April 15, the relevant Committee of the Parliament of Abkhazia starts the debate of the two bills — one relating to the turnover of residential properties, this project provides for the purchase of residential property by foreign nationals. Second — opposing the idea of opening the Abkhazian real estate market to foreigners, the draft law on the moratorium on the adoption of legislation that regulates the acquisition of real estate in the country by non-citizens of the Republic.
Thus, a clash not just of different opinions about how to sell real estate to foreigners (read: Russians) or not, and start a global debate about the future of Abkhazia.
It is also interesting that in themselves two opposing ideas on whether or not to allow the Russians the legal ownership of real estate in Abkhazia, are of purely local value. Whichever of these projects was adopted, to any fundamental changes in the nature of economic and social processes in the country. It is important in this case everything is cluttered wrestling, the information posted by different sources have been of these bills.
As for the content, or the feeling that the bill, which includes the green light to the Abkhaz ownership of real estate to Russians, quite “raw”. There is no reflection of different social dispositions on the matter, no reflection and socio-cultural specificity of the country. But, in principle, the authors stated that the document is open for editing, but as an initial starting position to obviously start bargaining on this issue, the project are adequate.
The bill, which provides for the moratorium, non-viable, although it is rational. It is that the debate on the admission of citizens of Abkhazia in the country’s property market can continue after you have taken the necessary and really important legislation, without which the real estate market in the full sense become civilized can not. This and the land registry, which is not and Housing code, etc. But the problem is that, given the collapse of the state as such, and the crisis of state institutions, and lack of money for all these activities, necessary legal acts are not taken for a long time. And so the meaning of the moratorium devalued. The bill ignores the reality, which is that between Abkhazia and Russia there is an active economic and human activity, the movement of capital, people, ideas. Accordingly, the citizens of both countries will improve their lives on both sides of the border, and thus, buy real estate, invest in business projects, in their education, etc., the Legal act that ignores these realities will drive in the shade, eventually criminalized the property market, which will create numerous costs and reputational nature, and ultimately in the relations between the two countries. So the idea of a moratorium is a good populist idea, it’s a good political Declaration, which will gather a large number of people under the banner of the politicians promoting it. But real life is not relevant. In any case and the bill on the moratorium — also a basis for bargaining.
This can be finished to talk about the content of the bills. Another is more interesting is what is behind the looming confrontation.
Behind the confrontation is a split — ideological, generational, property, eventually. Very bad signal — the radicalization of public opinion on this issue. Speech already goes not about a dispute of intellectuals that would be correct, since this is a tactical dispute over how to development. Formed another, more profound than the one that now is, not bureaucratic nomenclature, and ideological split.
Although, again, the bills are not of a strategic nature, they serve as “fuel” for the promotion of conflicts around the discussion of the formats of the future of the country.
The question is, what type of development preferred — extensive development, the priority of which most are qualitative and quantitative indicators of growth in the number of jobs and tax base, or sustainable development, in which priority is given to conservation of habitat and natural landscapes. Pay attention to the fact that the active opposition ripen about all ideas associated with the rapid economic development of the oil property (the consciousness draws built 20-storey buildings Gagra coast), railway, road to the North Caucasus (her turn is not yet reached, but still ahead).
But, first of all, Abkhazia was late for this train, the time of extensive development ends, is not and will not in the future of money. And actually, in this sense, Abkhazia today there are huge advantages, because it is green, eco-friendly, not contaminated by anything, nor waste, nor excessive urbanisation of the space.
But green space is still the development strategy. And the fact that today opponents of the “major projects”, is conservation of the ruin, lifeless space, a territory where nothing happens. And that is why they, unfortunately, eventually lose the supporters of extensive development. Because we cannot test the patience of people. They can’t live for decades without meanings, there is no way that entire generations, having lived, not created anything new. Therefore, sooner or later, no matter how wanted the society to live in a green and quiet country, it is willing that the children lived better “score” on ideals. To avoid this, an alternative to extensive growth must be real, decorated in specific initiatives and projects, and healthy, it is visible for a short period of time has to change people’s lives for the better.
Itself the same question of real estate in all of this is quite minor. But those who oppose, unintentionally of course, see this as a threat to the established format of life, trying as hard as possible to cement. This property of human nature. Although this is a key threat. This format of life is bankrupt.
The conflict around the law on real estate and shows us another characteristic of the present reality. Association on the basis of opposition of a bill on the regulation of real estate turnover is a very bad trend. In fact this provides the basis for a new “rally point” of identity, which is primary, of course, not the law itself, and search for “external threats”. In General, it is normal for the early stage of the formation of a new national identity, but the problem is that any early stage was delayed, or at least one and a half decades were thrown out of life. Public consciousness seeks to answer the question of why everything turned out so sad. But the influence of “external forces” on the situation in the country all these years was minimal.
The political environment in this situation is to prevent the radicalization of public consciousness, to the internal problems and crises are not caused even and foreign policy issues. And here the choice for a particular politician — or he works for rank, influence, and based on short-term interests “blows up” the situation, or, on the contrary, working for the future, calms facing the wrong way protest. And this is not bare rhetoric. The current situation in Abkhazia that there are no tools for any rapid normalization of the socio-economic environment. And a wave of popular protest would take turns to knock down some politicians over others. And those who now want to use the “real estate factor” for growth, tomorrow, the next wave of opposition will be defeated before the media even more radical ideas.
