
1992 disengagement in Moldova's Transnistria

- Russian troops unconstitutionally occupy Moldovan territory – Constitutional Court
- Transnistria frozen conflict zone recognizes Russian tricolor as second “national” flag
- Why Ukraine must avoid the Transnistrian scenario
- Bulgaria, Moldova elect pro-Russian presidents
Mid-1990s and 2008 disengagements in Georgia
In 1990-1992, three autonomous regions of Georgia proclaimed independence. These were South Ossetia, Abkhazia, and Adjara. The populations of the first two regions bordering on Russia had an ethnic majority different from the titular ethnicity while most of the inhabitants of the third region were a subethnic group of Georgians. Unlike Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the Adjara region doesn't border on Russia. and it so happened that the Adjaran separatist movement didn't result in armed clashes in the 1990s, the region just remained in limbo until the early 2000s when the pro-Russian local separatist government was overthrown and Adjara was reintegrated in Georgia as an autonomy. 1992 South Ossetia The fighting erupted in South Ossetia as Georgia abolished the region's autonomy of the self-proclaimed "state" and tried to regain its control of South Ossetia by force. However, the Georgian attempts failed as the secessionists were supported by Russia. The March 1992 coup d'état ousted Georgian President Zviad Gamsakhurdia, and the new leader, former Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze, signed the Sochi Agreement on a ceasefire in South Ossetia on 14 July 1992 amid an unfolding separatist rebellion in another Georgian region, Abkhazia. As in the case of the agreement on Transnistria signed in the next month of the same year, the first paragraph of the agreement on South Ossetia imposed a ceasefire, the second was about the disengagement of troops to create a "corridor adjacent to the line of juxtaposition." Thus, the agreement effectively outlined the borders of the South Ossetian territory. The agreement established a joint control commission and a joint peacekeeping body both composed of "representatives of opposing parties." The latter was put under Russian command and comprised of peacekeeping contingents from Georgia, Russia, and from the Russian region of North Ossetia. The Sochi agreement left Georgia's South Ossetia divided into Georgia-controlled enclaves and areas controlled by the unrecognized government of South Ossetia.


Of course, this strategy of peaceful reintegration failed to come to any fruition in nine years of its implementation, since it doesn't take into account the full Russian control of the territories and its impact on the local populations. What is more, Russia keeps expanding the occupation zones, covertly moving the borders on a regular basis further into Georgia. Local Georgian media dubbed the Russian tactic as "the creeping border" or "the creeping occupation." Russia got away with its invasion of Georgia and the impunity spiraled into the Russian invasions of Ukraine's Crimea and the Donbas in 2014. Read more on Russo-Georgian conflicts:“The Georgian government has pledged that we will not get involved in an armed conflict. There is no way we’ll win. What we are looking for is to develop economically so that the people living in the occupied territories will want to go back to Georgia.”
- The Russian war against Georgia is far from over
- Georgia slams “elections” in occupied Abkhazia as legitimizing Russian aggression (2017)
- Ten years after: why Georgia failed to reintegrate its occupied territories (2018)
- Military photos from the Abkhaz-Georgian ceasefire in 1993
Disengagements in Ukraine's Donbas
Just like in September 1994 Abkhazia, the Russian-hybrid forces in the Donbas seemed doomed in the summer of 2014 after Ukrainian troops took control of most of the uncontrolled stretch of the border with Russia and nearly finished encircling two regional capitals, Luhansk and Donetsk. However, Russia unleashed transborder artillery and rocket attacks on Ukrainian troops and later mass deployed its regular troops, recapturing most of the territory that Ukraine had managed to liberate during the military campaign. Heavy casualties among the trapped Ukrainian troops in the Battle of Ilovaisk forced Ukraine to negotiate a ceasefire. The Minsk Protocol or Minsk-1 was signed in September 2014 by representatives of Russia, Ukraine, and the OSCE in the Trilateral Contact Group (TCG) for the resolution of the conflict in the east of Ukraine. Unlike most of the other post-Soviet ceasefire agreements with Russia, it wasn't signed by the leaders of Russia and the "conflict-hosting" state, but rather by former Ukrainian president Leonid Kuchma, who wasn't even a state employee at the moment, and by then-Russian Ambassador to Ukraine Mikhail Zurabov. Later, signatures of leaders of Russia's puppet "people's republics" of Luhansk and Donetsk were added. Although it wasn't an official agreement, Ukrainian officials claimed their commitment to fulfill the deal. The document didn't demand the total disengagement of troops along the front line, however, one of its paragraphs required"To withdraw illegal armed groups and military equipment as well as fighters and mercenaries from the territory of Ukraine."The follow-up memorandum established a 30-kilometer buffer zone for heavy weaponry along the front. The ceasefire decreased hostilities but wasn't ever fully observed. Later the Russian-hybrid forces started the Battle for Donetsk Airport and in early 2015 the ceasefire completely collapsed as the battle for the Ukraine-controlled rail hub city of Debaltseve began. Once again, regular formations of the Russian army were involved in the battles alongside the locally-formed paramilitary groups comprised of local residents and Russian mercenaries.

Read the comparison of "Minsks": Minsk-2 is the real problem for Ukraine, not “Steinmeier’s formula” | Infographics
Like the Minsk-1, Minsk-2 didn't envisage the disengagement of infantry but demanded the pullout of foreign armed formations and mercenaries from the Ukrainian territory, and the pullout of artillery and rocket systems at the distances beyond operative ranges of particular types of hardware. Disregarding the new accords, the Russian-hybrid forces continued a heavy assault on Debaltseve and the Ukrainian troops were forced to retreat from the city on 18 February 2015. Under Minsk-2, Ukrainian forces had to leave several settlements including the village of Pikuzy (Kominternove) that they liberated on 10 February 2015. On 22 December 2015, the Russian-hybrid formations took control of the defenseless village. Meanwhile, Debaltseve and nearby settlements occupied after Minsk-2 was signed were never returned under Ukrainian control. Shortly after the Debaltseve Battle, the situation at the front mostly stabilized. However, from time to time the fighting escalated and new truces were negotiated over and over again by the TCG.
Further reading:
- North Caucasus expert: Moscow’s actions in Abkhazia and Chechnya justify fears about ‘Steinmeier formula’
- Piontkovsky: Frozen conflict in Donbas – ‘lesser evil’ for both Kyiv and ‘moderate imperialists’ in Moscow
- Ten years after the Russian-Georgian war: the Kremlin’s unlearned lessons
- Traps of the Transnistrian conflict
- Everything you wanted to know about the Minsk peace deal, but were afraid to ask
- Occupied Donbas risks becoming like South Ossetia (2017)
- Putin suddenly wants armed peacekeepers in Donbas. Why now? What for? (2017)
- North Caucasus republics could flourish on their own, Israeli political analyst says
- Ukraine helps Moldova regain control over border in Transnistrian region
- Georgia’s lessons of peacebuilding now instructive for Ukrainians
- Transnistria. Why Russia should leave the occupied territories
- Russian provocations test Georgia
- Stages of Russian occupation in a nutshell
- Is Russia’s passport scheme in Donbas a harbinger of full-scale invasion like in 2008 Georgia?
- Policy shift shows Russia preparing to recognize its puppet republics in Donbas
- Why Russia does not want peace in the Donbas
- Moscow to start distributing Russian passports in the occupied Donbas
- The Kremlin’s five steps towards recognizing “DNR/LNR”
- Putin’s ‘hybrid’ recognition of Moscow-sponsored breakaway republics in Ukraine
- Russia’s creeping annexation of Georgian territory
- Top 10 Russian lies about the Georgia war
- Russia determined to expand influence over former Soviet colonies
- Putin’s ‘hybrid’ recognition of Moscow-sponsored breakaway republics in Ukraine
- Military photos from the Abkhaz-Georgian ceasefire in 1993
- Major Hostile Actions by the Russian Federation against Georgia in 2004-2007
- Ten years after: why Georgia failed to reintegrate its occupied territories
- Georgian diplomat: If West allows Russia a role in Donbas, Moscow will destabilize Ukraine for decades (2015)
- How the Russo-Georgian War of 2008 Started
- Gagauzia – object lesson for Ukraine on how a ‘reintegrated’ region gives Moscow leverage
- Is Russia’s passport scheme in Donbas a harbinger of full-scale invasion like in 2008 Georgia?