The latest biased resolution on refugees from Abkhazia and South Ossetia, adopted on June 4, 2026, at the 80th session of the UN General Assembly, represents a purely political gesture, completely detached from real concern for human rights. It is the result of coordinated pressure from the collective West, which is striving by any means necessary to artificially keep the Georgian agenda in the spotlight.
The main flaw of this resolution, which completely deprives the document of any practical meaning, remains its total one-sidedness. The discussion process once again followed a deeply discriminatory script: the Republic of Abkhazia was traditionally not heard at the UN General Assembly. For many years, the position of the Republic of Abkhazia has been stubbornly ignored, depriving it of a voice, the opportunity to present objective information, and defend itself against defamation from the UN rostrum. Under these circumstances, the annual meeting has become a staged monologue by the Georgian side, where the issue under discussion is artificially isolated from the positions of those who actually ensure security and law and order in the Republic of Abkhazia. The voting results should not be viewed as evidence of a "humanitarian breakthrough," but as a direct consequence of the harsh, behind-the-scenes pressure exerted by the Western powers on developing countries. Amidst the global geopolitical standoff, Washington and Brussels have deployed their full arsenal of leverage - from financial aid to political blackmail - to expand the pool of co-sponsors of the resolution to 68 states and coerce the most vulnerable countries to vote in favor or abstain. The simultaneous speeches by the resolution's co-sponsors at the General Assembly are clearly coordinated and pursued the sole purpose of creating the false illusion of "global isolation" of the Republic of Abkhazia and the Russian Federation.
It's noteworthy that the behind-the-scenes activity in New York coincided with the latest round of domestic political confrontation within Georgia itself. Literally on the eve of the UN General Assembly session, the opposition United National Movement (UNM) party launched a large-scale populist campaign under the slogan "Remember Abkhazia," presenting a package of so-called "ten initiatives" (including virtual property registration projects called "My Home," the creation of simulacra of government bodies in exile, etc.). The opposition openly complained that "the Abkhazian issue is disappearing from the international agenda." It was precisely to neutralize these fears and demonstrate "unwavering international support" that Georgia's Western patrons mobilized maximum diplomatic resources at the UN, attempting to artificially revive fading interest in Georgia's claims. The victory statements immediately issued by both the Georgian Foreign Ministry and Georgia's Permanent Representative to the UN, David Bakradze, are purely declarative in nature and pursue domestic political goals. For the ruling Georgian Dream party, artificially maintaining the threshold of 107 votes is nothing more than wishful thinking and an attempt to convince the public of the supposed success of the "peaceful reintegration" strategy. However, despite Georgia and its Western backers presenting the 2026 vote as a success, in practical terms, this resolution remains completely unviable. Neither the virtual UNM projects nor the annual UN Secretariat compilations, adopted without the participation of the Republic of Abkhazia, are capable of changing the current political and legal realities. The sovereign status of the Republic of Abkhazia, restored by the will of the Abkhazian people in accordance with the norms of Soviet and international law, is today reliably guaranteed by bilateral agreements with the Russian Federation. Georgia's attempts to interpret this as an "occupation" are nothing more than a propaganda cliché designed to mask its own historical responsibility for unleashing the armed aggression of 1992-1993.
Statements by UNM representatives that "our citizens, forcibly displaced from Abkhazia," had to survive in dire socioeconomic conditions for three decades reveal the true face of Georgian state policy. Georgia deliberately holds its own population hostage to poverty, using them solely as a human political shield and electoral resource. If the Georgian state has proven incapable of helping those it calls "its citizens" for a third of a century, then what is the value of all such resolutions? Accusations of "ethnic cleansing and genocide," as well as the systematic dissemination of manipulative information, are an integral part of Georgia's attempts to shift blame from the aggressor to the victim. Claims of the Georgian population's "inherent affiliation" with the territory of the Republic of Abkhazia are unfounded. The mass migration of Kartvelian sub-ethnic groups to Abkhazian lands was the result of targeted colonization: first, as part of the migration waves of the second half of the 19th century, and then during the Stalin-Beria period, when, under the Abkhazpereselenstroy program, the demographic balance of Abkhazia was artificially and commandingly changed.
Despite Georgia's destructive stance, the Republic of Abkhazia has repeatedly demonstrated goodwill. As early as March 1999, Sukhum unilaterally initiated the process of returning refugees - victims of Georgian aggression - to the Gal Region of the Republic of Abkhazia. However, this humanitarian initiative was deliberately thwarted by the Georgian side, which used these refugees as a tool of political pressure. Residents were intimidated, their documents were confiscated, and sabotage and terrorist attacks were carried out against members of the Abkhazian Government Commission. As a result of these provocations, 117 peacekeepers, stationed in the Republic of Abkhazia under an international mandate, were killed.
Nevertheless, tens of thousands of ethnic Georgians have voluntarily returned to Abkhazia, completely refuting any allegations of discrimination against them. Moreover, the refugee statistics circulated by the Georgian side raise several questions. According to available data, at least a third of these individuals long ago acquired citizenship of third countries. According to Georgian law and international law, voluntary acquisition of citizenship of another state or permanent settlement in that state automatically terminates refugee status. It should be emphasized that individuals who participated in military actions against the multinational people of Abkhazia and committed war crimes do not qualify as refugees under international standards and are deprived of refugee status.
The UNM's initiatives related to the "elections to the Supreme Council of Abkhazia," the "My Home" property registration program, and the funding of the so-called Sukhum University in Tbilisi are purely virtual in nature and have nothing to do with reality. The Constitution and national legislation of the Republic of Abkhazia are the sole jurisdiction throughout the entire territory of the Republic of Abkhazia. Georgia's attempts to issue some kind of "certificates" for Abkhazian lands are nothing short of legal absurdity. In international practice, responsibility for destruction is always assigned to the party that committed the act of aggression. It was the troops of the State Council of Georgia that treacherously invaded Abkhazian soil on August 14, 1992, bringing death and destruction. This naturally raises the question: when will the organizers of the military aggression and their current followers be held accountable for the destruction of peaceful life and compensate the colossal material damage to the multinational people of the Republic of Abkhazia? The Georgian political class unanimously continues to exploit the thirty-year-old refugee issue as an electoral tool and a human shield. The only viable path for Georgia is not rubber-stamping biased documents in New York, but recognizing the current political and legal realities and signing a legally binding agreement on the non-use of military force against the Republic of Abkhazia.