Magda Cardenas – Women and peacebuilding in Georgia

1. 1
WOMEN-TO-WOMEN DIPLOMACY IN GEORGIA: A PEACEBUILDING
STRATEGY IN FROZEN CONFLICT
Magda Lorena Cardenas
Umea University
This research analyses the extent to what the strategies led by women´s grassroots organizations can offer particular
opportunities for peacebuilding in a frozen conflict setting such as Georgia and the breakaway territories of South
Ossetia and Abkhazia. These conflicts are primarily territorial and related to separatist aspirations which are based,
on the surface, on ethnic differences. However, the precedent of inter-ethnic dialogue shows that there is not an inherent
“us-against-them” narrative separating Georgia from Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Therefore, it is possible to create
alternative arenas for dialogue and mutual understanding among the parties. To this end, this study adopts a broad
approach to peacebuilding as a long term social transformation of hostile attitudes and exclusive narratives. I argue
that women-to-women diplomacy is a peacebuilding strategy with the potential to address the roots of polarization by
“humanizing the other” and identifying common ground for cooperation and inter- ethnic dialogue in Georgia and the
breakaway territories. The empirical research based on the experiences of women’s organizations in Georgia illustrates
the contribution of women-to-women diplomacy to peacebuilding given their leaning for a comprehensive agenda and a
wider understanding of the nature of the conflict. Furthermore, this strategy offers an alternative paradigm of identity
which is not based on ethnicity but on the common field of the achievement of equal rights.
Key words: Frozen conflict, peacebuilding, people-to-people diplomacy, women-to-women
diplomacy, gender, women, participation, identity.
Introduction
Can women offer particular opportunities for peacebuilding in frozen conflict settings such as
Georgia and the breakaway territories of South Ossetia and Abkhazia? Recent scholarship has
identified greater equality in participation in peace processes is beneficial for the settlement of civil
wars as well as stability in the post-conflict society (Olsson & Gizelis, 2015). However, we know less
about how women can provide the crucial breakthrough that creates momentum when the process
has stalled and inter-ethnic trust is low or non-existent.
The decline in fighting in the world in recent decades (Goldstein, 2011; Pinker, 2011) does not
mean that all formerly active wars have been resolved. Indeed, the most common outcome of
conflict after the end of the Cold War is neither a victory nor a peace agreement but that fighting
ceases while grievances and sometimes the armed actors remain in place (Kreutz, 2010). Such
situations have been referred to as “frozen conflicts” or a “cold peace” where – despite talks which
may be ongoing –decades can pass without any tangible progress towards conflict resolution. Cases
of protracted conflicts can be found around the world, including China-Taiwan and Somaliland, but
the phenomenon is particularly common in Eastern Europe and the post-Soviet states.
Despite the prevalence and the importance of dealing with these situations, there is very little
research into peacemaking in frozen conflicts. The study of institutional and diplomatic mechanisms
for conflict resolution has been the foremost research subject in this field. That is the case of
Georgia and the frozen conflicts with the breakaway territories of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. I
argue that in this conflict setting it is possible to study an alternative approach wherein
peacebuilding is used despite a lack of conflict resolution. To do so, this study goes beyond the

2. 2
conventional approach of peacebuilding1
which places it primarily as a post agreement strategy and
holds the definition of a long term social transformation of hostile attitudes and exclusive narratives
(Lederach, 1997).
Frozen conflicts are defined as those having little or no violence and little threat of large scale
violence; however the hostile relationships among the parties and the causes of the conflict remain
in place. In addition, they are primarily territorial and related to separatist aspirations, often leading
to the establishment of a de facto regime, which is not recognized by the central regime or the
international community (Nodia, 2015). On the surface, Abkhazia and South Ossetia base their
separatist claims on real or perceived ethnic differences from the national majority. However, the
shared history as a mixed inter-ethnic community in Georgia shows that the “us-against-them”
narrative has been encouraged in the conflict period by political and strategic reasons.
In this type of conflict there is no agreement between the parties while at the same time not
sufficient resources or capabilities to start fighting, which leads to this idea of “freezing” and hoping
that there will be concessions in the future. Both Georgia and on the other hand Abkhazia and
South Ossetia know that they are not likely to win a war, even though the latter have security
guarantees from Russia to ensure that they are not at risk of being defeated. Russia has geostrategic
interests in keeping the situation frozen and has been fueling the ambition of the rebels to distance
themselves from the central Georgian state by creating the idea of inter-ethnic enemies. Thus, the
dominant perception in which grievances are irresolvable has led to a situation of no confrontation
and no compromise (Ohlson, 2008).
Hence, it is worth asking if it is possible to have true peacebuilding in a frozen conflict setting. By
approaching peacebuilding as a societal change, this paper aims to analyze alternative arenas for
dialogue in the current deadlocked negotiation process taking place within Georgia and the
breakaway territories. Since, the institutional mechanisms developed to solve the conflict such as the
Geneva Talks and the Incident Prevention and Response Mechanism “IPRM”2
, have not shown
tangible results in terms of conflict resolution, addressing local initiatives and community concerns
is imperative. To do this, it is important to use a “bottom-up” peacebuilding approach focused on
creating trust and links across communities, as well as offering opportunities for people to voice
their interests and to share their respective negative experiences from the conflict. Hence, bottom-
up diplomacy materialized through “people to people diplomacy” is a strategy to find common
ground for potential cooperation.
I contend that women can make a particular contribution to peacebuilding in frozen conflict setting
when they conduct initiatives on “people-to-people diplomacy” given their leaning for inclusive
agendas and a wider understanding of the nature of the conflict and its implications across different
levels of society. By analyzing scholars’ work on this topic and experiences of women’s
organizations in Georgia, I argue that linking people-to-people diplomacy with the gender agenda in
addressing conflict is not just “fair” but also improves the likelihood of success. Women can
contribute to processes of reconciliation by creating additional interactions, specifically those
challenging the “us-and-them” dichotomy, which leads to the creation of a new arena for belonging.
1 According to Boutros Boutros Ghali in the Agenda for Peace, peacebuilding takes place in the aftermath of
international war, “it may take the form of concrete cooperative projects which link two or more countries in a mutually
beneficial undertaking that can not only contribute to economic and social development but also enhance the
confidence that is so fundamental to peace”. Report of the Secretary-General, 1992.
2 Geneva Talks were stablished in the aftermath of the 2008 war in South Ossetia with the purpose to verify the
accomplishment of the agreements to maintain the security in the region. The IPRM was created in 2009 as the
operational branch of the Geneva Talks, designed to manage the cases related to ensuring security and stability on the
ground by avoiding incidents and preventing criminal activities as well as guaranteeing effective delivery of humanitarian
aid the conflict affected population settled by the Administrative Boundaries Lines (ABL).

3. 3
In this way, gender emerges as a new paradigm for identity, one where women acknowledge the
experiences, challenges, and aims they share regardless of their ethnicity. The gender roles which
undermine the full involvement of women in society and public affairs are predominant across
different communities, and in fact, according to Kumar Das (2008), place within the ethnic
affiliations. Due to these shared experiences, it is worth analyzing the extent to what women-to-
women diplomacy in Georgia has a greater chance of actually influencing the societal underpinnings
of a frozen conflict and improving cross-community interaction and dialogue.
The aim of this paper is not to test and evaluate the specific effects of these measures (it is too early
in the process), but to analyze the contribution that women have made to conflict resolution
between Georgia and, Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Besides, it contributes to theory development
with regards to approaches to address frozen conflicts. Another theoretical contribution is the
emphasis on the role of women within the idea of people-to-people diplomacy in frozen conflict.
The empirical contribution consists of a study of efforts of women-to-women diplomacy in these
conflicts.
This paper is structured as follow. The first section outlines the conceptual and theoretical
framework related to frozen conflict, people-to-people diplomacy, and the role of women in
peacebuilding. The following session presents the methodological strategy and the empirical
material. The analysis follows with the role developed by women within the processes of conflict
resolution and peacebuilding. In order to illustrate their contribution, I present initiatives in the field
of people-to-people diplomacy by analyzing efforts of women-to-women diplomacy through the
work of Fund Sukhumi, Women’s Information Center and Consent IDP among others. In my
conclusion, I discuss the contribution of these developments to the transformation of the
predominant conflict narrative and to improve intercommunity dialogue.
Peacebuilding in frozen conflicts
Frozen conflicts are common across the globe. According to the recent data of the Conflict
Barometer,3
there were 223 violent and 186 non-violent conflicts in the world in 2015 (HIIK, 2016).
In much of the international relations literature, they are seen as relatively positive situation as they
at least limit human suffering compared to a full-fledged war. However, the continuance of the
underlying conflict affects the livelihood, economic development, security, and human rights
situation in the involved countries. The greatest threat lies in the immediate border areas, where
competing territorial claims often occur, and rival states often sponsor violent opposition groups to
fight against their neighbouring regime (Conrad, 2011). Similar to enduring rivalries between states,
frozen conflicts are often related to territorial issues where the rebel side is seeking secession or
autonomy from central rule. These territories may not necessarily be resource rich or strategically
important but are often claimed to be symbolically important by a self-defined ethno-nationalist
community (Toft, 2005).
Even if violence has completely ended between the belligerents, a failure to settle the conflicting
issue can at best only lead to what Miller (2000) calls a “cold peace.”4
He argues that even if this
means little visible violence, their remains the great risk of derailing into a resumption of war
following a change in the regional or international balance of power. The Georgia-Russia war over
the breakaway territory of South Ossetia in 2008 presents a clear example of this situation.
3 While most conflict data collection focus con the occurrence of conflict and on violent cases, the Conflict Barometer
produced by the Heidelberg Institute for International Conflict Research list non-violent “latent” conflict situations, in
addition to ongoing violent conflicts.
4 Miller refers to ideal types of regional peace: Cold peace, normal peace and warm peace.

4. 4
Political leaders and military bureaucracies increasingly institutionalize the conflict situation as a
“zero sum” game where defeat constitute a high risk that the ethnic community would disappear as
an entity. Such ingrained institutions further the polarization and security dilemma between the
parties (Ohlson, 2008), which affects all dimensions of daily life in the country including every
activity in the public sphere. As Bal Tar (2013) argues, “society members live a normalized
conflicted life, often even without realizing its tremendous effects or being aware that there are
other ways of life”. Thus, communities deliberately (or forcibly) suppress historical narratives of
interethnic cooperation as opposed to the narrative of conflict and the idea of primordial enmity
which becomes the core national identity.
As the factors that perpetuate these frozen conflicts include the inability to progress with talks
about the conflict issues and the absence of military domination on either side, the logical approach
to seek peace is to start by challenging the forces of polarization within and between the parties
through perceptions of gains from peace and joint development. According to Coleman (2006)
these types of ethno-political struggles are linked to local belief systems, that is why “the way to
intervene protracted conflicts is by altering the general patterns of interactions among the parties of
the conflict in a more constructive direction”. Building on that, Bar Tal (2013) stresses the need of
set peacebuilding’s aims in terms of achieving societal change which involves “persuasion, learning,
reframing, re-categorization, and eventually acquisition of new societal beliefs, attitudes, emotions,
motivations and patterns of behaviour”. In brief, research suggests that in order to unfreeze these
conflicts, it is necessary to address the local societal processes that reinforce polarization and
conflict narratives.
Therefore, steps toward grassroots peacebuilding are particularly important in unfreezing the
conflicts between Georgia and the breakaway territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Building on
Lederach’s (1997) approach to peacebuilding as a long-term contribution to social change which
needs the participation of a wide range of actors5
, this study emphasizes the role of grassroots
organizations. Particularly in frozen conflict settings, given their historical grievances and
mainstreamed hostile attitude and narratives, it is critical to work “at the most fundamental human
levels to change the relationships involved” (Chufrin, G.I. & Saunders, H.H. 1993).
Public diplomacy: A bottom-up approach in practice
The bottom-up approach allows the analysis of the local level as the “microcosm of the bigger
picture of conflict’s dynamics” (Lederach, 1997) and is crucial to understand both the grievances
and the aspirations of the warring parties and to find alternative mechanisms for conflict resolution,
even in a frozen conflict setting. It also provides the parties a greater insight regarding each other’s
needs, fears, priorities, and constraints; and to understand the motives and the ways in which the
conflict-driven interactions among the parties tend to escalate and perpetuate the conflict (Kelman,
2000).
Public diplomacy is a bottom-up mechanism employed to acknowledge the multiple actors involved
in a conflict, their particular affectations and their inputs in the processes of conflict resolution and
peacebuilding. Thus, public diplomacy can be understood as a mechanism for social peacebuilding
since the involvement of civil society can provide valuable contributions to the official channels of
negotiation and governmental processes, as well as to help develop contextualized and consonant
5 Lederach identifies three levels of actors which are needed simultaneously to achieve the goal of sustainable peace
(Garweck, 2006). The first level is represented by leaders and policymakers, the second by academics, opinion leaders,
and representatives of key sectors of society who can influence decision making processes, and the third is constituted
by grassroots leaders and organizations

5. 5
strategies. By addressing individual issues and experiences, it makes possible to identify shared
problems and identify solutions across communities whether it is a family, a village, a region, or
ethnic groups. This is particularly important to bridge the “us-against-them” narrative between
ethnic identities by noting that there are shared concerns and aspirations as well as shared suffering
for people on both sides of the border. As Davies and Kaufman (2002), argue this kind of dialogues
offer the opportunity of humanizing “the other” and to encourage momentum for peace and
reconciliation. This mechanism has been implemented in the cases of India-Pakistan, Israel-
Palestine, and South Africa, and is the main focus of this study in the cases of Georgia, Abkhazia
and South Ossetia.
The plurality of actors and the analysis of the local level are particularly important in attempts to
resolve intractable conflicts. Since these conflicts are based on intercommunal cleavages, they
cannot be analysed merely as a political problem and so it is necessary to focus on relation building
among the ordinary people and this way, achieve peace at the societal level (Yilmaz, 2006). The
mechanism to develop these interactions in the framework of public diplomacy is called people-to-
people-diplomacy and the aim is to implicate civil society, both networks and grassroots level, in
every stage of the process of conflict resolution and peacebuilding.
These initiatives cannot fully substitute or be substituted by an official diplomatic process. They do
not seek to negotiate strategic positions either but to challenge the widespread zero sum rationale by
acknowledging shared interests and potential field for cooperation. People-to-people diplomacy
contributes to strengthen civil society and encourages a critical mass by situating citizens within the
context of public debate. Therefore, it represents a window of opportunity for the creation of new
patterns of belonging and identity. Moreover, an important contribution is to develop a common
ground of interests and potential cooperation in which citizens can identify themselves as
individuals rather than parties of the conflict. In fact, the strategies developed to this end often
exclude references to the conflict. Instead of discussions on conflict-related experiences, these
encounters use art, sports, and science among others to increase the participants’ knowledge of the
other and build “a sense of common humanity” (Saunders, 1999). Initiatives developed in Bosnia
Herzegovina, for instance, tried to bring people together for reasons not related to the conflict.
Rather than reconciliation and dialogue, the idea was to create awareness of the possibility of
cooperation. As a result of that, people evaluated the intercommunity encounters as positive
experiences which often produce concrete outcomes and a sustainable work in joint initiatives
(Paffenholz, 2013).
Women-to-women diplomacy
Scholars and practitioners have partially explored the potential of spill-over from the experience of a
specific community, or even an individual, even so, this is a promising field to transform conflict
narratives and to move towards consensus-building. On the other hand, there is an increased
interest both from an academic and policy perspective on the role of women in peacebuilding.
However, we know less about how women can contribute to create momentum for peacebuilding,
particularly from the grassroots level. The United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 on
“Women, Peace and Security” calls for the inclusion of women in the different stages of peace
negotiation and peacebuilding. While the spirit of the resolution is in part based on moral ideas of
equality, this study explore gender as an approach to address frozen conflict.
In these conflict settings, the narratives and stereotypes which perpetuate the idea of the enemy and
constrain the possibility of dialogue are often based on a fierce identity in which ethnicity or religion
have been prescribed as exclusive values. However, it is worth asking how gender can be considered

6. 6
a wider paradigm of identity with the potential to challenge this mainstream narrative and to create
opportunities for mutual understanding and integration, and thereby constitutive of an important
approach for conflict resolution.
Gender roles and the struggle of women to challenge them are not exclusive to an ethnic group or
religion, but spread worldwide. According to sociological theories “many women are socially
restricted to find power through relationships with others rather than through power over others in
traditional political or economic structures” (Schirch, 2012). The shared aim to confront the
lopsided gendered order and the structures that perpetuate violence allows women to establish long
term alliances by seeking not just the promotion of women’s rights, but a comprehensive agenda of
human rights and equality.
According to Ivecovic (2008), women recognize themselves as “inside others” within their
communities, so they can find social roots which perpetuate a conflict beyond ethnicity, religion, or
other ideas of nationhood. “For women, peace movements begin with struggles over their ability to
be heard and lead on to a fight against all forms of imbalances and oppressions”. Where there are
gender norms which disenfranchise women, there is also momentum for coalition building to revert
that order as a preamble of peace.
Another feature in women’s involvement in peacebuilding is that contrary to the competing sides,
women have fewer reasons to view negotiations as a zero sum game. “Women are thought to
undertake peace initiatives on behalf of their communities, rather than for personal gain; this
perception of neutrality and their willingness to engage with both sides allow women the
opportunity to monitor warring factions on the ground and to engage them in meaningful dialogue”
(McCarthy, 2011).
Thus, women can cross lines of division and demystify notions of the ‘other’ in order to include all
parties in the resolution of conflict (Noma, Aker and Freeman, 2012). Through dialogue and
interactions, women would recognize the shared aims, interests, and struggles beyond the ethnic
group to which they belong. By looking beneath an ethnic or national identity, women might find
political and moral values in common, as well as the willingness to challenge injustices and thereby
encourages them to work together. The sense of commonality helps women to deconstruct the
male predominant way to understand the values of equality, inclusion, and justice.
Institutional mechanisms of conflict resolution and peacebuilding often inhibit women’s
participation or consider it as a formality. Therefore, unofficial initiatives or what I refer in this
paper as women-to-women diplomacy offer alternative ways for engagement and participation.
Women reclaim space, but they are also willing to create their own scenarios to influence peace
negotiations, and even more, to push the societal change needed for a sustainable peace. Women’s
initiatives have demonstrated that there are multiple channels for dialogue, among them informal
domestic network that can also escalate to decision makers as the case of Liberia (Gilmaz, 2011).
The clear benefits of women’s involvement go beyond theoretical framings. International
experiences, such as Kosovo Women Network, and Women’s Development Federation in Sri
Lanka, demonstrate the capacity of women’s organizations to positively influence the political
agenda and to provide specific inputs to decision and policy makers. Women also contribute to the
transformation of widespread narratives that too often define conflicts. “Women’s associations can
also significantly shape public opinion through grassroots movements and public demonstrations,
such as mass mobilizations for peace whenever there is a threat of a return to violence” (McCarthy,
2011).
Noma, Aker and Freeman (2012) acknowledge the capacity of women to “see the big picture” and
to deepen the concept of peacebuilding. The crosswise nature of women’s agendas allows them to
address issues relating to the causes and effects of conflict, frequently based on the concept of

7. 7
human security by joining the three pillars of the United Nations (human rights, security, and
development). Another advantage of getting women involved in peacebuilding is their capacity to
establish more stable alliances and long term projects given the comprehensive nature of their
agenda. To sum up, women-to-women diplomacy can contribute to peacebuilding in the following
ways: Promoting Inter-community dialogue, making women victim’s voices heard, peacebuilding
behind the stage and creating a bridge to official diplomacy.
Research design
This study seeks to contribute to theory about peacebuilding in frozen conflicts, focusing
particularly on alternative channels conducted by women such as people-to-people diplomacy. To
do so, I combine a conceptual and theoretical discussion with a case study of frozen conflict in
Georgia6
. The aim of this study is not to directly test existing theoretical framework, meaning that
the case is exploratory and instrumental without the motivation to identify a causal explanation
towards a clear, predefined outcome (ie: ”peace”) (Baxter and Kack, 2008). Instead, the empirical
investigation in this study is as a so-called plausibility probe, which serves as a “preliminary study a
relatively untested theory to determine whether more intensive and laborious testing is warranted”
(George and Bennett, 2005). Since literature on peacebuilding has been primarily developed on the
basis of a post conflict setting, this study aims to explore the potential of people-to-people
diplomacy as a peacebuilding strategy in frozen conflicts when this strategy is conducted by women.
By applying theoretical concepts such as frozen conflict and people to people diplomacy in an
empirical case, this study helps clarify what these theoretical terms actually imply and how they can
be made observable and thus researchable.
The unit of analysis for this study consists of those initiatives of people to people diplomacy
conducted by women in the frozen conflicts in Georgia. In the theoretical and concluding sections,
I contribute to the literature on people to people diplomacy by arguing that interactive women-to-
women projects create particularly promising areas for this type of peace building. The empirical
focus of the study, though, is limited to the specific initiatives aimed at fostering interaction
between Georgian, Abkhazian, and South Ossetian communities.
The sources of this research encompass literature review in combination with material collected
primarily with local women’s organizations and institutional sources. It is based on fieldwork in
Georgia conducted between the 8th of March and the 22nd of April, 2016. The research was mostly
performed in Tbilisi, with occasional visits to Kutaisi and Gori where I conducted semi-structured
interviews in four categories: Women’s organizations, international organizations, international non-
governmental organizations, or public officers. In the first category, I interviewed the director of
Women’s Information Center, Fund Sukhumi, and Consent IDP Women’s Association. These
organization have been recognized by their contribution to the promotion of women’s rights in
Georgia. Second, I approached the European Union Monitoring Mission and UNWomen in order
to explore their role in the conflicts and their insights on women’s role in processes of conflict
resolution and peacebuilding. Third, in terms of non-governmental international organizations,
interviews with “Kvinna till Kvinna” and “The Institute for War and Peace reporting” provided
another view of the conflict and analysis in the field of people to people diplomacy. Fourth,
interviews with delegates from the Office of the State Minister of Georgia for Reconciliation and
Civic Equality, which is the main institutional actor in the ongoing negotiation with the breakaway
6
A case study can be described as a study of a single case – defined as a spatially demarcated phenomenon, or unit,
observed at a certain time, consisting of one or more (within-case observations) – for the purpose of refining theory,
clarifying terminology, or explaining “a larger class of cases” i.e. a population (Gerring, 2007).

8. 8
territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, were crucial to analyse the challenges in terms of conflict
resolution. In addition, the dialogue with public servants at the National Defence Academy
provided important elements both for an historical analysis.
Women and Peacebuilding in Georgia
Georgia became independent in 1990 and in the same year the first democratic elections led to the
victory of the nationalist party. The new regime wanted to overcome the Soviet legacy by aiming for
a western political model. In doing so, the political project quickly transformed Georgia into an
over-centralized model enforced by legislation that set a clear distinction among the population and
prevent the inclusion of ethnical minorities (George, 2009). This was opposed by separatist
movements in the regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia with active civil conflict in South Ossetia,
1991-92, 2004 and 2008 and, in Abkhazia, 1992-93. Ceasefires were agreed but the structural debate
regarding the status of Abkhazia and South Ossetia remain unresolved and the conflict frozen. In
the aftermath of the 2008 war, the so-called Geneva Talks7
were established as an international
mediation process in order to achieve a comprehensive agreement to guarantee the stability and
security in the region.
During the state formation of independent Georgia, women’s political viewpoints and feminist
activism were encouraged (Ivecovic, 2008) and women’s rights were in Georgia’s state building
agenda as a crucial theme towards their goal of adopting western values. According to Chkheidze
(2010), the advancement of women and gender, and their mainstreaming in policies were some of
the objectives of the post-communist governments. However, the challenges of the institutional
design, the economic recovery, and the emerging conflicts were prioritized while a progressive
leadership and commitment to women’s rights stayed solely in the field of rhetoric. Furthermore,
the male dominant social structures, patriarchal traditions and behavioural patterns influencing both
private and public spheres remain as barriers for female participation.
Nevertheless, the decade of the 90s was crucial in the rise of women’s organizations which
acknowledged the potential of their activism and networking to develop alternative mechanisms of
participation. Owing to that belief, they shaped what I refer in this study as “women to women
diplomacy”. Organizations such as Consent IDP Women Association and Fund Sukhumi were
stablished with the initial purpose of protecting the rights of IDP women. However, they soon
realized the potential of their organizations to contribute to conflict resolution.
The mechanisms of women-to-women diplomacy
Promoting Inter-community dialogue
From the very beginning, initiatives of women’s organizations made clear that their work and goals
were not based on exclusive national aims. On the contrary, they have led a multi-ethnic dialogue
toward peace and stability and have promoted regional initiatives based on the idea of creating
transnational solidarity for conflict resolution. Important experiences such as the “Caucasus
Forum,” a network of civil society leaders from Georgia, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Armenia,
Azerbaijan, and Chechenia (Akaba, 2012) and the regional platform “Women of the Caucasus,”
have promoted women’s rights and protections against Gender based violence, particularly
7 Integrated by the European Union, United Nations, OSCE, United States, Russia, Georgia, Abkhazia, and South
Ossetia, Geneva Talks also seek the accomplishment of the commitments related to the use of force and the protection
of human rights for people living in the occupied territories.

9. 9
domestic violence. This activism soon transitioned towards more politically-oriented issues and
provided clear evidence of the spill-over potential in women-to-women diplomacy by showing how
networks of active women from the South Caucasus “serve a dual purpose, pooling women’s rights
expertise and serving as a platform for peacebuilding and dialogue” (Peace Direct, 2015). The year
2003 is a milestone for Women of the Caucasus after have approached the heads of the official
delegations at the Georgian-Abkhaz negotiations with a proposal for a joint discussion on the
situation in the Gal(i)8
district of Abkhazia and the need to sign the agreement on the non-
resumption of hostilities (Akaba, 2012). Women’s organizations realized the potential of people-to-
people diplomacy to escalate initiatives and to effectively present their findings to decision makers.
Fund Sukhumi constitutes another experience of women’s activism for inter-community dialogue.
This organization established in 1997 with the primary objective of guarantying the enjoyment of
rights for IDP women also decided to take part in the resolution of the conflict. Alla Gamakharia,
its director, described how in 1998 they organized a joint meeting in Soichi with Abkhaz women to
discuss different views on the conflict and their ideas for the future. “It was a complicated meeting
but it was possible to overcome some communication barriers and plan activities together.”9
Afterwards, meetings, workshops, and conferences took place to deepen mutual knowledge and
understanding. These dialogues showed participants the cross-border nature of many of their most
serious problems and needs such as gender inequality and domestic violence, among others.
Constant, another women’s organization focused on IDP has also explored women-women-women
diplomacy through bilateral meetings between IDP women from Georgia and Abkhazian.
Consequently, a five year strategy was designed for the development of joint projects. Beyond
networking at the level of grassroots organizations, one of the important outcomes of this initiative
was the rise of personal relationships among the participants, a symbolic way to break the paradigm
of ethnic antagonism and the destabilizing narrative of “us-against-them”10
.
International organizations have also supported women-to-women diplomacy. “Women peace net”,
for instance, sought to build a platform for women leaders involved in peacebuilding. This provided
a stage for women to write about issues they wanted to be raised in the frame of formal negotiation,
such as the implementation of Resolution 1325 and the need for institutional responses to fight
against gender based violence. Furthermore, it was critical to challenge propaganda and hate speech.
Although it took time for the platform to capture an audience and attain credibility, it became more
influential and successfully reached two thousand monthly readers. From 2012 to 2015, women
shared ideas and were inspired by others’ success stories. From a personal dialogue, this initiative
became an instrument for political incidence. The lessons learned by this strategy motivated a
second phase “Analytical women peace net” in which journalists were involved in order to gain the
skills related to gender sensitive reporting.11
Make women victims voices heard
Consent IDP’s projects originally addressed the needs of conflict affected communities and the
integration of IDP. By implementing their strategies, they realized that a holistic attention to the
needs of women and girls negatively influenced by the conflict could only move forward when it
includes strategies oriented to empowerment. To this end, Consent IDP has implemented education
programs to provide access to a wide range of sources of information and to support community
leaders for peacebuilding strategies. For instance, “Developing Innovative Solutions for conflict
8 The spelling of the district is still contested. Georgians refer to this as Gali while Abkhazians call it Gal.
9 Interview with Alla Gamakharia, Fund Sukhumi, Kutaisi, April 11th 2016.
10
Interview with Julia Karashvili, Consent IDP, Tbilisi, April 5th
2016.
11
Interview with Regina Jegorova-Askarova, Institute of Peace and War Reporting, Tbilisi, April 6th
2016.

10. 10
affected communities” illustrates the comprehensive approach of the organization. this project
seeks to broad cast the needs, interests and concerns of the conflict affected population and to
advocate for them at the local and national level. Furthermore, it provides organizational and
leadership skills which allow population in conflict affected areas to create initiative associations and
seeks to strengthen capacity of NGO in the fields of advocacy, mediation and negotiation.
Fund Sukhumi, shares the objective of improving life conditions for IDP as a priority. However, as
their projects evolved, their priorities encompass calling for women’s empowerment. In doing so,
the first step was to raise women’s awareness regarding their rights and how to best protect them.
The School of Young Women Leaders was the first initiative to prepare young women for their
active participation in peacebuilding and political processes in Georgia. Furthermore, projects such
as Strengthening of women’s rights in Western Georgia have contributed to a more active role of
women in society and in the family which has a possitive impact in decreasing cases of domestic
violence. Other examples can be found in projects such as “Enhanced capacity of women's groups
and their motivation to participate in election campaigns and peacekeeping,” and “Conflict Analysis
from Gender Perspective: Women Vision of the possible scenarios for future”, which engage
women in the analysis of political issues and their role in the attainment of a sustainable peace.
Peacebuilding behind the stage
Is it possible to work on conflict resolution and peacebuilding without mentioning the word
“conflict” itself? The widespread narrative of “us-against-them” often inhibits interactions among
Georgians, Abkhaz and South Ossetians. Therefore, women’s organizations have realized the
imperative of creating alternative strategies in which citizens are treated primarily as individuals
rather than parties of the conflict. Women-to-women diplomacy contributes to this end by
“humanizing the other” which is the first step to transform conflict narratives.
To achieve this goal, women’s organizations have implemented the professional gatherings as a
strategy to develop a new sense of commonality12
on account of shared interests. These meetings
allow professionals to discuss their projects and to share information about new techniques or
procedures. In this context, they are colleagues, thus the paradigm of identity is based on what they
do rather than who they are or where they come from. This strategy has been implemented with
doctors, journalists and teachers13
, among others with notable results seen through professional
networking which remain active through consultations, informal communication and sometimes
joint projects such as writing articles on their specific field14
.
Creating a bridge to official diplomacy
Given the lack of direct participation of women in the official negotiation, it is worth analysing the
link between official and non-official diplomacy. Women’s organizations have utilized lobby and
advocacy to create a space for meaningful dialogue with the delegates of the Geneva Talks. As
representatives of the international community, European Union Monitoring Mission and
UNWomen have stressed the importance of these consultations. It allows delegates to have a more
contextualized and detailed information regarding the conflicts. With regard to this matter, Maya
Rusetskaia, director of Women’s Information Center has highlighted the importance of developing
12
Concept by Banerjee (2008).
13
Teachers are crucial as a target group since 99.9 % staff in schools are women.
14
Interview with Regina Jegorova-Askarova, Institute of Peace and War Reporting, Tbilisi, April 6th
2016.

11. 11
more consultations with citizens affected by the conflict and the inhabitants of the Administrative
Boundary Lines’ surrounding areas.
There have been more improvements in terms of the IPRM than the political discussion at the
Geneva Talks. According to Fund Sukhumi Director Alla Gamakharia, women’s organizations work
is based upon a human security approach which is an important matter needed to develop
comprehensive proposals to address existing situations regarding Georgian and Abkhazian society
such as water pollution, mobility and the right of Georgian minority in the de facto territories to
receive education in their native language15
.
Beyond the context of the Geneva Talks, it is important to analyse the work of women’s
organizations in order to be consistently engaged with the broad process of conflict resolution and
peacebuilding. The experience of the Women’s Information Center illustrates how the development
of alternative mechanisms to reach decision makers as well as how mobilising public opinion and
academic interest in the promotion of women’s rights rests firmly as a security and peace issue.
They succeeded in raising awareness of the importance of adopting Resolution 1325 and then
started a process of monitoring its unfolding, the results of which are shared with community based
organizations.
By implementing Resolution 1325, Georgian institutions and society developed a wider
understanding of women’s role in both conflict resolution and peacebuilding. It has been crucial for
civil society to take part not only in the ongoing negotiations, but in the policy making field as a
whole, to make women visible and incorporate their agenda in the political debate.16
Moreover, it
has been a frame of reference in the design of public policies and enforcement of strategies related
to the promotion and protection of women’s rights. In terms of public diplomacy, it has helped
build a bridge between grassroots and governmental processes (Peace Direct, 2015).
Discussion
This paper has analysed the influence of people-to-people diplomacy in frozen conflict settings and
the benefit derived when this strategy is conducted by women. The experiences of women’s
organizations in Georgia strengthen this assertion since their initiatives demonstrate that women’s
agenda encapsulates more than the promotion of women’s rights but a crucial social transformation
that occurs as a result of the acknowledgment of equal rights.
The strategies on women-to-women diplomacy implemented in the conflicts of Georgia and the
breakaway territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia have helped create networks for cooperation
based on the acknowledgment of shared interests and challenges which are highly influenced by the
predominant gender roles within their communities. These strategies are particularly important in a
frozen conflict setting since they confront the dominant narrative defined as “us-against-them” and
acknowledge the possibilities of joint development.
Women-to-women diplomacy contributes a wider understanding of the causes of the conflict
involving issues related to “hard” and “soft power”. There is assumption that women should
primarily participate in the latter topics. However, the experience of Georgia evidences how
women’s strategies have addressed "hard" issues such as the return of refugees, the economic
recovery in ABL’s surrounding areas and the need of incorporating a Human Security approach in
the frame of Geneva Talks.
15
Since September 1st
2015, the classes in Georgian language have been officially excluded from the schools of
Gali district, occupied territory of Abkhazia. More information is avalaible in
http://georgiatoday.ge/news/1111/Georgian-Language-Banned-from-Gali-Schools
16 Interview to Malin Askhamre from Kvinna till Kvinna, April 5th
2016.

12. 12
Despite the improvements stemmed from these projects, there are difficult barriers for women-to-
women diplomacy to succeed in terms of a straightforward incidence in peacebuilding. According to
Julia Karashvili, one of these barriers is that Resolution 1325, which has been crucial in Georgia to
create more scenarios for women’s participation, is unfortunately not currently achievable for South
Ossetia and Abkhazia. Additionally, the barriers imposed by the de facto government, who is
controlling and restricting the work of NGOs by introducing new legal hurdles to international
cooperation and fund management. The situation is particularly difficult for South Ossetia where
many organizations have been closed. Although Abkhazia faces less restrictions its NGO cannot be
considered totally free which seriously affect the possibilities of networking.
Women’s interaction is clearly needed to foster an open environment of dialogue toward
peacebuilding, though at this moment people from Abkhazia and South Ossetia still have problems
getting engaged in these kinds of initiatives. Radical positions within communities in Abkhazia and
South Ossetia, which have been fuelled by Russian propaganda, can inhibit the opportunities for
women to spread a discourse of mutual understanding and reconciliation. That is why, as Karashvili
stresses, organizations involved in strategies for women-to-women diplomacy need to take care to
guarantee the personal security of the people involved and never to harm or hinder their
involvement.
Another challenge for women-to-women diplomacy is rooted in the social attitudes regarding
women’s roles in public affairs. “Gender inequality is a barrier for women to get their voices
raised,”17
despite the evolution in “gender speech” during the last decade, there are still restrictions
for women to influence decision makers, either at the community level or even more within high
politics. Nevertheless, this fact has not disenfranchised women to mobilise but enforced their goal
to engender the process of peacebuilding.
Conclusion
By analysing the conflicts between Georgia and the breakaway territories of Abkhazia and South
Ossetia, this study sets out to contribute to existing literature by developing theory in three main
areas. First, draws attention to the context of frozen conflict and identify the opportunities and
challenges of peacebuilding in such settings. Second, this study advances an argument that public
diplomacy may be particularly advantageous as a peacebuilding strategy in this kind of conflict.
Lastly, among the multiple strategies of public diplomacy, I argue that people-to-people diplomacy,
particularly when led by women, has a great potential to address the roots of polarization by
“humanizing the other” and to identify common ground for cooperation.
I contend that these conflicts illustrate how peacebuilding can occur prior to the formal resolution
of the conflict issue in a frozen conflict setting. The aims of Abkhazia and South Ossetia are not
constructed by essential ethnic differences but shaped by contemporary political objectives as, in
fact, an historical analysis of the evolution of these conflicts shows a precedent of inter-ethnic
dialogue. For this reason, civil society use alternative dialogue on-the-ground in order to shift the
prevalent conflict narratives that at the surface have been considered unresolvable.
Building on the literature that advances a wider understanding of peacebuilding as a long term
process which seeks social transformation and cannot be restricted to a post conflict setting, this
study has contended that widespread us-against-them narratives and hostile attitudes can potentially
be transformed. The initiatives led by women’s organizations in Georgia have facilitated cross
border dialogue and have provided alternative channels to recognize shared interests and challenges
as a population mutually affected by ongoing conflict.
17
Interview with Regina Jegorova-Askarova. IPWR

13. 13
The importance of women’s role in creating momentum for “unfreezing” this kind of conflicts
cannot be based on essentialist assumptions that women are by nature more suited for
peacebuilding. Women and men can both serve as agents of conflict or for peace. Nevertheless, the
findings from the Georgian experiences support the argument made by scholars and practitioners
regarding the importance of women’s inclusion. Since the traditional gender roles are similar on
both sides of the conflict, women arguably already possess a shared identity which is not based on
ethnic differences but rather on common aims and challenges when it comes to becoming more
influential in society. Likewise, this also means that women in both societies have, to some extent
similar (negative) experiences of the conflict and its effects when it comes to security threats and
challenges for improving family livelihoods. However, the capacity for coalition- building among
women has not been exclusively built on acknowledging victimhood but a common goal of
empowerment and transforming male dominated societies.
Women’s organizations have achieved important progress such as consolidating strong networks.
However, it is worth noting that different strategies in the field relating to people-to-people
diplomacy are not exclusive, but complementary. The experiences analysed in this study
demonstrate that the gender-based approach and the direct participation of women strengthens
other forms of people-to-people diplomacy such as those initiatives developed by youth, victims,
etc. This is why these women’s endeavours are not limited to only the promotion of women rights
but is important for an overall human rights agenda.
Another important contribution of women is to encourage the adoption of a human security
approach in the peacebuilding agenda. As argued by Anderlini, women have the capacity to identify
security threats and challenges beyond the conflict setting. This is particularly important in the
context of frozen conflict where there is limited “battlefield” violence, but where a human security
approach acknowledges the risks of multiple sources of violence, including attacks on civilians and
domestic abuse.
A limitation of the study is that it is challenging to empirically determine the effectiveness of
women-to-women diplomacy since these strategies address primarily the transformation of
narratives, attitudes, and a wider understanding of conflict. What can be seen, however, in the
Georgia example is that the successful implementation of these programs seems to contribute a
positive development with regards to mutual understanding and an increased willingness for inter-
community dialogue at the local level.
Another challenge for exploring this aspect with an evidence-based approach is the lack of specific
indicators that could evaluate whether women-to-women interactions are more effective than other
people-to-people interactions. However, the findings from this study show that one of the particular
contributions of women-to-women diplomacy in Georgia has been the implementation of a
comprehensive agenda covering a broad range of themes. This includes initiatives that have the
potential to develop into institutional mechanisms, or at least influences agenda setting and
influential decision and policy makers.
To conclude, this study has started to explore the theoretical underpinnings and the possible policy
advantages of using women-to-women diplomacy. As shown from the case study of Georgia, this is
an approach that is being used and it may facilitate progress in a frozen conflict. However, the
scholarly and policy communities still know little about the effectiveness of these approaches or
how they can best be designed to reach positive results. To this end, there is a need for much more
research on this topic in the future, in particular in the form of comparative study of cases of
successful conflict resolution and cases where peacebuilding has been unable to “unfreeze” the
situation.

14. 14
Bibliography
Akaba, N. (2012). The Peacebuilding Experience of the Caucasus Women’s League. In: B. Khishvili,
J. Java, J. Schofield and L. Sotieva, ed., Mediation and Dialogue in the South Caucasus: A Reflection on 15
Years of Conflict Transformation, 1st ed. London: International Alert.
Anderlini, S. (2007). Women building peace. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Pub.
Asmus, R. (2010). A little war that shook the world. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Banerjee, P. (2008). Women in peace politics. New Delhi, IN: Sage.
Bar-Tal, D. (2013). Intractable conflicts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Baxter, Pamela & Snyder, Jack. (2008). Qualitative Case Study Methodology: Study Design and
Implementation for Novice Researchers. The qualitative Report, 13 (4), 544-559.
Bell, C. and O'Rourke, C. (2010). PEACE AGREEMENTS OR PIECES OF PAPER? THE
IMPACT OF UNSC RESOLUTION 1325 ON PEACE PROCESSES AND THEIR
AGREEMENTS. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 59(04), pp.941-980.
Bell and Klein, E. (2006). Peacebuilding in the South Caucasus: What can the EU contribute?. [online]
London. Available at: http://www.international-
alert.org/sites/default/files/publications/EU_South_Cau_small.pdf [Accessed 9 Mar. 2016].
Blakkisrud, H. & Kolstø, P. (2012), "Dynamics of de facto statehood: the South Caucasian de facto
states between secession and sovereignty", Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, vol. 12, no.
2, pp. 281.
Borgen, C. (2007). Imagining Sovereignty, Managing Secession: The Legal Geography of Eurasia's
"Frozen Conflicts. St. John's University School of Law. Faculty Publications, [online] (117), pp.477-535.
Available at: http://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/faculty_publications/119 [Accessed 3 Jun. 2016].
Boutros-Ghali, B. (1995). An agenda for peace, 1995. New York: United Nations.
Broome, B. (2002). Participatory planning and design in a protracted conflict situation: applications
with citizen peace-building groups in Cyprus. Syst. Res., 19(4), pp.313-321.
Chaney, P. (2016). "Civil Society and Gender Mainstreaming: Empirical Evidence and Theory-
Building from Twelve Post-Conflict Countries 2005–15", World Development, vol. 83, pp. 280-294
Chkheidze, K. (2010). CAUCASUS ANALYTICAL DIGEST. Caucasus Analytical Digest. [online]
Tbilisi. Available at: http://www.css.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/cis/center-
for-securities-studies/pdfs/CAD-21-2-4.pdf [Accessed 9 Mar. 2016].
Chinkin, C. (2003). Peace Agreements as a Means for Promoting Gender Equality and Ensuring Participation of
Women. [online] Ottawa: United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women (DAW), pp.1-
34. Available at: http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/egm/peace2003/reports/BPChinkin.PDF
[Accessed 25 May 2016].
Chinkin, C. and Charlesworth, H. (2006). Building Women into Peace: the international legal
framework. Third World Quarterly, 27(5), pp.937-957.
Chufrin, G.I. & Saunders, H.H. (1993). "A Public Peace Process", Negotiation Journal, vol. 9, no. 2,
pp. 155-177.
Clancy, M. and Nagle, J. (2009). Frozen Conflicts, Minority Self-Governance, Asymmetrical Autonomies. In
search of a framework for conflict management and conflict resolution. [online] University of Ulster. Available
at:

15. 15
http://www.fesasia.org/media/publication/2009_AER_Paper_Frozen%20Conflicts_Clancy_Nagle
.pdf [Accessed 16 Jun. 2016].
Coleman, P. (2006). Conflict, Complexity, and Change: A Meta-Framework for Addressing
Protracted, Intractable Conflicts--III. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 12(4), pp.325-348.
Conrad, J. (2011). Interstate Rivalry and Terrorism: An Unprobed Link. Journal of Conflict Resolution,
55(4), pp.529-555.
Coppieters, B. (2012). Conflict resolution after the 2008 Georgia–Russia War: the Taiwan and
Kosovo models as tools for mobilization and comparison. Nationalities Papers, 40(5), pp.677-701.
Cunningham, D. (2010). Blocking resolution: How external states can prolong civil wars. Journal of
Peace Research, 47(2), pp.115-127.
Davies, J. and Kaufman, E. (2002). Second track/citizens' diplomacy. Lanham, Md.: Rowman &
Littlefield.
Derouen, K. and Bercovitch, J. (2008). Enduring Internal Rivalries: A New Framework for the
Study of Civil War. Journal of Peace Research, 45(1), pp.55-74.
Fabry, M. (2012). The contemporary practice of state recognition: Kosovo, South Ossetia,
Abkhazia, and their aftermath. Nationalities Papers, 40(5), pp.661-676.
Florea, A. (2014). "De Facto States in International Politics (1945-2011): A New Data Set",
International Interactions, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 788-811.
Galtung, J. (1996). Peace by peaceful means. Oslo: International Peace Research Institute.
Gamakharia, E. (2015). Women's paticipation in Geneva Talks: Problems, achievements, prospects. [online]
Kutaisi: Federal Department of Foreign Affairs FDFA, pp.48-80. Available at: http://Women's
paticipation in Geneva Talks: Problems, achievements, prospects [Accessed 22 Mar. 2016].
Gahramanova, A. (2007). Peace strategies in “frozen” ethno-territorial conflicts: integrating reconciliation into
conflict management. Mannheimer Zentrum für Europäische Sozialforschung: Working Paper, no. 5,
pp. 20-48.
Garb, P. (2009). The view from Abkhazia of South Ossetia ablaze. Central Asian Survey, 28(2),
pp.235-246.
Gawerc, M. (2006). Peace-building: Theoretical and Concrete Perspectives. Peace & Change, 31(4),
pp.435-478.
George, J. (2009). The politics of ethnic separatism in Russia and Georgia. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
George, Alexander. & Bennett, Andrew. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences.
Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
German Development Institute (DIE). The Convergence of Peacebuilding and State Building:
Addressing a Common Purpose from Different Perspectives. Briefing Paper 4/2009.
Gizelis, T. (2009). Gender Empowerment and United Nations Peacebuilding. Journal of Peace
Research, 46(4), pp.505-523.
Gizelis, T. (2011). A Country of their Own: Women and Peacebuilding. Conflict Management and Peace
Science, 28(5), pp.522-542.

16. 16
Gleditsch, Nils Petter, Peter Wallensteen, Mikael Eriksson, Margareta Sollenberg, and Håvard
Strand (2002) Armed Conflict 1946-2001: A New Dataset. Journal of Peace Research 39(5): 615-637.
Goldstein, Joshua S. (2011) Winning the war on war: The decline of armed conflict worldwide. Penguin.
Graalfs,U. (2011). "THE GEORGIAN-ABKHAZ DIALOG AND SECOND TRACK
DIPLOMACY", International Journal on World Peace, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 35-43.
Gerring, John. (2007): Case Study Research: Principles and Practices. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Ikenberry, G. and Saunders, H. (1999). A Public Peace Process: Sustained Dialogue to Transform
Racial and Ethnic Conflicts. Foreign Affairs, 78(5), p.164.
International Alert, (2010). InternatIonal engagement In the georgIan-abkhaz conflIct resolutIon process.
[online] London, pp.35-43, 86-92. Available at: http://www.international-
alert.org/sites/default/files/publications/Georgian-Abkhaz.pdf [Accessed 18 Mar. 2016].
International Crisis Group, (2010). Abkhazia: The Long Road to Reconciliation. Europe Report 224.
[online] Brussels. https://d2071andvip0wj.cloudfront.net/b58-georgia-securing-a-stable-future.pdf
[Accessed 19 Mar. 2016].
International Crisis Group, (2013). Abkhazia: The Long Road to Reconciliation. Europe Report 224.
[online] Brussels. Available at: https://www.crisisgroup.org/europe-central-
asia/caucasus/abkhazia-georgia/abkhazia-long-road-reconciliation [Accessed 9 Mar. 2016].
HIIK -Heidelberge Institute for International Conflict Research- (2016). Conflict
Barometer,2015,Available at
http://www.hiik.de/en/konfliktbarometer/pdf/ConflictBarometer_2015.pdf [Accessed 25 Mar.
2016].
Ivecovic, R. (2008). Women, Nationalism and War: "Make love not war". In: P. Barnjee, ed., Women
in Peace Politics, 1st ed. London: SAGE, pp.112-130.
Kelman, H. (2000). The Role of the Scholar-Practitioner in International Conflict Resolution. Int
Studies Perspectives, 1(3), pp.273-287.
Kelman, H.C. (2010), "Looking Back at My Work on Conflict Resolution in the Middle East",
Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 361-387.
Kelman, H.C. (2015), "The Development of Interactive Problem Solving: In John Burton's
Footsteps: Development of Interactive Problem Solving", Political Psychology, vol. 36, no. 2, pp.
243-262.
Kirova, I. (2012). PUBLIC DIPLOMACY AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION: RUSSIA,
GEORGIA AND THE EU IN ABKHAZIA AND SOUTH OSSETIA. CPD Perspectives on
Public Diplomacy. [online] Los Angeles: Figueroa Press. Available at:
http://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/sites/uscpublicdiplomacy.org/files/useruploads/u35361/2012%20
Paper%207.pdf [Accessed 22 Jun. 2016].
Kobakhia, Javakhishvili, Sotieva and Schofield, B. (2012). Mediation and Dialogue in the South Caucasus:
A Reflection on 15 Years of Conflict Transformation Initiatives. 1st ed. [ebook] London: International Alert.
Available at:
http://www.internationalalert.org/sites/default/files/publications/201208MediationSCaucasusEng.
pdf [Accessed 3 Sep. 2016].

17. 17
Kolstø, P. & Blakkisrud, H. (2008), "Living with Non-recognition: State- and Nation-building in
South Caucasian Quasi-states", Europe-Asia Studies, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 483-509.
Kreutz, J. (2010). How and when armed conflicts end: Introducing the UCDP Conflict Termination
dataset. Journal of Peace Research, 47(2), pp.243-250.
Kreutz, J. (2012). Dismantling the Conflict Trap : Essays on Civil War Resolution and Relapse,
Uppsala universitet, Institutionen för freds- och konfliktforskning.
Kumar Das, R. (2008). Ethnicity and Democracy Meet when Mothers Protest. In: P. Barnjee, ed.,
Women in Peace Politics, 1st ed. London: SAGE, pp.54-77.
Lederach, J. (1997). Building peace. Washington, D.C.: United States Institute of Peace Press.
Lynch, D., 1970. (2004). Engaging Eurasia's separatist states: unresolved conflicts and de facto
states, United States Institue of Peace Press, Washington, D.C.
McGarry, J. & O'Leary, B. (1993). The politics of ethnic conflict regulation: case studies of
protracted ethnic conflicts, Routledge, London;New York, NY;.
McCarthy, Mary K., (2011). "Women's Participation in Peacebuilding: A Missing Piece of the
Puzzle?" 08 April 2011. CUREJ: College Undergraduate Research Electronic Journal, University of
Pennsylvania, http://repository.upenn.edu/curej/132
Mackinlay, J. and Cross, P. (2003). Regional peacekeepers. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.
Mannergren Selimović, J, Nyquist Brandt, Å, Söderberg Jacobson, A, & Kvinna till kvinna (2012).
Equal power - lasting peace: obstacles for women's participation in peace processes, Kvinna till
kvinna, Johanneshov.
Maoz, Z. and Mor, B. (2002). Bound by struggle. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Marshall, L. (2008). WOMEN ENVISION PEACE, Off Our Backs, Inc, Washington.
Miller, B. (2000). Explaining Variations in Regional Peace: Three Strategies for Peace-making.
Cooperation and Conflict, 35(2), pp.155-192.
Myrttinen, H., Naujoks, J., El-Bushra, J. & International Alert (2014). Re-thinking gender in
peacebuilding. [online] London. Available at: http://www.international-
alert.org/sites/default/files/Gender_RethinkingGenderPeacebuilding_EN_2014.pdf [Accessed 4
Jun. 2016].
Mikhelidze, N. (2010). The Geneva Talks over Georgia’s Territorial Conflicts: Achievements and
Challenges. Istituto Affari Internazionali, [online] 25. Available at:
http://www.iai.it/sites/default/files/iai1025.pdf [Accessed 3 Jun. 2016].
Nan, S. (2010). The roles of conflict resolution scholars in Georgian–Abkhaz and Georgian–South-
Ossetian conflict and conflict resolution. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 23(2), pp.237-258.
Nodia, G. (2015). Europeanization and (not) Resolving Secessionist Conflicts / Additional
Commentary to Europeanization and Conflict Resolution: Case Studies from the European
Periphery. Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe., 5, pp.1-15.
Noma, E., Aker, D. and Freeman, J. (2012). Heeding Women's Voices:Breaking Cycles of Conflict
and Deepening the Concept of Peacebuilding. Journal of Peacebuilding & Development, 7(1), pp.7-32.
Noma, Taylor and Van Schoonhoven, E. (2007). Is Peace Possible? Women PeaceMakers in Action. San
Diego: Joan B. Kroc Institute for Peace & Justice.

18. 18
Office of the State Minister of Georgia for Reconciliation and Civic Equality, (2010). Action Plan for
Engagement. Tbilisi.
Office of the State Minister of Georgia for Reconciliation and Civic Equality, (2010). State Strategy on
Occupied Territories: Engagement Through Cooperation.Tbilisi.
Ohlson, T. (2008). Understanding Causes of War and Peace. European Journal of International Relations,
14(1), pp.133-160.
O’Loughlin, J., Kolossov, V. and Toal, G. (2014). Inside the post-Soviet de facto states: a
comparison of attitudes in Abkhazia, Nagorny Karabakh, South Ossetia, and Transnistria. Eurasian
Geography and Economics, 55(5), pp.423-456.
O’REILLY, Ó SÚILLEABHÁIN AND PAFFENHOLZ, M. (2015). Reimagining Peacemaking:
Women’s Roles in Peace Processe. [online] New York: International Peace Institute. Available at:
https://www.ipinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/IPI-E-pub-Reimagining-Peacemaking.pdf
[Accessed 15 Jun. 2016].
Paffenholz, T. (2013). International peacebuilding goes local: analysing Lederach's conflict
transformation theory and its ambivalent encounter with 20 years of practice. Peacebuilding, 2(1),
pp.11-27.
Peace Direct, (2015). Women, violence and peace in the South Caucasus: a regional perspective. [online]
Available at: http://www.insightonconflict.org/2015/09/women-violence-and-peace-in-the-south-
caucasus-a-regional-perspective/ [Accessed 14 Mar. 2016].
Pettersson, T. and Wallensteen, P. (2015). Armed conflicts, 1946-2014. Journal of Peace Research, 52(4),
pp.536-550.
Pinker, Steven. (2011)The better angels of our nature: The decline of violence in history and its causes. Penguin
UK.
Ramsbotham, O. (2005). The analysis of protracted social conflict: a tribute to Edward Azar. Review
of International Studies, 31(01).
Rothman, J. ed., (2016). From Identity-Based Con fl ict to Identity-Based Cooperation The ARIA Approach in
Theory and Practice. 1st ed. New York: Springer, pp.135-156.
Saunders, H. (1999). A public peace process. New York: St. Martin's Press.
Samuels, K. (2005)."Sustainability and peace building: a key challenge", Development in Practice, vol. 15,
no. 6, pp. 728-736.
Schnabel, A. and Tabyshalieva, A. (2012). Defying Victimhood. New York: United Nations University
Press.
Shepherd, L. (2009). Gender, Violence and Global Politics: Contemporary Debates in Feminist
Security Studies. Political Studies Review, 7(2), pp.208-219.
Shevchuk, Z. (2014). "Menící se povaha ozbrojeného konfliktu v Jizní Osetii Od zamrzlého
konfliktu k otevrenému a zpet/The Evolving Nature of the Armed Conflict in South Ossetia From
"Frozen" to "Hot" and Back", Univerzita Obrany. Ustav Strategickych Studii. Obrana a Strategie,
vol. 2014, no. 1, pp. 51.
Smith, Anthony D. (2001) Nationalism: Theory, Ideology, History. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.

19. 19
Schirch, L. (2006). Linking Human Rights and Conflict Transformation: A Peacebuilding
Framework. In: J. Helsing and J. Mertus, ed., Human rights and conflict: exploring the links between rights,
law and peacebuilding, 1st ed. Washington D.C: United States Institute of Peace Press, pp.63-96.
Souleimanov, E. (2013). Understanding ethnopolitical conflict: Karabakh, South Ossetia, and
Abkhazia wars reconsidered, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Spillmann, K. and Kollars, N. (2010). Herbert Kelman's contribution to the methodology of
practical conflict resolution. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 16(4), pp.349-360.
Stiehm, J.H. (2001). "Women, peacekeeping and peacemaking: Gender balance and mainstreaming",
International Peacekeeping, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 39.
Toft, M (2005). The geography of ethnic violence: Identity, interests, and the indivisibility of territory. Princeton
University Press.
Tryggestad, T.L. (2009), "Trick or Treat? The UN and Implementation of Security Council
Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace, and Security", Global Governance, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 539-557.
Tudoroiu, T. (2015). Unfreezing Failed Frozen Conflicts: A Post-Soviet Case Study. Journal of
Contemporary European Studies, 24(3), pp.375-396.
United Nations Security Council (2000). Resolution 1325 “Women, Peace and Secrity”.
S/RES/1325.
UN Women, (2010). Women’s Participation in Peace Negotiations: Connections between Presence and Influence.
[online] New York. Available at:
http://www2.unwomen.org/~/media/headquarters/media/publications/unifem/0302_womenspa
rticipationinpeacenegotiations_en.pdf?v=1&d=20140917T101001 [Accessed 11 Jul. 2016].
Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP Conflict Encyclopedia: www.ucdp.uu.se, Uppsala
University
Waltz, K. (1990). Nuclear Myths and Political Realities. The American Political Science Review, 84(3),
p.731.
Welt, C. (2009). The Thawing of a Frozen Conflict: The Internal Security Dilemma and the 2004
Prelude to the Russo-Georgian War. Europe-Asia Studies, 62(1), pp.63-97.
Yilmaz, M. (2005). Interactive Problem Solving in Intercommunal Conflicts. Peace Review, 17(4),
pp.443-450.
Yin, Robert K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods. London: Sage.
Zürcher, C. 2007, The post-Soviet wars: rebellion, ethnic conflict, and nationhood in the Caucasus,
1st edn, New York University Press, New York.