News Georgian - South Ossetian - Russian Conflict

[Art]

You are claiming that Bush or perhaps McCain is behind Albright's, Eagleberger's and NPRs reporting of the situation?

Perhaps the hysteria is being created by the tanks continuing to roll towards Tbilisi?

Tbilisi is one hour's drive from Gori. I think if the Russians were heading for the capital they'd have got there by now even if they got out and pushed. A BBC reporter who is with the Russian force said they stopped 5 miles up the road from Gori where they are dismantling a Georgian military camp where Georgian forces had gathered for their attack on S Ossetia. Russian troops they interviewed said they have been told they will be spending the next two days demilitarising the area after which they will be going home.

If the Russians were to leave immediately it would lead to an instant renewal of hostilities between S Ossetian irregular forces who have ventured into Georgia proper and the Georgians so it is in everybody's interest that there is an orderly handover of control. After all no-one would like to see the scenes of looting and devastation that took place in Baghdad and Basra when the US and the UK failed to exercise control over areas it had occupied.

The BBC are also now showing footage of the devastation in S Ossetia and interviews with some of the survivors. It seems the media is beginning to fall out of step with the UK and US gov'ts.

 

[Art]

Why is it that Saakashvili actions are repeatedly described at stupid, ill-reasoned or unwise, rather than evil, horrible or despicable? He did raze a town and kill many hundreds of civilians, didn't he?

Another report I saw on TV had a reporter commenting in hushed tones on how 'the Russians are advancing inexorably despite the widespread condemnation of the international community'. Funny how the US advance in Iraq wasn't described in those terms despite it being true.

Saddam was strung up following a guilty verdict in a shi'ite court on a charge of killing a handful of shi'ite villagers whereas the Georgian president is being feted by Bush and Brown and touted as a hero for massacring civilians. Somehow I don't see Bush calling for him to be hunted down like a dog and handed over to the S Ossetian's for trial. It's a funny old world.

Personally I think Russian troops should be employed as peace keepers in all the world's hotspots. They have just given the UN a salutary lesson on how to react when peace keepers are attacked rather than the usual run for the hills ;)

 

[meopemuk]

Taunting the Bear
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/10/weekinreview/10traub.html

Yes, very interesting historical observations and deep psychological analysis of Putin and Saakhashvili, and study of the geopolitical situation, all of which looks reasonable and even may be true. However, the author, like many others, misses the true point. It is not a crime to be in bad relations with your neighbor (Russia, Georgia, Abkhazia, Kosovo,...) or with US or with EU. Such bad relationships between countries or regions or nations occur everywhere in the world, and people somehow adjust to live with them.

But it is a crime to shell a city and kill thousands of civilians. The author refers to this event by a brief euphemism "the lid blew in South Ossetia". That's why his article just muddies the waters and diverts our attention from real issues.

 

[seycyrus]

Tbilisi is one hour's drive from Gori. I think if the Russians were heading for the capital they'd have got there by now even if they got out and pushed.

The fact that they are heading towards the capital is certainly enough to raise an eyebrow or two of suspicion.

I certainly don't think the cease fire would allow for Russia to continue driving around the Georgia homeland.

A BBC reporter who is with the Russian force said they stopped 5 miles up the road from Gori where they are dismantling a Georgian military camp where Georgian forces had gathered for their attack on S Ossetia. Russian troops they interviewed said they have been told they will be spending the next two days demilitarising the area after which they will be going home.

Again, I wonder if such "cleanup" activities were part of the cease fire. It would seem that Georgians do not think so.

If the Russians were to leave immediately it would lead to an instant renewal of hostilities between S Ossetian irregular forces who have ventured into Georgia proper and the Georgians so it is in everybody's interest that there is an orderly handover of control.

That is certainly a fair amount of conjecture. A renewal of hostilities would be a violation of the cease fire. Who would do such a thing? Certainly nto the beatne Georgians, and certainly not the *innocent* S. Ossetians!

After all no-one would like to see the scenes of looting and devastation that took place in Baghdad and Basra when the US and the UK failed to exercise control over areas it had occupied.

It's amazing how we can't go one step without bashing the US or Bush admin.

The BBC are also now showing footage of the devastation in S Ossetia and interviews with some of the survivors. It seems the media is beginning to fall out of step with the UK and US gov'ts.

You need to update your webpages more often. BBC has had videos of S. Ossetia and those interviews for quite some time now. they also have videos talking about the breach of the cease fire.

Here we finally get to see some accounts from Georgian refugees.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7558813.stm

 

[seycyrus]

Another report I saw on TV had a reporter commenting in hushed tones on how 'the Russians are advancing inexorably despite the widespread condemnation of the international community'. Funny how the US advance in Iraq wasn't described in those terms despite it being true.

That commentary wouldn't have been correct at that time, because the international condemnation was not yet in effect. Here in this case, the international condemnation has been reported.

Saddam was strung up following a guilty verdict in a shi'ite court on a charge of killing a handful of shi'ite villagers whereas the Georgian president is being feted by Bush and Brown and touted as a hero for massacring civilians.

It looks like you are minimizing the crimes of that pig-dog piece of slime formerly known as Sadaam Hussein.

I certainly don't see the Georgian president being touted as a hero, either.

Personally I think Russian troops should be employed as peace keepers in all the world's hotspots.

Apparently they are too cowardly to deploy anywhere else, rather than S. Ossettia.

They have just given the UN a salutary lesson on how to react when peace keepers are attacked rather than the usual run for the hills ;)

Yeah, that'll teach those capitalist pigs!

Unbreakable union of free republics,
Great Russia has joined forever!
...

 

[Art]

The fact that they are heading towards the capital is certainly enough to raise an eyebrow or two of suspicion.

Well as they are now parked you can lower your eyebrow.

I certainly don't think the cease fire would allow for Russia to continue driving around the Georgia homeland.Again, I wonder if such "cleanup" activities were part of the cease fire. It would seem that Georgians do not think so.

One of the nice things about winning a war is you get to make the rules.

That is certainly a fair amount of conjecture. A renewal of hostilities would be a violation of the cease fire. Who would do such a thing? Certainly nto the beatne Georgians, and certainly not the *innocent* S. Ossetians!

If the Russians weren't there to stop them I am sure the Georgians would be more than happy to go another round with the Ossetians and likewise the Ossetian irregulars with the Georgians. I don't think the Ossetians were actually parties to the ceasefire agreement and I do think the Georgian civilians need protection from revenge attacks by these irregulars.

It's amazing how we can't go one step without bashing the US or Bush admin.

Bashing?? I'm pointing out that recent experiences show exactly what happens in a power vacuum in a war zone and I personally would not like to see widespread destruction of Georgian homes and businesses. I suppose I could have cited the Moors invasion of Spain as an example to spare your sensibilities but I thought something more recent would serve the purpose better.

You need to update your webpages more often. BBC has had videos of S. Ossetia and those interviews for quite some time now.

No they have not. They only showed video of S Ossetia and the survivors when their own camera crew entered the area tonight.

Here we finally get to see some accounts from Georgian refugees.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7558813.stm

I have every bit as much sympathy for Georgian civilians caught up in this nightmare as I do for the S Ossetians. It is the warmongering pieces of s%^& that get them into these hellish situations that I despise. Unfortunately it is all too rare for them to be held accountable for their evil stupidity.

 

[Art]

That commentary wouldn't have been correct at that time, because the international condemnation was not yet in effect. Here in this case, the international condemnation has been reported.

Remember 'freedom fries'?

It looks like you are minimizing the crimes of that pig-dog piece of slime formerly known as Sadaam Hussein.

Not at all, but that's all he was sentenced for. Personally I'd have loved to see him stand trial on other charges to see who his fellow conspirators were.

I certainly don't see the Georgian president being touted as a hero, either.

Bush certainly takes every opportunity to proclaim his support for him. He is even sending Condi over as a message of solidarity. As if Georgia didn't have enough problems already

 

[roam]

Last year I had plans to go stay in Tbilisi for some time... it's quite scary and shocking to hear this!

I heard Putin condemning Georgia for committing "genocide". Funny Putin should say that, considering the slaughter in Chechnya

It looks like you are minimizing the crimes of that pig-dog piece of slime formerly known as Sadaam Hussein.

Uh, which crimes? Care to explain?

 

[Astronuc]

Yes, very interesting historical observations and deep psychological analysis of Putin and Saakhashvili, and study of the geopolitical situation, all of which looks reasonable and even may be true. However, the author, like many others, misses the true point. It is not a crime to be in bad relations with your neighbor (Russia, Georgia, Abkhazia, Kosovo,...) or with US or with EU. Such bad relationships between countries or regions or nations occur everywhere in the world, and people somehow adjust to live with them.

But it is a crime to shell a city and kill thousands of civilians. The author refers to this event by a brief euphemism "the lid blew in South Ossetia". That's why his article just muddies the waters and diverts our attention from real issues.

Yes, certainly shelling civilian areas is a crime. In an interview, Traub pointed out that the precipitating event was murky, i.e. it is not clear to those remote from the situation who fired the first shot last week.

As for the euphimism, the entire paragraph is:

The situation in both Abkhazia and South Ossetia took yet another turn down the spiral of confrontation in July, when mysterious acts of violence plagued both regions. There were bombings in Abkhazia. There were shootings in South Ossetia. Who was behind the string of attacks? Criminal gangs? Provocateurs? Georgian secret agents? No one knew, but that didn’t stop the accusations from flying. Abkhazia closed the cease-fire line, then cut all ties with Georgia. On July 8, with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice about to visit Georgia, Russia sent fighter jets over South Ossetia. Georgian Interior Ministry forces squared off against civilians in South Ossetia. The pot was boiling. And then, last week, the lid blew in South Ossetia, for reasons that remain unclear. Diplomats are now laboring mightily to prevent the war from spreading, though hostilities may serve too many different interests to be easily contained.

So were Abkhazian and Ossetia separatists/militia targeting Georgians in those regions? Did the Russians support such activity, which is essentially ethnic cleansing?

 

[AhmedEzz]

In my opinion, you are not looking at the big picture. Something similar would have happened one way or the other. It is not who shot the first shot or who started this, it is something like a hidden war between Russia, EU & US. Russia just added a card that might be to its favor if it is played correctly. The US wants to debunk this card, it starts a media propaganda and tries different things to put this card down. For example, put political pressure on Russia, direct the UN to put more pressure on Russia, get someone like Sarkozy to put more pressure on Russia, support Georgian forces and supply them with weapons and so and so...I think the US might even call forces into Georgia.

This is the Russians not bending over to Americans (unlike some people) and Americans trying to neutralise the Russian danger by implementing its missile-defense programme.

*this is my personal opinion*

 

[Astronuc]

Who is not looking at the big picture? What is the basis of such a comment?

Personally, I'm looking for an independent (non-biased) assessment, which is difficult given the interests involved.

Certainly, there is the US-Russian conflict of competing strategic interests (that is rather blatantly obvious). There is also the competition among Georgia, Abhkazia, and S. Ossetia. No innocent parties here. Shall we list all the greviances of all parties?

This is interesting - why does Russia need so much firepower (many times that of Georgia) for peace-keeping?
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/08/10/article-1043359-023C040E00000578-819_468x400.jpg


Meanwhile -

Leading article: A conflict that has cost Georgia's democracy dear
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinio...-has-cost-georgias-democracy-dear-892815.html


The view from South Ossetia: Joy and thanks in the land that is now part of Russia
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...e-land-that-is-now-part-of-russia-892861.html


Ossetian militias 'looting Georgian villages' (and Georgian militias intimidating ethnic Ossetians)
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ilitias-looting-georgian-villages-893474.html

Human Rights Watch says it has witnessed South Ossetian fighters looting ethnic Georgians' houses and has recorded multiple accounts of Georgian militias intimidating ethnic Ossetians.

The report today by the respected international rights group is important independent confirmation of the claims by each side in the Russia-Georgia conflict. Both have accused the other of committing actions that could be counted as war crimes.

Kim Sengupta: First war, now anarchy as Russian militias run riot
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinio...rchy-as-russian-militias-run-riot-894525.html

The conflict in Georgia appeared to be evolving into a vicious new phase yesterday, with killings, burning and looting by irregular militias coming in behind Russian military columns thrusting from the breakaway province of South Ossetia deep into the country.

George Bush and the Georgian government accused Moscow of breaking the less than 24-hour-old ceasefire, as armed bands of Ossetians, Cossacks and Chechens raided villages around the strategic town of Gori which was taken over by Russian forces in the morning.

Bullet-riddled bodies were seen at three villages, Karaleti, Gavardzhavli and Variani, struck by the militias who appeared to be members of Caucasian groups fighting alongside South Ossetian separatists against Georgian government forces. There were also corpses at Dzardzanis and Kelktsuili. Some of the houses were ablaze and there was widespread evidence of looting.

The Georgian military attacked Tskhinvali and killed civilians, and Russians attacked Gori (and Poti?) and killed civilians.

Georgians attack Ossetians and Ossetians attacked Georgians.

 

[AhmedEzz]

The big picture i am talking about is getting over the details of this war such as who fired the first shot. This would have happened one way or the other. Can't you see how Russia was so excited to deploy its troops in Georgia! Its like a card game where each player has some cards in his/her hands, Russia just made up another card that could be either in their favor or really go against them, it depends on how well they play the game and how stupid/smart those sitting on the table can be.

 

[Astronuc]

I should clarify a previous statement - there are no innocents - except for the millions of unarmed civilians (men, women and children) who are just trying to live or in some cases survive under sometimes difficult conditions.

Who are the aggressors - perhaps the corrupt politicians (and their allies) who want power and control over the lives of other people, or the military/militias who support the political leaders, the people with weapons, the people who are all to willing to go to war?


If one looks back in antiquity, most of that area was part of the kingdom of Armenia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Armenian_Empire.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenia#Antiquity

Empires, nations, borders come and go.

 

[Astronuc]

The big picture i am talking about is getting over the details of this war such as who fired the first shot. This would have happened one way or the other. Can't you see how Russia was so excited to deploy its troops in Georgia! Its like a card game where each player has some cards in his/her hands, Russia just made up another card that could be either in their favor or really go against them, it depends on how well they play the game and how stupid/smart those sitting on the table can be.

Sure - seems obvious to me. Russia didn't want to let go of the Soviet Union!

What will happen when the Abkhaz or Ossetians decide that they have had enough of Russia? Or how about the Ingush, Chechens, or those of Dagestan (Avars, Dargins and Lezgins) if they decide they want autonomy from Russia. Will Russia claim territorial integrity and attack civilians the way Georgia behaved toward Abkhazia and Ossetia?

Why doesn't Russia behave to Georgia the way the US behaved to Cuba? Russia certainly put a trade embargo on Georgia and cut off energy supplies.

I've been watching the big picture for 40 years or so.

 

[AhmedEzz]

Well said my friend, the only true losers are the people. Look how many children lost their parents or how many fathers lost their children, look how many people lost their arms,legs or even worse...Presidents and so called leadrs will wake up next morning and still have their lives but those whose lives are changed are the people.

 

[meopemuk]

As for the euphimism, the entire paragraph is:

"The situation in both Abkhazia and South Ossetia took yet another turn down the spiral of confrontation in July, when mysterious acts of violence plagued both regions. There were bombings in Abkhazia. There were shootings in South Ossetia. Who was behind the string of attacks? Criminal gangs? Provocateurs? Georgian secret agents? No one knew, but that didn’t stop the accusations from flying. Abkhazia closed the cease-fire line, then cut all ties with Georgia. On July 8, with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice about to visit Georgia, Russia sent fighter jets over South Ossetia. Georgian Interior Ministry forces squared off against civilians in South Ossetia. The pot was boiling. And then, last week, the lid blew in South Ossetia, for reasons that remain unclear. Diplomats are now laboring mightily to prevent the war from spreading, though hostilities may serve too many different interests to be easily contained."

So were Abkhazian and Ossetia separatists/militia targeting Georgians in those regions? Did the Russians support such activity, which is essentially ethnic cleansing?

Hi Astronuc,

yes, James Traub's article is factually true, but his priorities seem to be screwed.
It is true that a low-level conflict was brewing in the region for 15 years. Both sides occasionally shot each other. This is actually the reason why peacekeeping forces were stationed in South Ossetia. By the way, this force consisted of three parts: Ossetians, Georgians and Russians. They were in the region on the basis of internationally recognized accord between the three parties. This was an unfortunate (but tolerable) state of affairs that can be found in many other hot spots of the world.

However all this changed when Georgian regular military force entered the area on August 8, killed Russian peacekeepers, shelled Tshinvali, killed thousands of civilians, and created the refugee crisis. There can be no equation sign between low-level skirmishes on both sides and the wholesale massacre of civilians. It is amazing how some Western leaders and media fail to see the difference. It is amazing how they are shy to mention the real event that started all this, and focus only on the Russian military response.

How would you feel if US international policy of the last 7 years was discussed without mentioning the events of 9/11?

Eugene.

 

[quadraphonics]

What will happen when the Abkhaz or Ossetians decide that they have had enough of Russia? Or how about the Ingush, Chechens, or those of Dagestan (Avars, Dargins and Lezgins) if they decide they want autonomy from Russia. Will Russia claim territorial integrity and attack civilians the way Georgia behaved toward Abkhazia and Ossetia?

Almost certainly yes. They've already done so in Chechnya, for example. Russia's geostrategical position is backed by nothing besides naked force, and has been for centuries. The only interesting question is how the EU will deal with the fact that history is still raging on its borders.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Personally I think Russian troops should be employed as peace keepers in all the world's hotspots.

Interesting idea. Let's see if they have some free time for that after Georgia, Crimea, and Lithuania.

 

[Astronuc]

yes, James Traub's article is factually true, but his priorities seem to be screwed.

It is true that a low-level conflict was brewing in the region for 15 years. Both sides occasionally shot each other. This is actually the reason why peacekeeping forces were stationed in South Ossetia. By the way, this force consisted of three parts: Ossetians, Georgians and Russians. They were in the region on the basis of internationally recognized accord between the three parties. This was an unfortunate (but tolerable) state of affairs that can be found in many other hot spots of the world.

However all this changed when Georgian regular military force entered the area on August 8, killed Russian peacekeepers, shelled Tshinvali, killed thousands of civilians, and created the refugee crisis. There can be no equation sign between low-level skirmishes on both sides and the wholesale massacre of civilians. It is amazing how some Western leaders and media fail to see the difference. It is amazing how they are shy to mention the real event that started all this, and focus only on the Russian military response.

How would you feel if US international policy of the last 7 years was discussed without mentioning the events of 9/11?

The matter between Russian and Georgia and Russia and those small geopolitical units in the Caucuses have been simmering for a long time. No state, or rather, no politician likes to give up territory.

Traub's article, while leaving out the background and some key details, is pretty good for the US.

I always have to go to sources outside the US for my news. And preferably I'd go myself, but no one wants to pay me to be a witness.

I think US foreign policy has been rather poor - for the last 232 years - but then it's much along the lines of the European and Asian Imperial/colonial powers.

 

[Astronuc]

Interesting idea. Let's see if they have some free time for that after Georgia, Crimea, and Lithuania.

Afghanistan . . . . Oh wait - they were for a time.

 

[Oberst Villa]

I think US foreign policy has been rather poor - for the last 232 years - but then it's much along the lines of the European and Asian Imperial/colonial powers.

US foreign policy wasn't all that bad under Franklin D. Roosevelt. If he would have messed it up, Europe (including Russia) might be living under the swastika now.

 

[meopemuk]

Traub's article, while leaving out the background and some key details, is pretty good for the US.

That's right: "some key detail". Thousand of people here, thousand of people there... who counts them? Anyway, the value of people's life in some remote obscure region is much less than of those occupying a skyscraper in New York. For some powers it is OK to occupy and devastate entire countries. For others it is not OK to defend its own citizens. Pretty good for the US.

 

[Oberst Villa]

The conflict between Russia and Georgia might have consequences for the Iran policy of the US:


The effect will be felt beyond the Caucasus. Noting that the US wants Russia to support sanctions against Iran and to not sell weapons – "particularly the highly effective S-300 air defense system" – an analysis from Stratfor, an intelligence analysis firm, said Wednesday that the Russians "have backed the Americans into a corner."
"Georgia is a marginal issue to the United States; Iran is a central issue," notes Stratfor. The US must either "reorient" away from the Mideast to the Caucasus, or "seriously limit its response to Georgia to avoid a Russian counter in Iran."

(underlined by me, not in original text)

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0815/p10s01-wome.html


If you assume that this is true, which of the options do you think the US will take ? Reorient from Mideast to Caucasus or limit its response against Russia ?

 

[quadraphonics]

This is actually the reason why peacekeeping forces were stationed in South Ossetia. By the way, this force consisted of three parts: Ossetians, Georgians and Russians.

The idea of having the parties to the conflict, and only those parties, serve as peacekeepers seems poorly-conceived to me. The whole idea of a peacekeeping force is that it is a neutral third party with no incentive to use its position to deepen the conflict. Granted, it's often difficult to get all the parties to a conflict to agree upon and accept such a third-party, but it seems like an abuse of the term 'peacekeepers' to use it in this situation. When it's the actual parties to the conflict, the 'peacekeeping mission' is nothing more than a temporary cease-fire, and a pretense for mobilizing troops and resources in the disputed area.

 

[meopemuk]

Western "independent" media looks laughable. Saakhashvili's paranoidal statements are reported immediately without verification, and Russian officials are quoted out of context. They (the media) try to avoid the central issue of who destroyed Tshinvali by all possible means: "cannot be independently verified", "Georgians were provoked", "result of heavy fighting", etc. It is good that some Western reporters now reached the conflict zone on the South Ossetian side and started to send more or less objective information, including interviews with local residents, who know better than anybody else who is to blame. The West is going to be embarrassed very soon to learn that they gave unconditional support to a war criminal.

 

[meopemuk]

The idea of having the parties to the conflict, and only those parties, serve as peacekeepers seems poorly-conceived to me. The whole idea of a peacekeeping force is that it is a neutral third party with no incentive to use its position to deepen the conflict. Granted, it's often difficult to get all the parties to a conflict to agree upon and accept such a third-party, but it seems like an abuse of the term 'peacekeepers' to use it in this situation. When it's the actual parties to the conflict, the 'peacekeeping mission' is nothing more than a temporary cease-fire, and a pretense for mobilizing troops and resources in the disputed area.

Yes, I agree, this was not an ideal solution. Apparently, there was no 4th party willing to send their peacekeepers to the area and acceptable to all sides of the conflict. So, the sides made the arrangement among themselves. Note that this arrangement (good or bad) managed to keep relative peace and quiet in the area for 15 years.

 

[Art]

US foreign policy wasn't all that bad under Franklin D. Roosevelt. If he would have messed it up, Europe (including Russia) might be living under the swastika now.

You should brush up on WW11 history. Russia defeated Germany in the defining battles of Stalingrad which started the reversal in Germany's fortunes and then Kiev which signalled the beginning of the end for Hitler without anybody's help. All the major battles were fought in the East with the Western front being a far lessor battle ground in terms of men and materials. Plus America went to war with Germany because Germany declared war on America two weeks after Pearl Harbour which didn't exactly leave the US a choice. Having said that and not to take away from America's role it is very likely that all of Europe would have ended up under Stalinist Russia were it not for the US forces.

 

[WarPhalange]

You should brush up on WW11 history.

Holy crap! You mean to tell me I slept through NINE world wars??

 

[Art]

Holy crap! You mean to tell me I slept through NINE world wars??

Stercus accidit atqui nihil est. In vita priore ego imperator romanus fui.

Scio cur summae inter se dissentiant! Numeris Romanis utor!

 

[Art]

A more balanced analysis from the BBC

Russians losing propaganda war

By Paul Reynolds
World affairs correspondent, BBC News

The Bush administration appears to be trying to turn a failed military operation by Georgia into a successful diplomatic operation against Russia.

It is doing so by presenting the Russian actions as aggression and playing down the Georgian attack into South Ossetia on 7 August, which triggered the Russian operation.

Yet the evidence from South Ossetia about that attack indicates that it was extensive and damaging.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7562611.stm