Medvedev has even hinted that Russia will simply break off relations entirely with NATO if necessary. There are many issues outside of the recent war in the Caucuses on which the Russians actually help NATO: transit of troops and equipment to Afghanistan, on the illegal drug trade, on stopping North Korean and Iranian nuclear proliferation, and so on. The Russians have already started talks aimed at reducing their involvement in the WTO - freezing or withdrawing from some agreements altogether - until they have status as full members.
(Russia starts talks, etc.)

Right now, NATO has sent a number of warships to the Black Sea with "humanitarian" assistance for the Tbilisi regime. What's interesting about the role of these ships is that in at least one case the trip was planned quite some time ago. Combined with the canceled visit of some senior NATO officials to Moscow just before the Georgian bombing of South Ossetia started, this has led to some reports in the Russian media, quoting military officials, that NATO knew about the Georgian attack well in advance.

Pat Buchanan has even suggested that the officials of the Bush Administration be questioned about this in a Congressional Committee (Senate or House - I forget which). Ha ha. It's nice to see the neocons get it from the right as well as the left. Buchanan has some harsh words for the McCain Foreign Policy "point man", Randy Scheunemann, in a recent article: And None Dare Call It Treason.

A great big can of whoop ass is being opened on the lame duck Bush administration. These last few months could be highly entertaining as the Bush Rethugnicans crawl off the world stage. And it will be especially excellent if Senator McCain's Presidential hopes goes with them. After that, new struggles.

All of this may have a wonderful effect on Republican sycophants and quislings in other countries. Perhaps Harper in Canada wants to avoid the prospect of fighting an election after a electoral drubbing of his Washington masters? Could this be a reason for all this talk of an election around the corner?

quote:

---

John Laughland: As the dust settles on the conflict in South Ossetia - and as it vanishes progressively from the headlines in the Western press - one thing has become overwhelmingly clear. It is that Georgia will now never join NATO and that the balance of power in the world has therefore shifted radically as a result of this little six-day war....

More than ten years of promises that Georgia would be invited to join NATO have therefore just been quietly shelved (even if the West does not admit this openly). Moreover, not only Georgia's accession but the whole process of further NATO expansion is now on hold. If Georgia does not join NATO, then nor will Ukraine.

It is no coincidence, indeed, that tensions within the pro-Western bloc in Ukraine itself exploded just after the Ossetian conflict. President Yushchenko has accused his own prime minister, Yulia Tymoshenko, of treason for trying to curry support in Moscow for her own presidential ambitions. In a startlingly Soviet-style reflex, he has announced that he will set his secret services loose on her....

This is a historic turning point. ... The project of NATO expansion having now been arrested, perhaps for ever, the aim of creating a unipolar world around the world-wide projection of American power is now a thing of the past.

---

If Laughland is correct about this last point then these events are, indeed, a historic turning point. Somehow it seems appropriate that it comes through the rebuffing of a Georgian tyrant by the Russians ... something that would have changed the history of the world for the better if it was done sooner in different circumstances ...

John Laughland , director of studies at the Institute of Democracy and Cooperation in Paris and British historian/political analyst, wrote this piece for RIA/Novosti.

[ 25 August 2008: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

[ 25 August 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]

quote:

---

Any country seeking to control its own development or resources, regardless of its social system, is targeted. This is as true for Russia as it is for Iran, China or Venezuela.

---

The Georgian tanks were captured, intact, as their crews fled without a fight. I understand the Russians want to thank the Americans for the expensive equipment and are particularly grateful for the latest upgrades as well.

quote:

---

BBC - S Ossetia 'emptied of Georgians'

Russia is attempting to empty Georgia's breakaway province of South Ossetia of its ethnic Georgian population, the head of Europe's security body says.

---

Seems the propagandists just never stop their propaganda.

quote:

---

Russia does not like the current Georgian government, which talks
about joining NATO and the European Union. But Moscow has not recognised
Abkhazia's independence (or South Ossetia's) because that would be a
precedent that could be used by ethnic minorities in other "autonomous
republics" in Russia itself. And there is a bigger problem, too.

What horrifies the Russians about many recent actions of the United
States and some its European allies -- the war against Serbia in 1999, the
invasion of Iraq in 2003, the creation of an independent Kosovo in 2008 --
is that they are deliberately tearing up the United Nations Charter, the
rules that the victorious powers drew up at the end of the Second World War
in the hope of avoiding further great-power wars.

Attacking the UN is often popular in the United States. Republican
presidential candidate John McCain now talks about a League of Democracies
that would effectively bypass the UN (and would presumably authorise its
members to invade anybody who needed a lesson). President George W. Bush
acts as though such a vigilante outfit already exists.

The Russians, who lost forty million killed in the last world war,
think that this is a very bad idea. They are right. If the great powers
were ever to go to war again, the nuclear weapons would come out and
hundreds of millions would die.

The United Nations' core rules are that no country can attack
another, and that the whole international community will defend and
preserve the existing borders of every UN member. These rules creates much
injustice, especially when oppressed minorities are seeking independence
from intolerant majorities, but they are probably necessary. They have
certainly been useful: no great power has fought another directly since
1945.

Kosovo was legally part of Serbia, even if most of its people
didn't want anything to do with Serbia. Giving it independence without
Serbia's assent and in defiance of the UN rules suits the Western great
powers for the moment, but it undermines those essential UN rules that were
invented to bring some order to international affairs.

If Russia one day recognises Abkhazia's independence without
Georgian consent and Security Council approval, it will mean that Moscow
has finally lost its faith in international law and accepted that the world
has reverted to jungle. For the moment it's just bluffing, but to no avail.
The historically challenged dwarves who currently run foreign policy in
Washington, London, Paris and Berlin don't even understand what really
troubles the Russians.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ceti:
Gwynne Dyer's take is useful here:

---

quote:

---

Russia does not like the current Georgian government, which talks about joining NATO and the European Union. But Moscow has not recognised
Abkhazia's independence (or South Ossetia's) because that would be a precedent that could be used by ethnic minorities in other "autonomous republics" in Russia itself. And there is a bigger problem, too.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:

While this may be the case, I think a much more pertinent reason that Russia wants the status of Ossetia and Abkhazia to be "undefined" is because this is a primary reason that Georgia can not become part of NATO.

---

quote:

---

If Russia one day recognises Abkhazia's independence without Georgian consent and Security Council approval, it will mean that Moscow has finally lost its faith in international law and accepted that the world has reverted to jungle.

---

And that day is today!

In the first place, the Security Council met in Sochi, where Putin is in charge. And in the picture Medvedev is indeed at the head of the table- but with the appropriate chief clerk's pose and his eyes with everyone elses on Putin.

For what its worth, that final formal recognition will not diminish at all the obstacle those two regions will permamnently pose to Gerogia joining NATO. There will never be broad international recognition and Georgia will never give up formal claim, or the stated intention to take the territories back. And Germany and France- with support from other member nations- will never allow Georgia as a member until it relinquishes such claims.

The US will continue to provide the goodies to Georgian governments to keep them in the no compromises camp. This will keep Gerogia in the economically hobbled twilight zone- but that is a price the rulers are willing that the Georgian people pay.

quote:

---

There will never be broad international recognition and Georgia will never give up formal claim, or the stated intention to take the territories back.

---

quote:

---

And in the picture Medvedev is indeed at the head of the table- but with the appropriate chief clerk's pose and his eyes with everyone elses on Putin.

---

So it's simply tit-for-tat and the Americans, or NATO for that matter, can jump up and down making monkey screeches for all the Russians care. The latter have discontinued joint peacekeeping operations with NATO for six months already. Medvedev has even said that Russia is willing to break off relations with NATO entirely, if reluctantly, if it becomes a waste of time. They are, however, willing to continue to work with NATO in Afghanistan.

Without Russian help it would become much more difficult, if not impossible, to transport troops and equipment to Afghanistan. Russia could easily put pressure on some of the "Stans" (Uzbek, Turkmen, Tajik, Kirghiz, and Kazak) and make things very difficult for NATO in its occupation of Afghanistan. So the Russians are perhaps waiting to see how long the NATO sabre-rattling goes on, and whether it gets escalated or not, before playing all their cards. They are going to prove that NATO needs Russia more than Russia needs NATO.

I can't help but think that the Russians are going to enjoy providing the lesson.

In an interview with RT, Russian President Medvedev responded to a question about the legitimacy of recognizing South Ossetia (and Abkhazia!) by making immediate reference to Kosovo. Those NATO chickens are coming home to roost. I found his answer to a question about remarks made by the two leading contenders for the US Presidency on the current conflict amusing; Medvedev noted, with a smile on his face, that American voters tend to be indifferent to what is happening abroad when it comes to elections. He wished the two candidates all the success and, with that, ended the interview.

quote:

---

RT: Russia’s recognition of Abkhazia and South Osettia has sparked jubilation in Georgia’s two breakaway republics. Celebratory gunfire has been going on for hours in the South Ossetian capital Tskhinvali, along with blasts of loud, cheerful music. Similar scenes have occurred in Sukhumi, the capital of South Ossetia.

The celebrations in both capitals are expected to last for at least a few more days.

---

Joy in Sukhumi - radio report

Meanwhile, NATO now has nine warships in the Black Sea region, and eight more are on the way, according to Russian military spokesperson Colonel-General Anatoly Nogovitsyn. Regnum reports that a Russian Defence Ministry source claimed that there are "about 50 Tomahawk cruise missiles designed for surface attacks on board" the USS McFall.

[ 26 August 2008: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

quote:

---

How many civilians died in South Ossetia, when after being cut off from water supplies for more than a month, they were attacked by U.S./Israeli trained Georgian military forces? Somewhere between 133 and 1,492. 1,492 is the figure given by local authorities. 133 have been identified so far by Russian investigators. How many does Human Rights Watch claim? Dozens. “We believe we are talking about dozens rather than thousands,” claimed Anna Neistat, a Human Rights Watch representative.

---

The article makes a number of other points regarding HRW's unsubstantiated claim that cluster bombs were used by the Russians in Georgia, and so on, but perhaps the most useful observation is that

quote:

---

Human Rights Watch is calling for international organizations to send “fact-finding missions ... Too bad there aren’t any international human rights organizations with the money to sponsor such an endeavor that aren’t, like HRW, completely compromised.

---

Regnum reports that the exact number of South Ossetia's victims will be know NO SOONER than in a few months time.

quote:

---

The final figure of victims of the Georgian aggression against South Ossetia will be known not earlier than in several months, said Minister of Healthcare of South Ossetia Nugzar Gabarayev at a press conference held at the “Tskhinval-2008” the press center in Tskhinval. REGNUM correspondent quotes the Minister to say that the estimated death toll is about two thousand people....

There is yet another obstacle on the way of those counting the victims. ''The fact is that many relatives of the people who died are outside the republic and have not informed the authorities of their missing relatives.''

''Besides, dead bodies are still being removed from under the ruins.''

''To put it short, the number of victims of the Georgian aggression is still to be verified,” Gabarayev said.

---

Human Rights Watch, no doubt, will have moved on to other issues and will no longer be "interested" in the precise figures at that point.

[ 26 August 2008: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

quote:

---

Interfax: Russia has recognized the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia because it is responsible for the survival of those nations, the Russian Foreign Ministry said. "Russia has recognized the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, being aware of its responsibility for the survival of its
fraternal nations in the face of Tbilisi's aggressive, chauvinistic course," the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement posted on its website on Tuesday.

"By his aggressive attack against South Ossetia in the early hours of August 8, 2008, which claimed many lives, including among [which were] peacekeepers and other Russian citizens, and by preparing a similar operation against Abkhazia, Mikheil Saakashvili has himself given up on Georgia's territorial integrity," the ministry said.

"By constantly using military force against the people whom he says he wants to see as part of his country, Saakashvili has not left them any other choice but to secure their safety and the right to existence through self-determination as independent states," the statement said.

"It is unlikely that Saakashvili was unaware of what would be the consequences for Georgia of the attempt to use force to solve the South Ossetian and Abkhaz problems. Back in February in 2006 he said in one of his interviews, "I will not order a military operation. I do not want people to be killed because bloodshed in the Caucasus - it will not only last for decades, it will last for centuries." So, he knew what he was doing," the statement said.

"Nor can we ignore the role that was played by those who have facilitated Saakashvili's militarist regime throughout all these years, by supplying him offensive weapons in breach of OSCE [Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe] and EU regulations, by advising him not to renounce the use force and by creating with him a complex of impunity, including in respect of his authoritarian suppression of dissidents within Georgia," the Russian Foreign Ministry said.

"We know that at certain stages foreign patrons were trying to stop Saakashvili from reckless military ventures, but he clearly got out of control. It is alarming that not all were able to make objective conclusions from this aggression. The glimmer of hope given by the joint initiative of the Russian and French presidents of August 12, 2008, swiftly vanished when Tbilisi in effect dismissed this initiative and Saakashvili's supporters followed his lead," the statement said.

"Moreover, the U.S. and several European capitals pledge NATO's protection for Saakashvili, call for the re-armament of the Tbilisi regime and have already begun new weapon supplies. This is a direct invitation to new adventures," the Russian Foreign Ministry said.

Following the requests from South Ossetian and Abkhaz people ... Russia relied on the United Nations Charter, the Helsinki Final Act, other fundamental international documents, including the 1970 Declaration of Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations Among States, the statement said.

---

[ 26 August 2008: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

The image is of the South Ossetian State University campus after the Georgian attack.

I cannot help but think that if the Russians bombed the Tbilisi State University in response, then the media in our own country would not respond with the dead silence that it has in regard to the bombing of this post-secondary institution. We would probably still be reading reports about Russian barbarity and so on. Just a hunch.

I wonder if any of the Universities in Canada, or student organizations, have anything to say about this? Babble academics? Hello?

Or will we have more DEAFENING silence?

Barracks of Russian peacekeepers after Aug 8, 2008 Georgian attack

They are calling Tkhinval the Stalingrad of the 21st century

[ 26 August 2008: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

There was nothing about the appeal by the elected Abkhazian and South Ossetian leadership to Russia to be allowed to join that country; there was nothing about the vote in both Houses of the Russian Parliament in response to that appeal. Instead, the report misrepresented the whole thing as a dictatorial policy of the Russian President in isolation from these two catalytic causes.

This was to be expected as the port of Poti still has some Russian troops and/or patrols there. The USS McDonalds (or whatever) landed at Batumi instead and unloaded its cargo of "humanitarian aid". It's rather odd, in any case, for battleships to be delivering such aid, but I guess they're practicing for a future attack on Iran or something.

Batumi is of interest because it is the capital of a region called Ajaria. Like South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Ajaria was an autonomous region in the old Soviet Georgia. Not anymore. Ajaria has been absorbed back into the Georgian Borg and it now has only a mock autonomy.

2. US Vows to Thwart Enclaves' Independence

Abkhazia and South Ossetia were, effectively, "frozen conflicts". After the Georgian attack, there's no way these regions will ever want to be part of Georgia again - one only has to look at the joyous celebrations going on right now in Sukhumi and Tskhinvali over the recognition of their independence by Russia. But the US WILL likely be able to thwart official recognition through bodies such as the UN for some time. I expect Belarus will recognize the breakaway regions, and maybe a few more states.

3. Russia, Angry With US, Takes Up Afghan Attack at UN

The Russians are rubbing the Americans' noses in it. Others will be highly entertained by this, even if they say nothing, and the general contempt with which much of the world treats the USA will grow.

By rapidly transporting new weapons, Tomahawk and other missiles to Georgian, the US is increasing the tension and likelihood of more conflict in the region. Filling the Black Sea up with NATO warships, in a petulant expression of gunboat diplomacy, won't achieve anything positive.

But it will cause some NATO members to question the usefulness of such an alliance, and resent their role as US stooges in Europe and cannon fodder in Afghanistan and Iraq, and so on.

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.Beltov:
The USS McDonalds (or whatever)...

---

quote:

---

The USS McDonalds (or whatever)...

---

edit:: also, the Russians aren't going to get much favor from many members of the SCO, particularly China, who grapple with restive minorities who want independence.

edit 2:: also, it was probably likely that Russia used cluster munitions. They are one of the big producers of them, up there with the States. I'm not too sure if they sent it to the front, but if they were fielding the Smerch, a MLRS, which is designed to fire cluster bombs and thermobaric warheads, it seems like that they decided to employ them. It certainly wouldn't be outside of the norm for Russia. They most certainly do not have a history of embracing that many weapons control conventions.

[ 27 August 2008: Message edited by: Papal Bull ]

OTOH, China has benefited from some oil contracts being taken away from Russia by the puppet regime in Iraq and given to China instead. So there are differences too.

Novosti: Iraq finds China more convenient partner than Russia

edit2: "it was probably likely that Russia used cluster munitions" ... This speculative claim was made by HRW but was completely unsubstantiated. About the initial horrific Georgian bombardment of South Ossetia, HRW had remarkably little to say - and certainly had nothing to say about the multiple rockets used against South Ossetian civilians. Funny how that is.

HRW also claimed that, since the Ossetians have only found 133 bodies (so far), therefore the numbers of casualties is no larger than that number. Gah.

[ 27 August 2008: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

And, whoopy, China has sided with Russia thus far? That doesn't mean that China is going to get snugglebunnyhappy with Russia over the issue of actually recognizing S. Ossetia and Abkhazia. China wasn't down with Kosovo (despite a long time love affair with Albania) because of its ongoing problems with Ughyurs and Tibetans. What makes you think Russia is going to get its diplomatic jollies from China?

edit:: and how are your claims of genocide being substantiated other than speculation? You really going to trust Russian government-owned media as much as you distrust CNN, BBC, etc.?

[ 27 August 2008: Message edited by: Papal Bull ]

Feast away. I'd rather not repeat myself.

another thread

Edited to add: the latest I've read is that the Ossetians and Russian Prosecutor's Office are collecting evidence. It is expected that the number of dead will not be completely known until a few months from now. No doubt western interest will diminish to zero in that time. The problem is that many bodies are buried under the rubble of Tskhinvali - which was 70-80% destroyed. Also, many quick burials were made by people who were themselves refugees from South Ossetia and who have yet to return to their bombed out cities. All of this complicates things enormously.

Russia Today has some eyewitness reports on the other thread that I've provided the link to. Some of these reports describe what happens to people when they are literally blown to pieces by multiple targeted rockets. This is what, it is claimed, Georgia did under Saakashvili's orders.

Warning: that video is not for the faint of heart.

[ 27 August 2008: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

Most of this you would have noticed if you'd actually READ THE OTHER THREAD.

[ 27 August 2008: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

quote:

---

Papal Bull: Yeah, you still haven't said anything. As you've said, there is another thread. I am reading it. What of the cluster bombs? What about the SCO?

---

You've provided no links and no sources. Myabe you think I should do your homework for you?

quote:

---

Miliband's attempt in Ukraine, meanwhile, to deny the obvious parallels with the US-orchestrated recognition of Kosovo's independence earlier this year rang particularly hollow, as did his denunciation of invasions of sovereign states and double standards. Both the west and Russia have abused the charge of "genocide" to try and give themselves legal cover, but Russia is surely on stronger ground over South Ossetia - where its own internationally recognised peacekeepers were directly attacked by the Georgian army - than Nato was in Kosovo in 1999, where most ethnic cleansing took place after the US-led assault began.

There has been much talk among western politicians in recent days about Russia isolating itself from the international community. But unless that simply means North America and Europe, nothing could be further from the truth. While the US and British media have swung into full cold-war mode over the Georgia crisis, the rest of the world has seen it in a very different light. As Kishore Mahbubani, Singapore's former UN ambassador, observed in the Financial Times a few days ago, "most of the world is bemused by western moralising on Georgia". While the western view is that the world "should support the underdog, Georgia, against Russia ... most support Russia against the bullying west. The gap between the western narrative and the rest of the world could not be clearer."

Why that should be so isn't hard to understand. It's not only that the US and its camp followers have trampled on international law and the UN to bring death and destruction to the Middle East, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.Beltov:

You've provided no links and no sources. Myabe you think I should do your homework for you?

Thanks for coming.

---

The SCO doesn't need many links. It just requires a basic understanding of Chinese anxiety about separatist causes. This should show you where I am coming from.

quote:

---

Papal Bull: As for cluster munitions. Russia didn't show up to the conference to ban them. They used them in Afghanistan, they used them in Chechnya, what makes you think that they won't use an effective weapon in a high-profile conflict?

---

OK, so you're admitting your claims here are pure speculation - based on an admittedly poor previous track record. The claims regarding cluster/similar weapons used by the Georgians, however, came from multiple eyewitnesses.

I have some comments about the article you referenced. (forthcoming)

As a quick note, I would just observe that it's really easy for you to pick and choose which parts of the essay you agree with, depending on which parts I criticize. That's why I would expect you to make your own arguments, or summarize the arguments of others in your own words, rather than simply providing a bare link. I suppose it's something that you provided the link.

[ 27 August 2008: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

By the way, a high ranking Russian military figure took to describing the anti-missile system as a "dead cat". It can only really be tested in the circumstances of a nuclear exchange. How does that help Poland again?

- look, let's get this clear once and for all.

Georgia insists that Abkhazia and South Ossetia are, and shall remain, part of that country. This, of course, is the position despite the fact that these regions have been independent since the collapse of the Soviet Union, that they have NO interest in ever being part of Georgia, and that the failed ethnic cleansing of them by Georgia has led to their successful application to be recognized by the Russians - something they had, hitherto, been unsuccessful at.

Now, for NATO, whose members are obliged to "defend" each other (like they "defend" each other in Afghanistan, and so on) this issue HAS to be resolved before Georgia can be fully admitted into NATO. So, as long as Georgia insists that these two regions are part of that country, and they remain de facto, outside of Georgia, whatever international legal status or limbo they exist in, there's not a snowball's chance in hell that Georgia will become part of NATO.

Of course, there is ONE way that Georgia could become part of NATO. A two-tiered alliance would work, with some countries obliged to "defend" each other and others outside the club. But that's just another dead cat.

- something else. The Americans, by drawing the Europeans into their nefarious Russophobic plans, are doing a number on the European economies at a time when the US economy looks to be ready to crash and burn itself. And the Europeans aren't idiots; they see this as well and hence their reluctance, like the Germans, Italians and others, to get sucked into the Yanqui vortex. This is as much a factor as reliance upon Russian oil and gas, etc., in determining European attitudes. The Americans are quite happy to torpedo another economy while railing on about "national security" or "terrorism" or "the Rooskies" to justify their actions.

- OK, about China. First of all, let's be clear. China did not join the chorus of noisy denunciation from the NATO countries towards Russia. The fact that China adopted a middle position is, in fact, a kind of victory for the Russians. Hu Jintao met with his Russian counterpart (PM Putin) at a time when NATO was: refusing to meet with Russia in the NATO-Russia Council, ratcheting up the incendiary rhetoric, and making all sorts of references to Russian tanks in Prague, or Budapest, or anywhere else that might whip up cold war nostalgia. Russia is not the Soviet Union, and even the Americans in more sober moments acknowledge this.

quote:

---

M K Bhadrakumar: As Beijing would see it, Moscow has already entered a dangerous "no-go" zone by conducting military operations inside Georgian territory, by putting conditionalities on the withdrawal of its forces from Georgian soil and by loudly speculating on the (lack of) realism in laboring to preserve Georgia's territorial integrity.

---

It's hard to tell what the author means by this. "As Beijing would see it ..." What the hell does this mean? Does the Beijing government see things this way or not? Why circumambulate around the facts?

quote:

---

M K Bhadrakumar: ... the fact remains that Beijing also affirms that the Sino-Russian relationship today is at an all-time high ...

---

Uh huh. That's one huge rift, eh?

One other point. The Russians have already started to talk about Kosovo in a way that is different from the way they talk about Abkhazia and South Ossetia. They see these as quite different. Others are making the same points as the Russians. I think the Chinese are perfectly capable of diferentiating Tibet, say, from South Ossetia, and applying specific criteria to each specific situation, instead of a one-size-fits-all template.

quote:

---

Since Georgian and Russian forces use identical Soviet-era weapons systems including main battle tanks, Grad multiple-launch rockets, BMP infantry fighting vehicles and tube artillery, Human Rights Watch cannot definitely attribute specific battle damage to a particular belligerent ...

---

quote:

---

Michael Totten's Middle East Journal - The Truth About Russia in Georgia

“A key tool that the Soviet Union used to keep its empire together,” Worms said to me, “was pitting ethnic groups against one another. They did this extremely skillfully in the sense that they never generated ethnic wars within their own territory. But when the Soviet Union collapsed it became an essential Russian policy to weaken the states on its periphery by activating the ethnic fuses they planted.

. . .

The Rose Revolution was a popular bloodless revolution that brought Georgia's current president Mikheil Saakashvili to power and replaced the old man of Georgian politics Eduard Shevardnadze who basically ran the country Soviet-style.

“The first thing that Misha [Mikheil Saakashvili] did was try to poke his finger in [Russian President Vladimir] Putin's eyes as many times as possible,” Worms said, “most notably by wanting to join NATO. The West, in my view, mishandled this situation. America gave the wrong signals. So did Europe.”

---

[ 28 August 2008: Message edited by: A_J ]

quote:

---

Papal Bull: the Russians aren't going to get much favor from many members of the SCO, particularly China, who grapple with restive minorities who want independence.

---

... and from the article "which should show you where I'm coming from" linked to (but not quoted) we have:

quote:

---

M K Bhadrakumar: What stands out, on the whole, is that Beijing has refrained from taking a position supportive of Russia.

---

Yet today, already, we have:

quote:

---

ITAR-TASS: The Dushanbe Declaration to be adopted after the summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization will contain a separate provision on the situation around South Ossetia, a source in the Russian delegation told Itar-Tass on Thursday.

The provision included in the draft document states that SCO member-states express concern over South Ossetia’s tensions and support Russia’s role in peacemaking and cooperation in the region, the source said.

---

Its really a garbage article; Mr Totten blames the Soviets for "playing ethnic groups against each other" his evidence? After the Soviet Union collapsed many ethnic groups resumed inter-ethnic conflicts simmering since long before the USSR intervened and provided many decades of relative peace between previously warring ethnic groups; he even cites the absence of inter-ethnic conflict in the USSR as evidence that the Soviets were committed to some sort of scheme to create conflict!

He also provides the most outrageous analysis of the US sponsored destruction of Yugoslavia over the last several decades referring to the inter-ethnic conflicts there with the flippant comment that "Nothing much happened".

Finally his support for Georgia in the recent conflict with Russia apparently rests on the accusation that S Ossetians had mounted some cross-border raids into Georgia in the week before Georgia launched an all-out genocidal war of destruction against their little republic, indiscriminantly and intentionally slaughtering and driving out the civilian population; the Ossetian raids totally justify the Georgian response but that in turn obviously does not provide justification for the Russian intervention

Anyway save yourselves some time and skip Mr Totten's lengthy and deceptive article.

[ 28 August 2008: Message edited by: It's Me D ]

[ 28 August 2008: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

quote:

---

Incidentally, the "Rose Revolution" was hardly bloodless.

---

I wasn't? [/mock surprise]

Mr Totten not only praises the "bloodless" Rose Revolution, a CIA-Gladio whatever as Fidel would say, he also layers on the unbelievable praise for Georgia's nasty little regime suggesting it is tough to find a government,

quote:

---

as friendly and democratic as Georgia's

---

Buying investor confidence in Georgia.

quote:

---

quote:
ITAR-TASS: The Dushanbe Declaration to be adopted after the summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization will contain a separate provision on the situation around South Ossetia, a source in the Russian delegation told Itar-Tass on Thursday.

The provision included in the draft document states that SCO member-states express concern over South Ossetia’s tensions and support Russia’s role in peacemaking and cooperation in the region, the source said.

---

Really? Itar-Tass is rather premature. The facts are that Russia is increasingly isolated diplomaticly with grudging support only from the Belarus poodle-state.

quote:

---

Belarus, Russia's closest ex-Soviet ally, gave the clearest support, with President Alexander Lukashenko saying the Kremlin "had no other moral choice but to" recognize the Georgian regions. But he too stopped short of recognizing them himself.

---

Reuters reports that the SCO gives Russia no support at all.

quote:

---

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev failed to secure support for his action at a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), a group linking Moscow with China and four ex-Soviet Central Asian states.

"The SCO states express grave concern in connection with the recent tensions around the South Ossetian issue and urge the sides to solve existing problems peacefully, through dialogue, and to make efforts facilitating reconciliation and talks," the summit's closing statement in Dushanbe said.

Even China, which often sides with Russia in diplomatic disputes, issued a veiled criticism of Moscow's actions, saying it was "concerned about the latest changes in South Ossetia and Abkhazia" and calling for dialogue to resolve the issue.

---

Murray Dobbin lays out a compelling case for US bumbling of the Georgian issue but there is a school of thought developing that rather than dropping the Georgian ball, the US is executing a brilliant strategy to focus attention on resurging Russian transgressions to both shift the attention from US transgressions and to set the stage for the continued need for American military power.

quote:

---

Murray Dobbin lays out a compelling case for US bumbling of the Georgian issue but there is a school of thought developing that rather than dropping the Georgian ball, the US is executing a brilliant strategy to focus attention on resurging Russian transgressions to both shift the attention from US transgressions and to set the stage for the continued need for American military power.

In other words, to create a problem that requires an American military solution in domestic American politics in order to continue the profitable military adventurism and imperialist ambitions of the Neo-con administration.

---

quote:

---

If we seek to understand US foreign policy in terms of a rational engagement with international problems, or even as an effective means of projecting power, we are looking in the wrong place. The government’s interests have always been provincial. It seeks to appease lobbyists, shift public opinion at key stages of the political cycle, accommodate crazy Christian fantasies and pander to television companies run by eccentric billionaires. The US does not really have a foreign policy. It has a series of domestic policies which it projects beyond its borders. That they threaten the world with 57 varieties of destruction is of no concern to the current administration. The only question of interest is who gets paid and what the political kickbacks will be.

---

quote:

---

Russian Ambassador to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, called upon "NATO countries to withdraw and review their recognitions of independent Kosovo" and subsequently "act on the premise that this is the new political reality."

---

In the controversy around recognizing S Ossetia and Abkhazia I've been thinking about Kosovo quite a bit, and the grating hypocracy of most Western nations.

Here are a few nations that aren't being hypocritical in that their refusal to recognize S Ossetia and Abkhazia follows on their refusal to recognize Kosovo:

quote:

---

Spain:

Foreign Minister Miguel Ángel Moratinos said that the Government of Spain regrets the decision of Russia. He also said that this decision by Moscow is "unacceptable" and "not conducive to creating the conditions necessary for settlement of the conflict between Russia and Georgia". Moratinos reiterated the "need to fully respect the principles of international law, in particular the territorial integrity of states, in this case, of Georgia." In addition, he recalled that this is the stance that "Spain has always maintained", an allusion to the opposition of the Spanish Government to recognition of the Kosovo independence.

---

quote:

---

Slovakia:

Statement issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that Slovakia "disapproves of these steps and confirms the main principles, based on the longstanding position of the Slovak Republic regarding Georgia and the solution of conflicts on its territory. These principles are: sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia within its internationally recognised borders and solution of the conflicts exclusively by peaceful means and talks in compliance with the international law." The statement also said that "the Slovak government, as one of few EU member states, can insist on the principle of the territorial integrity of Georgia, as it has done also in the case of Serbia and Kosovo."

---

quote:

---

Cyprus:

Foreign Minister Markos Kyprianou has said that that relations of Russia and Cyprus are very close but on the other hand Cyprus supports "the respect and protection of the territorial integrity of states, and this is a principle which the Republic of Cyprus supports and supported in the case of Kosovo, so developments of the past few days in Georgia have worried us." The Government has issued a statement saying that "Cyprus expresses its deep concern over developments in Georgia. The Republic of Cyprus supports the respect of the rules of international law including the respect of the territorial integrity of states, of the UN Charter and of the principles of the Helsinki Final Act. Moreover, the Cyprus Government supports peaceful resolution of international disputes by political means through negotiations, avoiding unilateral actions that could aggravate the situation in this sensitive region."

---

Canada should have at least followed this example; afterall its not like we don't have our own seperatist movement.

Also interesting are the competing positions of Serbia and Kosovo on this issue (Kosovo's appearing rather silly IMV):

quote:

---

Serbia: Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement saying that Serbia "respects international law and has a principled policy of preservation of sovereignty and territorial integrity of internationally recognized states, above all of the Republic of Serbia. Serbian officials have continuously warned that the unilateral declaration of independence of Kosovo and Metohija, just as the recognitions of this illegal act, could have the nature of a precedent and destabilize other regions in the world. It can be surmised, with regret, that these predictions have come true".

---

quote:

---

Kosovo: President of Kosovo Fatmir Sejdiu said that Kosovo cannot serve as an example for Russia to recognize South Ossetia or Abkhazia. He said "We have always stressed that Kosovo has special characteristics. That it is sui generis and it cannot be used as a precedent for other conflict zones, areas or regions". He did not comment on Russia’s recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, but said that Kosovo was "on the side of great world powers" on that issue.

---

quote:

---

There is a case to be made and was stated rather brilliantly, I think, by George Monbiot

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by It's Me D:
FM,

Monbiot is great, no doubt. I am sure he also does not consider the strategy he is describing to be "brilliant"; he'd more than likely dub it "inhuman" or "truly monstrous" and I would agree. My issue was with jester's comment that America was pursuing a "brilliant strategy" in all of this.

---

If you bother to comprehend my words, it is a school of thought that considers it possible that rather than bumbling, the US is executing a "brilliant strategy", not your humble servant.

The Monbiot article is one dimension of this theory.

quote:

---

DUSHANBE, August 28 (RIA Novosti) - China and the other members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) voiced their support on Thursday for Russia's actions in Georgia and South Ossetia following the recent conflict.

However, the Asian countries stopped short of backing Russia's move to recognize the independence of the breakaway province, along with Georgia's other rebel region, Abkhazia.

"The leaders of the SCO member states welcome the signing in Moscow of the six principles for regulating the South Ossetia conflict, and support Russia's active role in assisting peace and cooperation in this region," a joint declaration adopted at the SCO summit in Tajikistan said.

---

The six principles are, in fact, what the French have been playing footsie over (with the President saying one thing and the UN Ambassador refusing to agree with his own President!) and what the rest of NATO, under the US whip, have been trying to undermine.

quote:

---

The six leaders called for peaceful dialogue to resolve ongoing tensions.

"The SCO member states are deeply concerned over tensions around the South Ossetian issue, and call on all sides concerned to peacefully resolve existing problems through dialogue," the declaration said.

---

So they support the peacekeeping efforts of the Russians but stopped short of also recognizing the breakaway regions themselves. Which was to be expected, in any case.

Now, contrast this to the bellicose NATO rhetoric in which ...

quote:

---

The meeting of the regional bloc comes a day after the foreign ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United States and Britain adopted a statement condemning Russia's peacekeeping presence in Georgia and its recognition of the rebel regions.

---

Spin, spin, spin!

Thanks for coming. ahahahaha! snort! czhpfrmk!

[ 28 August 2008: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

quote:

---

If you bother to comprehend my words, it is a school of thought that considers it possible that rather than bumbling, the US is executing a "brilliant strategy", not your humble servant.

---

quote:

---

If you bother to comprehend my words, it is a school of thought that considers it possible that rather than bumbling, the US is executing a "brilliant strategy"

---

quote:

---

Frustrated Mess: And who are these people who think American bumbling is a brilliant strategy? The British?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.Beltov:
Incidentally, the "Rose Revolution" was hardly bloodless. Adjara was absorbed into the Saakashvili militarist regime and now its autonomy is purely cosmetic and decorative.

---

quote:

---

BBC - Aslan Abashidze ousted

After Eduard Shevardnadze was overthrown as Georgian president and the results of the November 2003 Georgian parliamentary elections were annulled, a state of emergency was declared in Ajaria. Its leadership refused to recognise the full authority of Mikhail Saakashvili as Georgian president.

In May 2004, Mr Abashidze claimed that Georgian forces were preparing to invade. His forces blew up bridges connecting the region with the rest of Georgia. Mr Saakashvili ordered the Ajarian leader to comply with the Georgian constitution and start disarming or face removal.

Large numbers of demonstrators took to the streets of Batumi. In an echo of events in Tbilisi the previous autumn, Mr Abashidze resigned.

Russia then agreed to close its military base at Batumi, which it said it had done by November 2007. The base was a source of great tension between Moscow and Tbilisi.

---

quote:

---

Actually, Shevardnadze's ally Aslan Abashidze was simply forced out by the people of Adjaria - also without any bloodshed:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:

Your words, generally, are incomprehensible. However, in this matter, you more or less stumbled into an argument already brilliantly laid out by Monbiot. Now Monbiot would be unlikely to describe the US strategy as brilliant and in the end it will probably backfire as not even Americans (try as they might) can wrap themselves in a flag that is being repossessed (along with homes and SUVs) just as a new bogey-man is being constructed to replace the last one.

And who are these people who think American bumbling is a brilliant strategy? The British?

---

I suppose any balance in discussion with unidimensional spouters of hysterical gibberish such as yourself would appear incomprehensible but,here's an apparent devotee of the theory that the Americans set the Russians up.

quote:

---

In an interview with CNN, the former Russian president suggested that unnamed people in the United States stoked the conflict in the Caucasus to create a crisis, but did not name the candidate who stood to gain.

“If my guess is right, then it raises the suspicion that someone in the U.S. specially created this conflict to worsen the situation and create an advantage in the competitive struggle for one of the candidates for the post of president of the United States,” said Mr. Putin, who still wields considerable power in Russia.

“They needed a short, victorious war. And if it didn't work out, they could always put the blame on us, make us look like the enemy and against the background of this surge of patriotism, once more rally the country around a particular political force,” he said.

---

Vladimir finally got it figured out - he was played like a piano. Vladimir has discovered that when you are up to your ass in alligators, its hard to drain the swamp.

Perhaps some babblers think that the Russians would have been better served by letting Georgia physically exterminate the Russian peacekeepers, the South Ossetians, and then the Abkhazians (in that order). That's a very American view of the world ... in which everyone else on the planet is cannon fodder for domestic US purposes.

[ 28 August 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.Beltov:
" ... played like a piano."

Perhaps some babblers think that the Russians would have been better served by letting Georgia physically exterminate the Russian peacekeepers, the South Ossetians, and then the Abkhazians (in that order). That's a very American view of the world ... in which everyone else on the planet is cannon fodder for domestic US purposes.

Good for the Russians in saving the Ossetians and Abkhazians. That, and preventing the Georgians from carrying out further atrocities, is the most important thing. It's rather disgusting now, in fact, to read how distressed and angry the Americans are over some Hummers that have not been returned. The US government seems to care more about property than about people.

---

As Monbiot points out, US foreign policy is anything but. Its designed to play to the domestic audience.

The difference between domestic audiences in the US, Russia and Iran is that when Putin rattles the saber or Ahmadinejad prances about shouting 'death to Israel', the domestic audiences see the posturing for what it is while in the US, Billy Bob and Scooter call for more defense spending.

Like the Russian worker said: "We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us".

Americans are brainwashed to not care about anyone or anything that is not American. Not only the intricacies but the basics of any geopolitical scheming are lost on them. Losing a few Hummers is a slight to their perceived preeminence in world affairs.

In the US, it is not deemed necessary to invite other countries when holding a 'world' series.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jester:
Like the Russian worker said: "We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us".

---

quote:

---

Beltov:

The US government seems to care more about property than about people.

---

How shocking! At least they are true to their principles.

quote:

---

Jester:

The difference between domestic audiences in the US, Russia and Iran is that when Putin rattles the saber or Ahmadinejad prances about shouting 'death to Israel', the domestic audiences see the posturing for what it is while in the US, Billy Bob and Scooter call for more defense spending.

---

Another difference: Putin is wildly popular and Bush is widely reviled... You can be your own judge of who is better at domestic politics

"Soldier of Failure"

The names across the top are mock versions of Condoleeza (Mandaleeza),Abassaka (Saakashvili mixed with Ossetia and Abkhazia) and Yebush (Bush, with an insult throw in for good measure).

BTW, don't go to UDAFF DOT com. It looks like a porno site.

[ 29 August 2008: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

My Russian is very rusty but 3:00 reads "Attack", 6:00 reads "Blitzkrieg", 7:00 reads "Zavtrak", (a late meal or Russian breakfast) and so on.

[ 29 August 2008: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.Beltov:
Perhaps you'd care to outline some better general course of action the Russians should have taken. (Other than lie down and die in orderly rows for the convenience of the US-backed Georgians, I mean.) Putin actually remarked, in one of his statements, that those who thought Russians were suitable only for graveyards were proven wrong ... again.

And now Saakashvili is afraid to leave his own country. How appropriate. Maybe it's time to change his undoubtedly foul-smelling underwear as well.

---

Oh, I believe that the Russian peacekeepers were well within their rights to keep the peace in the face of the Georgian hostilities but the Russians just can't help themselves in launching a full scale invasion can they?

Whether Hungary, Czekoslovakia or even tiny Lativa/Lithuania, the Russians have to go overboard and bomb the crap out of everything.

By overplaying their hand, the Russians will pay a huge economic price as well as shredding any positive regard they had built up as legitimate global partners.

quote:

---

Another difference: Putin is wildly popular and Bush is widely reviled... You can be your own judge of who is better at domestic politics

---

Better at fooling all the people some of the time or fooling some of the people all of the time?

Putin plays to an insecure audience that is seething over the humilities perpetrated against Russia during and after the collapse of the USSR. They pine for their lost prestige and any nationalistic scheme to prop up Russian pride is hastily grasped and held dearly.

Putin and Bush are kindred souls however in downloading needless pain on their constituencies to pay for their reckless adventures.

Furthermore, the terms of the 6 point plan - an arrangement about which NATO seems to have developed the most remarkable AMNESIA all of a sudden - allows the Russians to place their troops in such as way as to ensure the safety of Abkhazia and Ossetia ... even if those troops are in Georgia proper. I guess that's why NATO developed the amnesia in the first place.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jester:

Putin plays to an insecure audience that is seething over the humilities perpetrated against Russia during and after the collapse of the USSR. They pine for their lost prestige and any nationalistic scheme to prop up Russian pride is hastily grasped and held dearly.

---

quote:

---

The amount of "humanitarian aid" being delivered by NATO battleships (a curious use of a dreadnought, don't you think?) shows that the US is looking to deliberately arm the Saakashvili militarist regime again after all the equipment losses in the recent cowardly attack.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RosaL:

Whereas Bush plays to ....???

---

quote:

---

All praise Jesus but not in an Orthodox manner.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RosaL:

Whereas Bush plays to ....???

---

What's not been mentioned here, however, is that the process of improving and/or normalizing relations between Georgia and South Ossetia came to a sudden end following the mysterious death of Saakashvili's political rival, Zurab Zhvania, the former Georgian Prime Minister, in 2005. There's been a steady build up of tension on the Georgian side since that time, culminating in the attack that began on August 7/8 of this year.

It is starting to come out, as well, that American and Ukrainian passports have been found among the gear and equipment left by the fleeing Georgian troops. I think it's going to become more clear, over time, just how much this attack (on South Ossetia) was planned well in advance. We already see how many NATO ships "just happened" to be planning "exercises" in the Black Sea, also planned well in advance, at the same time as the Georgian attack. The Georgian "peacekeepers", which Georgia has now refused to provide any of, got their orders and slipped quietly away from the conflict zone in and around South Ossetia JUST BEFORE the bombardment on Tskhinvali began. Ditto for the international observers who, by the way, neglected to inform their Russian counterparts that the Georgian "peacekeepers" had suddenly made themselves scarce. And so on.

quote:

---

Eugene Kolesnikov, Private Consultant, the Netherlands: Now that the crisis is unfolding, the critical question is whether things are going to get even much worse before they get better. In my opinion, there are two possible long-term and one short-term scenario. In the long-term conflict scenario, the West makes good on its rhetoric and expands and accelerates implementation of its containment policies, such as minimizing ties with Russia, expanding NATO, speeding up missile defense, increasing military posturing, and so on. This is a so-called “New Cold War” scenario. It is not very likely due to a multitude of serious risks, but it is possible.
The other long term scenario involves Western elites waking up from the sweet dreams of the 1990s, accepting Russia’s independence, and forging a new framework for United States-EU-Russia political, security and economic cooperation, recognizing Russia’s regained status. Which is exactly what president Medvedev offered in Berlin. This scenario is unlikely to play out in the short term.

So what is going to happen in the short term? I believe that it is most probable that the West will continue for some time to pressure Russia without crossing too many red lines in the false hope that Russia somehow returns to submission. In its recent editorial, The Economist advised exactly this by saying that the West should do nothing with Russia (other than keeping the pressure on).

This attitude of the West will inevitably lead to a new crisis, be it over Ukraine or something else, where Russia will again take decisive action that may cause escalation into the “New Cold War” scenario, or settlement on the principles of the second scenario proposed by president Medvedev. It is a shame that we probably have to experience another dangerous crisis or a series of crises before things really get better.

---

Finally, here's Novosti's summary of PM Putin's recent remarks about the recent "American Gambit" in the Caucuses ...

quote:

---

The Russian Prime Minister pointed out that US military advisers have been spotted in the operations zone, which suggests that the US leaders was aware of Georgia’s forthcoming military action and was most likely involved in the preparation of it. Vladimir Putin feels that the idea behind Georgia’s aggression was to wage a brief victorious war, but if the attempt failed, as it did, to create an enemy image of Russia and use it as a basis for bringing together the US electorate around the Republican presidential hopeful.

---

It's difficult to distinguish any difference between the statements of Democratic hopeful Barak Obama and Republican hopeful John McCain in this regard, although it's patently obvious that McCain has much closer connections with Georgia as his key foreign policy staffer [Randy Scheunemann] was hired by the Georgian government to lobby for them. Perhaps Russian PM Putin is a little off here; creating the enemy image is something that Democrats and Republicans alike seem to do. It's a more bellicose shift in the American political landscape in general ... whomever wins in November.

But I would not put it past Putin to be unable to resist showing his own preferences, while pretending not to, for November's electoral results in the USA. The bellicose warmongering of the neocons has got to come to an end and one would like to think that the defeat of McCain would be a baby step in that direction.

There's been an early start to the next thread over here by KenS, who wants his name on the franchise.

[ 03 September 2008: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]