Abstract
This article seeks to contribute to the burgeoning debate on ontological security (OS) in International Relations (IR), and sides with that part of OS scholarship that emphasizes the distinction between “security of identity” and “security of the self”. We empirically show the need for separating these two concepts by discussing the case of Russian relokanty in Tbilisi in aftermath of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Also due to the history of conflict between Moscow and Tbilisi, Russian relokanty in Georgia have found themselves in a strongly pro-Ukraine environment, and have thus faced various shaming attempts by some locals. This, combined with the existential crisis they already felt due to their country’s invasion of Ukraine, has ignited personal reflections regarding their sense of self and their identity. We thus conducted fifty semi-structured interviews with Russian relokanty in Georgia, and methodologically traced ontological insecurity as manifested by its “symptoms” of anxiety and feeling of limbo. We highlight the difference between the security of identity and security of the self by: (1) discussing how a majority of respondents displayed symptoms of ontological insecurity, but only a minority of them also experienced an identity crisis; (2) and showing how those respondents who did shift identity as a result of an identity crisis, ultimately failed to re-establish security of the self.