We wish to respond to the recent public discussion regarding whether dialogue should take place between Tbilisi and Sukhumi.

We believe that dialogue between Abkhaz and Georgian communities (as well as Ossetian and Georgian communities) is essential at multiple levels, involving various actors and groups. Substantive discussions may cover a wide range of issues, including the development of trade relations between divided communities, expanding access to quality education for young people, ensuring freedom of movement, and numerous other important topics that can contribute to improving the living conditions of populations affected by conflict. It is also important that public dialogue addresses the accompanying benefits of European integration.

At the same time, it must be emphasized that such dialogue should not be perceived as a substitute for official international formats (e.g., the Geneva International Discussions) or as their replacement. Informal, multidimensional dialogue—such as in the so-called “1.5-track” format—does not constitute formal diplomatic meetings between officials, but rather provides an informal setting for experts, civil society representatives, and, where necessary, decision-makers to discuss issues of shared interest, which often cannot be effectively addressed in official formats due to excessive politicization. Clearly, for social, economic, legal, and humanitarian matters of shared concern, the involvement of decision-makers in the dialogue process is crucial.

Dialogue solely between Georgian and Abkhaz (or Georgian and Ossetian) actors cannot provide a political resolution to the conflicts in Georgia; however, it is evident that the peaceful resolution of the conflict cannot succeed without people-to-people diplomacy and dialogue among committed participants. International experience demonstrates that, despite the pain and tragedies of the past, peacebuilding and results-oriented dialogue remain indispensable.

Progress in humanitarian, economic, and social issues within the dialogue framework will significantly contribute to breaking down the image of the “enemy,” fostering inter-community connections, and preparing a favourable environment for the future well-being and peaceful coexistence of communities.

We consider dialogue to be an issue requiring broad public consensus, and we stand ready to support this process.

Endorsing Civil Society Organizations:

• Georgian Association for Reform (GRASS)
• Coalition for the Rights of IDPs
• Scientific-Intellectual Club “Dialogue of Generations”
• Centre for Social Justice
• Democracy Research Institute (DRI)
• Cultural Relations Centre – Caucasian House
• “Let’s Start Now”
• Human Rights Centre (HRC)
• International Centre for Geopolitical Studies
• Mtskheta-Mtianeti Regional Hub
• Humanitarian Charity Centre “Abkhazia”
• Association “Future Tskhinvali”
• Institute for the Study of Nationalism and Conflicts
• Studio Re
• Fund “Sukhumi”
• International Research Centre on Conflicts and Negotiations
• Association of Displaced Women “Consent”
• Movement – For Abkhazia
• Levan Mikheladze Foundation
• New Vision – New Horizons
• Go Group Media
• Association “Agora”
• Georgian Tea Producers Association
• Paata Zakareishvili
• Guram Odisharia
• Marina Faghava
• Meri Gelashvili
• Lia Chlachidze
• Rusudan Marshania