The 65th round of the Geneva International Discussions, held from November 1–12, 2025, ended without any progress in resolving the Georgian–Abkhaz and Georgian–South Ossetian conflicts. As with all previous rounds, the sides reiterated their longstanding positions without finding any common ground, and the cycle is expected to repeat with each new session.
Abkhaz journalist Inal Khashig, writing for Chegemskaya Pravda, argues that the format of the Geneva Discussions is inherently unproductive and that real progress will only occur if Georgia engages in direct talks with Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The discussions were initially designed after the 2008 war under the Medvedev–Sarkozy agreements, serving as a replacement for the failed Georgian–Abkhaz negotiations under UN auspices. However, Khashig contends that these discussions have become a mechanism to maintain a “bad peace” without any real intention of reaching a resolution.
From the outset, the Geneva Discussions were not meant to be a negotiation but rather a venue for airing positions and diffusing tensions. With no binding resolutions or genuine efforts to reconcile the parties involved, these discussions have become an unproductive ritual. The format of four annual meetings, all following the same predictable pattern, has failed to evolve despite shifting geopolitical realities.
Khashig notes that the discussions, initially reflective of the geopolitical landscape post-2008, have become outdated, particularly after the collapse of the old world order in 2022. The current global context, characterized by a resurgence of unresolved conflicts and new geopolitical divisions, demands a more active approach.
During Mikheil Saakashvili’s tenure, Georgia abandoned direct dialogue with Abkhazia and South Ossetia, hoping that external pressure from the EU and the U.S. would force Russia to withdraw its recognition of these territories. After Saakashvili, the Georgian Dream party continued this stance, refusing to engage directly with the separatists. However, over the past few years, Georgia sought to negotiate with Russia independently, especially after tensions with the EU escalated. Yet, these efforts have failed to yield results, and even Russian-backed proposals, such as a Georgian–Abkhaz confederation, have not come to fruition due to Abkhaz resistance.
The crux of the issue is that while Russia may exert influence over Abkhazia, the Abkhaz themselves would never accept any deal without their consent. Moscow’s involvement alone cannot resolve Georgia’s territorial integrity concerns.
As Georgia faces a deteriorating relationship with both the EU and Russia, the question arises: Is it time for Georgia to abandon its reluctance and engage directly with Sukhum (Abkhazia)? Khashig argues that this direct dialogue is now the only viable path forward for any meaningful resolution.
