarafından konfederal uygulamalar aracılığıyla pratiğe dökülecek birçok iş birliği ve bütünleşmeci operasyon, kökleşen husumetler ile kurumsallaşan güvensizliği kademeli olarak ortadan kaldırabilir. Bu durum, bölgesel veyahut ulusal bağlılıkların süreç içerisinde konfederal bağlılıklara dönüşmesini beraberinde getirebilir. İki topluluk, somutlaşan konfederal bağlılıkların neticesi olarak ortaya çıkan karşılıklı güven atmosferi içerisinde siyasi devlet teşkilatlanmalarını federal ya da üniter bir yapıya evirebilir. Söz konusu evrilme, gerek tarihî konfederasyonlarca tamamlanmış gerekse güncel konfederal yapılanmalarca takip edilen bir süreçtir. Gürcü ve Oset pozisyonlarını dikkate alarak konfederalleşme önerisini geliştiren çalışmamız, bu önerinin ciddi bir alternatif çözüm yolu teşkil edebileceğini Gürcü devletinin mevcut askerî, ekonomik ve siyasi kabiliyetleri gibi çeşitli dinamikleri göz önünde bulundurarak izah etmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ERCAN, O., KOLÇAK, H. (2022). The Alternative of Confederalism: A New Constitutional Order for the Resolution of the Georgian- Ossetian Conflict. Uluslararası Hukuk ve Sosyal Bilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 1, 66–88. https://ajindex.com/articles/816686

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Acaray, D. (2020). “Kafkasya Jeopolitiğinde Odak Noktası Olarak Güney Osetya”. Giresun Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 6(2), 168-183.
  2. Allison, R. (2008). “Moscow Resurgent? Moscow’s Campaign to ‘Coerce Georgia to Peace’”. International Affairs, 84(6), 1145-1172.
  3. Allison, R. (2009). “The Russian Case for Military Intervention in Georgia: International Law, Norms and Political Calculation”. European Security, 18(2), 173-200.
  4. Ambrosio, T. ve W. Lange. (2016). “The Architecture of Annexation? Russia’s Bilateral Agreements with South Ossetia and Abkhazia”. Nationalities Papers, 44(5), 673-693.
  5. Ancak, O. (2020). “Yeni Avrasyacılık Bağlamında Güney Kafkasya’da Türkiye ve Rusya”. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 75(3), 1113-1144.
  6. Anckar, D. (2020). “Small States: Politics and Policies”. Handbook on the Politics of Small States. (Ed. G. Baldacchino ve A. Wivel). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 38-54.
  7. Anjaparidze, Z. (2020). “Changes in the Separatist Abkhazian Government and Implications for Relations With Tbilisi”. Jamestown, 15 Haziran, https://jamestown.org/program/changes-in-the-separatist-abkhazian-government-and-implications-for-relations-with-tbilisi/ (17.01.2022).
  8. Asker, A. ve Z. Özpınar (2021). “Azerbaycan’ı Zafere Götüren Büyük Taarruz: 44 Günlük Savaşın Anatomisi”. Avrasya İncelemeleri Dergisi, 10(1), 83-106.
  9. Aublaa, M. (2018). “Possible Challenges to the Republic of Abkhazia in the Focus of Trump Administration’s Geopolitical Interests in the South Caucasus”. Kafkasya Çalışmaları, 3(6), 307-324. Baarová, B. (2019). “South Ossetia-Alania: 10 Years since Gaining Partial International Recognition”. Politické Vedy, 22(2), 159-188.
  10. Bajon, T. (2018). “Liechtenstein and the European Union: A Micro-Switzerland?”. Journal of Political Science and Public Affairs, 6(4), 1-5.
  11. Baldacchino, G. (2018). “Mainstreaming the Study of Small States and Territories”. Small States & Territories, 1(1), 3-16.
  12. Baldacchino, G. ve A. Wivel. (2020). “Small States: Concepts and Theories”. Handbook on the Politics of Small States. (Ed. G. Baldacchino ve A. Wivel). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2-19.
  13. Bayar, M. (2021). “National Identity, Foreign Policy and Conflicts in Georgia”. The Changing Perspectives and ‘New’ Geopolitics of the Caucasus in the 21st Century. (Ed. S. Yılmaz ve M. Yorulmaz). Ankara: Astana Yayınları, 35-48.
  14. Belkahla, M. (2017). Benelux Court of Justice. Luxembourg: Max Planck Institute. Benedikter, T. (2009). The World’s Modern Autonomy