Georgian - South Ossetian - Russian Conflict

[Oberst Villa]

How will the USA react ? From watching CNN, I'm a bit confused - will the USA try to act as a mediator between Russia and Georgia, or will it stand firmly on Georgia's side ? What are your predictions ?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

What more can the US do other than sit back and watch? It's time for Europe and Nato to do something for once.

 

[Oberst Villa]

What more can the US do other than sit back and watch? It's time for Europe and Nato to do something for once.

Well, as far as my (german) foreign minister Frank Steinmeier is concerned, I can assure you that he did something - he asked all sides for restraint (what a suprise, eh ?) and I guess this is what he will continue to do for the next days... weeks... months...

 

[Jordan Joab]

Why should anyone get involved? Let the two sides fight it out.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Why should anyone get involved? Let the two sides fight it out.

That's what we said when Russia rolled into Czechoslovakia ... Great idea.

 

[Jordan Joab]

That's what we said when Russia rolled into Checkoslovakia... Great idea.

I'm not familiar with the aftermath of that event. That country doesn't exist anymore. All I see now is a great opportunity for the US, Nato, Europe, et al to score brownie points with Russia ganging up against Georgia.

 

[Oberst Villa]

I'm not familiar with the aftermath of that event. That country doesn't exist anymore. All I see now is a great opportunity for the US, Nato, Europe, et al to score brownie points with Russia ganging up against Georgia.

I don't think that all this is about anybody ganging up against Georgia. As far as I understand it, Georgia started the fighting by attacking seperatist South Ossetia:

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/08/06/georgia.ossetia.ap/index.html#cnnSTCText

 

[Borek]

Technically South Ossetia is a part of Georgia, so before Russian army entered the scene it was a civil war, not an international conflict.

 

[Jordan Joab]

I didn't know what was going on here so decided to read up on it. Apparently Georgia wants to join NATO, Russia is not cool with that, <insert bunch of non-sense here>, and now they are fighting.

I'm sure this has some political relevance. I just don't see what benefit(s) Georgia brings to the table besides a place to land American troops.

http://www.slate.com/id/2197155/

 

[Borek]

Georgia want's to enter NATO as it is afraid of Russians, and not without a reason. Bordering Russia was always dangerous.

 

[Oberst Villa]

Technically South Ossetia is a part of Georgia, so before Russian army entered the scene it was a civil war, not an international conflict.

The Russians had peacekeepers in South Ossetia (Georgia claimed that the "peacekeepers" were in fact supporting the seperatists). As far as I know, when Georgia went into South Ossetia some of them were killed. Furthemore, Russia had given Russian passports to some of the South Ossetians. I have absolutely no idea whether this was legal under international law, but anyway, again this means that Russian citizens were killed. Russian president Medvedev was referring to this on TV.

 

[Oberst Villa]

Georgia want's to enter NATO as it is afraid of Russians, and not without a reason. Bordering Russia was always dangerous.

I think I recall from some other thread that you are from Poland, right ? In this case of course you have very good reasons to think so. And even if not, yes I think your statement is true. But in this specific case I think its really much more complicated than "small helpless country is harrassed by big country and seeks help from NATO"

 

[Borek]

Russia has a lot of experience in making things look in their favor. I don't know exact details about this particular conflict, but it would not surprise me if those Russian citizens have been granted russian passports and russian citizenship in the last two or three years. It will also not surprise me if some of them - being of the true Russian nationality - were relocated to Ossetia many years ago (perhaps even by Stalin) by force, just in anticipation of similar situation, to give a good excuse to use force when needed. That's what was done in Baltic republics.

In Polish we call it politics based on fait accompli.

Edit: and yes, I am from Poland.

 

[Borek]

Note: I am not saying that Georgians are only victims, they have their own agenda as well. But it is obvious that Russia doesn't want Georgia in NATO and that independent Georgia is not a thing that Russia wants to have at border. Russia supports separatists in Georgia, Russia stops gas and oil delivery, Russia stops to buy Georgia produce and so on. This is a consistent policy, these are not separate and accidental things.

 

[russ_watters]

What more can the US do other than sit back and watch? It's time for Europe and Nato to do something for once.

Nato does stuff (Bosnia), but only when we direct them. I agree Europe needs to step up and take care of their own backyard. They say they don't like us being the world's policeman - so step up!

 

[Alex:)]

I don't think that all this is about anybody ganging up against Georgia. As far as I understand it, Georgia started the fighting by attacking seperatist South Ossetia:

It has not been internationally approved to be independent country, though. Legally it is still part of Georgia as I understand.

The Russians had peacekeepers in South Ossetia (Georgia claimed that the "peacekeepers" were in fact supporting the seperatists). As far as I know, when Georgia went into South Ossetia some of them were killed.

Does this give Russians right to bomb pure Georgian territory? (By "pure" I mean not the conflict zone, but the areas far inside the country) There is no evidence showing that Georgians were shooting Russians. They might. But among so many people with guns, any provocation can be expected as well. In fact, there is also informational war going on: according to Georgian media Georgia has full control over Osetia, except for a single high-mountain village; while Russian media insists Russians have re-captured more than half of the territory...

Finally, if you compare sizes of Georgia & Russia, imho it's pretty clear, that Russian army can capture the entire Georgia within one night in pretty same way as Georgia did to Osetia yesterday. So better there appears some good International power which will cause both to shut up. It's strange that UN failed to make any decision for the second time...

 

[Borek]

Finally, if you compare sizes of Georgia & Russia, imho it's pretty clear, that Russian army can capture the entire Georgia within one night

It won't be that easy. Most Georgia terrain lies in mountains, which makes it a very difficut military target. Sure, Russia military power will be overhelming, but Russia has learned its lesson in Afghanistan the hard way, they don't want to try again.

 

[Oberst Villa]

It won't be that easy. Most Georgia terrain lies in mountains, which makes it a very difficut military target. Sure, Russia military power will be overhelming, but Russia has learned its lesson in Afghanistan the hard way, they don't want to try again.

I really hope that nothing that even comes close to this scenario (full scale and permanent occupation of Georgia by Russian troops) will happen. One further aspect that makes this whole mess so sad is that both Russians and Georgians are mainly orthodox christians ("most of the population of Georgia (82%) practices Orthodox Christianity and Georgian Orthodox Church is an influential institution in the country.", wiki). I'm not talking about the current events now, but the underlying conflict has been ongoing for more than a decade and obviously the leaders of the orthodox church on both sides failed to calm down the emotions. All this is very sad.

 

[Borek]

This conflict dates back to Tzar's times, but current events are - to some extent - heritage of Soviet times. Soviet Russia was keeping peace in their teritory and its surroundings by force - not necesarilly used, but existing and ready to be used. In the rest of Europe things were settling down by other means - be it treaties, be it economic cooperation. Peoples Democracy camp was kept at bay because everyone was afraid of Russian Army (or neighbours armies - see Czechoslovakia in 1968), so many conflicts were not put down, but only hidden. Now they strike back.

 

[Oberst Villa]

Abkhazia might join the fighting:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,570829,00.html

(Der Spiegel is a german news magazine, quite reliable).

I started googling for Abkhazia when I read reports that they already are fighting against Georgian troops, but until now I have NOT been able to confirm this by sources I consider reliable.

 

[Borek]

Same information in TV news here about an hour ago. Doesn't look good.

 

[humanino]

They say they don't like us being the world's policeman - so step up!

France is sending their secretary of foreign affairs. For instance. I guess it's better than military. Just an opinion.

 

[Alex:)]

but until now I have NOT been able to confirm this by sources I consider reliable.

good point. could you please let me know other sources that are reliable as well?

 

[Oberst Villa]

good point. could you please let me know other sources that are reliable as well?

I found something about Abkhazias involvement in the fighting in Yahoo News (how reliable they are I don't know):

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080809/ap_on_re_eu/georgia_abkhazia

Furthermore, watching CNN they say in their "Breaking" subtitle: Apkhazian provinz attacks Georgian troops.

So I think that Abkhazia is definitely part of the conflict now.

EDIT: If you are looking for reliable sources in general, I guess a good starting point would be this thread here: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=8663

 

[jostpuur]

It hasn't yet come clear to me what has been the original motivation by Georgia to start the war. It seems a strange thing for a small country to pose such threat to a greater country, Russia. Anyone has information on this?

In any case, the Russia is responding to an attack by Georgia, so I don't see immediate need for someone else to step into fighting too. I mean, the Russia is at least responding to real events, that concern Russia. Elsewhere, there has been illegal wars started with imaginary causes too *cough* *cough*, and international community hasn't been doing anything then...

 

[Borek]

It hasn't yet come clear to me what has been the original motivation by Georgia to start the war. It seems a strange thing for a small country to pose such threat to a greater country, Russia. Anyone has information on this?

Reread earlier posts. Technically Georgia didn't attack Russia, they tried to regain control over THEIR OWN TERITORY, occupied by Russia supported separatists,

 

[jostpuur]

Did I understand correctly that the South Ossetians have not been interested in being part of the Georgia? So Georgia is trying to use force to keep South Ossetia as part of itself?

 

[jostpuur]

Here's one point of view:

South Ossetian capital completely destroyed

 

[Art]

Nato does stuff (Bosnia), but only when we direct them. I agree Europe needs to step up and take care of their own backyard. They say they don't like us being the world's policeman - so step up!

Perhaps if the US hadn't supplied Georgia with a huge arsenal of weapons and military training over the past few years Georgia wouldn't have felt emboldened enough to break the international agreements it had signed and attack the 100,000 civilians of South Ossetia and it's UN mandated peace keepers with their US supplied weaponry. So I'm not sure why you think Europe should step up to fix a problem largely of the US's making. Perhaps to avoid such problems in the future the US state department should send a memo to itself - stop selling arms to dangerous lunatics with a history of using violence to get what they want.

Oh and Borek - a nice theory about Stalin except you do of course know he was Georgian don't you as was his head of the KGB.

Russia has stated it has no territorial ambitions in Georgia and that it's current campaign is to restore peace to South Ossetia by ejecting the Georgian invasion troops and so return the parties to the status quo prior to Georgia's wholly illegal act of aggression. As part of this mission they are attacking military targets outside the conflict zone which are supporting the Georgian military adventure. Afterall if Georgian artillery is firing into South Ossetia from outside then the Russians are hardly going to ignore it. The same is true for Georgian aircraft and the supply lines bringing more US munitions into Georgia. One can also assume it will be the Russian's intention to degrade Georgia's military capability so they don't try the same thing again in the future.

It really takes an enormous stretch of the imagination to portray the Georgians as the victims in this episode after their murderous onslaught against the tiny population of South Ossetia though some elements of the Western media are doing their best.

From a 2005 report -

For a country that is slightly smaller than South Carolina, with only 4.6 million citizens, Georgia receives a staggering amount of military support from the United States.

In 1997 Georgia received its first FMF grant of $700,000. In 1998, Washington increased FMF more than 7 times over, granting $5.3 million in aid. Since those first years, Georgia has received a total of $107.7 million in FMF grants.[138] The Bush administration requested an additional $12 million in the 2006 budget.[139]

Additionally, Georgia has been a recipient of International Military Education and Training funds since 1994. Between 1996 and 2001, the IMET aid hovered around $300,000 to just over $400,000 per year. And then, in 2002 the funding almost doubled to $889,000.[140] In 2003, the funding increased another 33% to $1.2 million—similar amounts were granted in 2004 and 2005.[141] The Congressional request for $1.2 million in FY 2006 represents an almost 2,000% increase in IMET aid since 1996.[142]

Both Secretary of State Colin Powell and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld visited Georgia in 2004, pledging continued U.S. support to the country.[143]

Georgia, an aggressive force in a number of border disputes and a state with a well-documented history of human rights violations, does not seem like an ideal candidate for U.S. military aid. Human Rights Watch says the country is, "one of the most corrupt in the world, is desperately short of money, and has a record of persistent and widespread human rights abuses."[144]

The State Department agrees, finding in its most recent Human Rights Report that "nongovernmental organizations blamed two deaths in custody on physical abuse. NGOs reported that police brutality continued, and in certain areas increased. Law enforcement officers continued to torture, beat, and otherwise abuse detainees

Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili is using U.S. weapons and know-how to strengthen his grip on power and rebuff Russia. Washington is taking advantage of Georgia’s strategic location just above the volatile Middle East, deploying U.S. troops and storing equipment and fuel. Georgia has granted U.S. warplanes access to its airspace and permitted joint training exercises with Georgian troops.[146]

The result has been a cozy relationship between President Bush and President Saakashvili. Georgia is one of the few European countries that have unreservedly embraced President Bush and contributed to the U.S.-led war in Iraq.

http://www.worldpolicy.org/projects/arms/reports/wawjune2005.html#2 It would seem the US are not the objective, disinterested observers of this dispute that some here seem to believe.

 

[Art]

This conflict was forecasted months ago -

Georgia in US-financed arms race for war on Abkhazia, South Ossetia
Transnistria Georgia is preparing for a US-financed war against Abkhazia and South Ossetia. That is what the country's military build-up reveals, according to a leading journalist and political analyst from Geneva. Since the current regime took power, Georgian military spending has effectively increased by over forty times and now has the highest growth-rate of any country in the world.
By Jason Cooper, 11/Nov/2007

TSKHINVALI (Tiraspol Times) - Despite not being at war with anyone, for the year 2007 the military budget of Georgia is showing the highest growth rate of any country in the world, with much of it being financed openly and directly by its key military partner, the United States.

As a result, fears run high in Tskhinvali these days.
The capital of the small Republic of South Ossetia is increasingly seen as the next target of Georgian military aggression, and many here worry that it is only a matter of time before enemy troops unleash an assault on the city.

Some international analysts agree. Vicken Cheterian, a journalist and political analyst who works for the non-profit governance organization CIMERA, based in Geneva, says that "Georgia's military plans reveal its ambition to reclaim the territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia it lost in the wars of the early 1990s."

The journalist, who is a regular contributor to Le Monde Diplomatique, points out that since the "rose revolution" of 2003-04, Georgian military spending has effectively been increased by over forty times. The majority of Georgia's arms purchases are financed directly or indirectly from Washington. Salaries for Georgian soldiers have also repeatedly been paid for by American taxpayers.

http://www.tiraspoltimes.com/news/a...a_prepares_war_on_abkhazia_south_ossetia.html
Hmmm

So Russ do you still see this as a European made problem which Europe should 'step up' and solve??

 

[Art]

Reread earlier posts. Technically Georgia didn't attack Russia, they tried to regain control over THEIR OWN TERITORY, occupied by Russia supported separatists,

Like Serbia and Kosovo/Albania you mean? By the same deduction technically Serbia didn't attack Kosovo as it was their own territory which they were trying to regain control of from Albanian supported separatists but that didn't stop NATO intervening to give Kosovo independence. The two situations are remarkably similar only for NATO read Russia.

 

[jostpuur]

It hasn't yet come clear to me what has been the original motivation by Georgia to start the war. It seems a strange thing for a small country to pose such threat to a greater country, Russia. Anyone has information on this?

Reread earlier posts. Technically Georgia didn't attack Russia, they tried to regain control over THEIR OWN TERITORY, occupied by Russia supported separatists,

My choice of wording wasn't the clearest possible, but it is justified to say that Georgia was posing a threat to Russia, because Russian civilians and troops were killed and injured in the Georgia's attack.

However, judging by the information I've encountered so far, they are the Georgian people living in South Ossetia who have been dying mostly in Georgia's attack!

I must repeat my original question still. What has been the original motivation behind this all? This isn't making sense to me.

(editing) ouch. I see Art has just been offering some possible answer...

 

[Oberst Villa]

I must repeat my original question still. What has been the original motivation behind this all? This isn't making sense to me.

(editing) ouch. I see Art has just been offering some possible answer...

I have to admit that I do not have any numbers at hand, but even with a massive increase of its military arsenal I think it highly unlikely that Georgia ever thought it could win a war against Russia. Look how fast Russia gained control over the airspace of Georgia.

Probably Georgia had the illusion that they could take South Ossetia with a fast and unbloody surprise attack. Even in this case the Russians would probably have come back into South Ossetia with armed forces, but in this case world public opinion might have looked on Russia as the agressor. And perhaps there would have been pressure on Russia to stay out of South Ossetia and instead to accept that UN troops are sent into keep the peace ?

Just a guess.

 

[layer_ru]

Russia isn't an agressor.It was defendins s.ossetia citizens and russian peacekeepers(who was there legally) from georgia.

 

[Oberst Villa]

Perhaps if the US hadn't supplied Georgia with a huge arsenal of weapons and military training over the past few years Georgia wouldn't have felt emboldened enough to break the international agreements it had signed and attack the 100,000 civilians of South Ossetia and it's UN mandated peace keepers with their US supplied weaponry. So I'm not sure why you think Europe should step up to fix a problem largely of the US's making. Perhaps to avoid such problems in the future the US state department should send a memo to itself - stop selling arms to dangerous lunatics with a history of using violence to get what they want.

Oh and Borek - a nice theory about Stalin except you do of course know he was Georgian don't you as was his head of the KGB.

Russia has stated it has no territorial ambitions in Georgia and that it's current campaign is to restore peace to South Ossetia by ejecting the Georgian invasion troops and so return the parties to the status quo prior to Georgia's wholly illegal act of aggression. As part of this mission they are attacking military targets outside the conflict zone which are supporting the Georgian military adventure. Afterall if Georgian artillery is firing into South Ossetia from outside then the Russians are hardly going to ignore it. The same is true for Georgian aircraft and the supply lines bringing more US munitions into Georgia. One can also assume it will be the Russian's intention to degrade Georgia's military capability so they don't try the same thing again in the future.

It really takes an enormous stretch of the imagination to portray the Georgians as the victims in this episode after their murderous onslaught against the tiny population of South Ossetia though some elements of the Western media are doing their best.



*START OF QUOTE FROM WWW.WORLDPOLICY.ORG*[/URL]

[I]For a country that is slightly smaller than South Carolina, with only 4.6 million citizens, Georgia receives a staggering amount of military support from the United States.

In 1997 Georgia received its first FMF grant of $700,000. In 1998, Washington increased FMF more than 7 times over, granting $5.3 million in aid. Since those first years, Georgia has received a total of $107.7 million in FMF grants.[138] The Bush administration requested an additional $12 million in the 2006 budget.[139]

Additionally, Georgia has been a recipient of International Military Education and Training funds since 1994. Between 1996 and 2001, the IMET aid hovered around $300,000 to just over $400,000 per year. And then, in 2002 the funding almost doubled to $889,000.[140] In 2003, the funding increased another 33% to $1.2 million—similar amounts were granted in 2004 and 2005.[141] The Congressional request for $1.2 million in FY 2006 represents an almost 2,000% increase in IMET aid since 1996.[142]

Both Secretary of State Colin Powell and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld visited Georgia in 2004, pledging continued U.S. support to the country.[143]

Georgia, an aggressive force in a number of border disputes and a state with a well-documented history of human rights violations, does not seem like an ideal candidate for U.S. military aid. Human Rights Watch says the country is, "one of the most corrupt in the world, is desperately short of money, and has a record of persistent and widespread human rights abuses."[144]

The State Department agrees, finding in its most recent Human Rights Report that "nongovernmental organizations blamed two deaths in custody on physical abuse. NGOs reported that police brutality continued, and in certain areas increased. Law enforcement officers continued to torture, beat, and otherwise abuse detainees

Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili is using U.S. weapons and know-how to strengthen his grip on power and rebuff Russia. Washington is taking advantage of Georgia’s strategic location just above the volatile Middle East, deploying U.S. troops and storing equipment and fuel. Georgia has granted U.S. warplanes access to its airspace and permitted joint training exercises with Georgian troops.[146]

The result has been a cozy relationship between President Bush and President Saakashvili. Georgia is one of the few European countries that have unreservedly embraced President Bush and contributed to the U.S.-led war in Iraq.[/I]

*END OF QUOTE FROM [PLAIN]WWW.WORLDPOLICY.ORG*[/URL]



From a 2005 report - http://www.worldpolicy.org/projects/arms/reports/wawjune2005.html#2 It would seem the US are not the objective, disinterested observers of this dispute that some here seem to believe.[/QUOTE]


The statement "Georgia, an aggressive force in a number of border disputes and a state with a well-documented history of human rights violations, does not seem like an ideal candidate for U.S. military aid." is certainly quite relevant for this discussion. However, I never had a look at [url]www.worldpolicy.org[/url] before - could anybody comment on it, I mean, do you consider it a credible source ?