Tweet
Targeted News Service
June 10, 2010 Thursday 7:37 AM EST
Professor's Research Shines Light on Attitudes in a Contested Region of Georgia
BLACKSBURG, Va.
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University issued the
following news release:
It may not be a surprise but it is now an empirically documented fact.
National identity trumps everything else when it comes to predicting
the attitudes of people in the deeply contested region of Abkhazia.
When respondents in this region -- once a part of Georgia, but a de
facto state with its own independent government since 1993 -- were
asked a range of questions about social, political, and economic
issues, it was found that nationality, rather than gender or age
(Soviet versus post-Soviet generation), was the single most
significant predictor of attitudes.
This is the major finding in a public opinion survey among 1,000
Abkhaz conducted in March and April of this year by Gerard Toal,
professor and director of Virginia Tech's Government and International
Affairs program in the National Capital Region; Professor John
O'Loughlin, Institute of Behavioral Science and Department of
Geography, University of Colorado, Boulder; and Professor Vladimir
Kolossov, Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow.
The survey also indicated that a majority are satisfied with the
political situation in the region and prefer independence from
Georgia.
Toal, O'Loughlin, and Kolossov, who have collaborated since 2001,
recently made a presentation of these and other survey findings and
data at the Kennan Institute, Woodrow Wilson Center, Washington, D.C.
The three researchers have authored an article which will appear in
the August 2010 issue of Post-Soviet Affairs.
The survey is part of a broader social science project funded by the
U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), "The Dynamics of Secessionist
Regions: Eurasian Unrecognized Quasi-States after Kosovo's
Independence," which aims to measure the attitudes of inhabitants in
South Ossetia, Moldova, Transdniestria, Abkhazia, Kosovo, and Georgia.
During their presentation, Transdniestria, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia
were described as de facto states, "secessionist regions that have
established internal territorial sovereignty but lack widespread
recognition and legitimacy as states in the international system."
These states all arose after the breakup of the Soviet Union and share
similar state-building aspirations. However, they differ in their
histories of wartime violence, the relationship between titular groups
and other populations, and the nature of their client-patron
relationships with the Russian Federation.
Questions covering standard of living, state building, identity,
external security, and potential for reconciliation were included in
the survey. Responses show that Abkhaz, Russians, and Armenians tended
to cluster, with most Abkhazian Georgians (those who declared
themselves Georgians, Mingrelians, and Georgian-Mingrelians and live
almost exclusively in the Gal(i) District of Abkhazia) often
expressing contrasting views. Abkhaz and Armenians felt better off
than others. A majority of Abkhaz felt their state had a better
economic situation than Georgia, although most have not travelled to
"Georgia proper" in recent years.
Among Abkhazia's four major nationalities, Abkhaz were most proud of
belonging to their ethnic group (though others expressed extremely
high rates of pride as well). More than 70 percent of Abkhaz indicated
they also had a Russian passport, with levels even greater among
Armenians and Russians. Approximately half of Georgian respondents
indicated they had an Abkhazian passport. High numbers of all
nationalities indicated they had never felt discriminated against
where they currently live but amongst Georgians there was a distinct
minority who did not feel the same.
Most Abkhazian residents felt that the problem of a renewed war with
Georgia was no longer a major worry. Toal explained that "after August
2008, which saw the introduction of large numbers of Russian troops
along the Inguri river separating Abkhazia and Georgian proper and the
recognition of Abkhazia as an independent state by the Russian
Federation, the non-Georgian majority within Abkhazia have crossed a
mental threshold and feel done with Georgia." The legacy of the
1992-93 war remains, however, said Toal.
The largest divide in the whole survey between nationalities was in
response to the question: "Would you be willing to accept the full
return of Georgian refugees to Abkhazia in return for Abkhazia's
recognition as a state by the West and the rest of the international
community?" More than 80 percent of Abkhaz and Armenians said "no" and
only a few indicated "yes," whereas 34 percent of Georgians answered
affirmatively (almost as many Georgians chose '"hard to say").
Ultimately, the survey found that Abkhazia is a divided society, with
the non-Georgian nationalities unwilling to consider themselves a part
of Georgia or to countenance the return of those displaced by war from
the region.
From: A. Papazian
June 10, 2010 Thursday 7:37 AM EST
Professor's Research Shines Light on Attitudes in a Contested Region of Georgia
BLACKSBURG, Va.
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University issued the
following news release:
It may not be a surprise but it is now an empirically documented fact.
National identity trumps everything else when it comes to predicting
the attitudes of people in the deeply contested region of Abkhazia.
When respondents in this region -- once a part of Georgia, but a de
facto state with its own independent government since 1993 -- were
asked a range of questions about social, political, and economic
issues, it was found that nationality, rather than gender or age
(Soviet versus post-Soviet generation), was the single most
significant predictor of attitudes.
This is the major finding in a public opinion survey among 1,000
Abkhaz conducted in March and April of this year by Gerard Toal,
professor and director of Virginia Tech's Government and International
Affairs program in the National Capital Region; Professor John
O'Loughlin, Institute of Behavioral Science and Department of
Geography, University of Colorado, Boulder; and Professor Vladimir
Kolossov, Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow.
The survey also indicated that a majority are satisfied with the
political situation in the region and prefer independence from
Georgia.
Toal, O'Loughlin, and Kolossov, who have collaborated since 2001,
recently made a presentation of these and other survey findings and
data at the Kennan Institute, Woodrow Wilson Center, Washington, D.C.
The three researchers have authored an article which will appear in
the August 2010 issue of Post-Soviet Affairs.
The survey is part of a broader social science project funded by the
U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), "The Dynamics of Secessionist
Regions: Eurasian Unrecognized Quasi-States after Kosovo's
Independence," which aims to measure the attitudes of inhabitants in
South Ossetia, Moldova, Transdniestria, Abkhazia, Kosovo, and Georgia.
During their presentation, Transdniestria, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia
were described as de facto states, "secessionist regions that have
established internal territorial sovereignty but lack widespread
recognition and legitimacy as states in the international system."
These states all arose after the breakup of the Soviet Union and share
similar state-building aspirations. However, they differ in their
histories of wartime violence, the relationship between titular groups
and other populations, and the nature of their client-patron
relationships with the Russian Federation.
Questions covering standard of living, state building, identity,
external security, and potential for reconciliation were included in
the survey. Responses show that Abkhaz, Russians, and Armenians tended
to cluster, with most Abkhazian Georgians (those who declared
themselves Georgians, Mingrelians, and Georgian-Mingrelians and live
almost exclusively in the Gal(i) District of Abkhazia) often
expressing contrasting views. Abkhaz and Armenians felt better off
than others. A majority of Abkhaz felt their state had a better
economic situation than Georgia, although most have not travelled to
"Georgia proper" in recent years.
Among Abkhazia's four major nationalities, Abkhaz were most proud of
belonging to their ethnic group (though others expressed extremely
high rates of pride as well). More than 70 percent of Abkhaz indicated
they also had a Russian passport, with levels even greater among
Armenians and Russians. Approximately half of Georgian respondents
indicated they had an Abkhazian passport. High numbers of all
nationalities indicated they had never felt discriminated against
where they currently live but amongst Georgians there was a distinct
minority who did not feel the same.
Most Abkhazian residents felt that the problem of a renewed war with
Georgia was no longer a major worry. Toal explained that "after August
2008, which saw the introduction of large numbers of Russian troops
along the Inguri river separating Abkhazia and Georgian proper and the
recognition of Abkhazia as an independent state by the Russian
Federation, the non-Georgian majority within Abkhazia have crossed a
mental threshold and feel done with Georgia." The legacy of the
1992-93 war remains, however, said Toal.
The largest divide in the whole survey between nationalities was in
response to the question: "Would you be willing to accept the full
return of Georgian refugees to Abkhazia in return for Abkhazia's
recognition as a state by the West and the rest of the international
community?" More than 80 percent of Abkhaz and Armenians said "no" and
only a few indicated "yes," whereas 34 percent of Georgians answered
affirmatively (almost as many Georgians chose '"hard to say").
Ultimately, the survey found that Abkhazia is a divided society, with
the non-Georgian nationalities unwilling to consider themselves a part
of Georgia or to countenance the return of those displaced by war from
the region.
From: A. Papazian