Abkhazia and South Ossetia should not be independent from Georgia

His arguments are as follows: 1. There is a historical background for the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia from Tbilisi as the two have already entered into separatist conflicts in the past. 2. The independence of those regions would actually make the Caucasus calmer. 3. The Abkhaz and Ossetian peoples are aware of their history and do truly want their independence. 4. The inhabitants of Abkhazia and South Ossetia have a right to self-determination. Now, I will equally debate those points in the order they have been listed. 1. The fact that there has already been separatist conflicts between the two peoples and Georgia does not mean there is a "historical background" for the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. It is true that South Ossetia had already seceded from Tbilisi in 1991, but this does not imply that Ossetians have ever been independent in the past. I also agree that there was a ethnical conflict between Ossetians and Georgians in 1918-1921, but South Ossetia was NOT independent at that time, it was a part of the Gori district of the Georgian Democratic Republic. There was a conflict because Ossetians were supporting Bolsheviks and had nothing to do with the ethno of the minority (in fact, the Georgian administration had good relations with non-Bolshevik ethnos, such as Armenians, Azeris, Muslims, and even Abkhazs), and the Georgians were right, as in 1920, Ossetians would rise a red flag over the Georgian city of Tskhinvali, raided Gori, and blocked the Surami tunnel, crucial link between Eastern and Western Georgia which had nothing to do with South Ossetia's geographic claims, while many former rebel leaders will help the Soviets invade Georgia in 1921. There was no "genocide" of Ossetians by Georgia. In fact, there were much more ethnic Georgians killed in 1992 than Georgians. Also, there is the issue of Abkhazia. Abkhazia did secede in 1992, but only because the local legislative body was only made up of ethnic Abkhazs and Russians, who agreed to vote secretly for the independence while the Georgian deputies, who represented the majority of the organ, were in vacation. In 1919, Abkhazia's (which was a part of Georgia) parliament entered into a political crisis as a part of its Abkhaz pro-Bolshevik members decided to secede in order to enter Soviet Russia, but the fact that they were in a minority allowed pro-Georgian Abkhazs to take control of the region and the Georgians gave autonomy to Abkhazia. 2. I am not sure of your claim that conflicts will decrease in case of Abkhazia's and South Ossetia's independence. At least, not for South Ossetia. There is litteraly no natural border between Georgia and South Ossetia. People from both sides cross the political frontier everyday to sell their products on local markets. Villages are divided in two by the Russian military and South Ossetian militia posts. And every time crossing happens, South Ossetian authorities arrest people for "illegaly crossing the border" or "spying on behalf of Georgia". This doesn't create an appeasement situation. As of today, there is at least 2,500 Georgians living in South Ossetia. For there to be peace, the 15,000 Georgian IDPs that followed the 2008 war will need to go back in their homes, while another 10,000 Georgian refugees coming from the 1990s conflict will have to get back, too, if South Ossetia wants to join the U. N. The population shift would thus make the Georgian population go up to almost 30% of South Ossetia's entire population. This is a lot and, considering the nationalism that both the Georgians and Ossetians have, neither one of them will agree to live peacefully together, as one will claim that the other is usurpating its historical lands. Moreover, take a look at this quote of the Ossetian scholar Vasil Abaev, "No authorities of Georgia will agree with this [the separation of South Ossetia]. And they will be right, because this will mean violation of Georgia's territorial integrity [. .. ] Who wants peace between South Ossetians and Georgians, should reject for ever the idea of South Ossetia joining North Ossetia. Who wants peace between Georgia and Russia, should also put this idea aside. This is the reality. " (. http://www.freewebs.com...) And this argument can also be argued with Abkhazia. In case of worldwide recognition of Abkhazia, the country's authorities will have to agree with the return of some 250,000 ethnic Georgians expelled from Abkhazia in 1993 and 2008. In case they do return, which is supposed to happen in the near future, the Georgian population would make up more than 50% of the total population of Abkhazia, which is also a lot and again, won't allow a peaceful situation to come into force unless Abkhazia joins Georgia back. Moreover, in a historical point of view, Georgia was seen as a guardian of peace in the entire Caucasus. That is how she was known in the Middle Ages, as well as during the Soviet Union. That is why Russia started its annexation of the Caucasus in 1801 with that of Georgia, before invading North-Caucasus. This is because of facts that are above of realpolitik and above of some Moscow or Washington politics and can only be explained by long-aging cultural and spiritual ties between all the Caucasian peoples and Georgia. Keeping Georgia unable to achieve her mission is a mistake, as has shown the many wars in Chechnya, Ossetia, Abkhazia, Karabagh, Ingushetia, and others, all somehow provoked by Russia. 3. I will keep claiming my point that Abkhazs and Ossetians aren't aware of their true background because of the fact that they believe Georgia was an imperialistic country in the Middle-Ages and invaded their lands in that period. The truth is different : Ossetians came into South Ossetia in the 17-18th century, while Abkhazs are ethnically more related to ethnic-Georgian Mingrelian and Svan tribes than anything else. Children's history textbooks are deliberatly changed, all old maps drawn by European travelers in the 17th century are being taken off the historical sources and changed by 20th century Russian-drawn maps. (You can check here . http://eng.expertclub.ge...). 4. I agree with Con on the fact that self-determination is an important doctrine, but so is territorial integrity. For the Ossetians, self-determination cannot be argued as the Ossetian nation already has its historical home in today's North Ossetia-Alania. They came into Georgian lands from the 17th century all the way to the 20th century. Look, for instance, the unbelievable increase of the Ossetian population in the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali, where, at the time of the establishment of the autonomous region by Moscow in 1922, there were only 613 Ossetians against 1,436 Georgians, against 12,432 Ossetians in 1959 and 4,652 Georgians. This shows that a policy of 'Ossetianization' obviously occured in Georgian lands. On the other hand, Abkhazs were made to believe by Russian imperial authorities that their nation was different from that of Georgians' in the 19th century. But culturally, religiously, and even ethnically, most Abkhazs are Georgians and Abkhazia is a part of the Georgian nation. In the West, we also value the principle of territorial integrity. So why is it that Georgia is not able to benefit from this principle and has to suffer the division of its territory, while 300,000 Georgians are now living in poor conditions and even in the streets all around Georgia because they cannot live in their fathers' homes in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. I do not believe any culture believe in such a doctrine. .. I look forward for a deep answer coming from Con.