related
document
can-rattling
for beginners - georgia part 2
people
power and the power of civil disobedience - georgia
Putin uses the Olympics as cover for the Russian attack.
“[...] Moscow responded to a Georgian offensive in the breakaway
republic of South Ossetia by sending tanks, troops and war-planes across
the border.”
—
“The United States, the European Union and Nato appealed for an
immediate end to the fighting and for the crisis to be resolved through
direct talks. President Bush pledged US support for Georgia’s territorial
integrity after holding talks with Vladimir Putin, the Russian Prime
Minister, in Beijing where both men were attending the opening of the
Olympic Games.”
Map of Georgia. Image: qqqqssss.files.wordpress.com
and the reverberations and repercussions continue
There are substantial claims that local insurrections
in South Ossetia and Abkhazia in recent decades, backed by the Russian
state, have been working towards driving out Georgians from these areas
(“ethnic cleansing”). At the same time, Georgia has ambitions
to recapture these areas.
the web address for the article above is
https://www.abelard.org/news/georgia2008.php#georgia_090808
georgia - some context
From a translation by Linards Ticmanis of an unattributed
German article.
Whatever was spread in the past few days in the matter of theses and
views - most of it is propaganda and has little to do with the complicated
situation on the ground. For instance, the Russian president conspicuously
received the two political leaders of the South Ossetians and the Abchasians
and declared that after this war nobody could demand of them to live
under Georgian domination ever again. Still, Russia will be extremely
wary of recognizing the two territories as independent states.
The reason for that is not only the fact that Russia would hardly
be able to find enough relevant countries worldwide that would do the
same and thus give political weight to such a step; independence of
these provinces is not in the Russian interest at all. If you ask yourself
the plain question "Who benefits?", you will have to assert
soberly: Russia [...] has not benefited from this war. Why not? Because
the former status quo served Russia's interest best. To determine this,
there is no need to follow the complicated history of the Caucasus region
back into antiquity, as some now do. It is enough to look at the situation
that has held since the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
Since the early 1990s there are four so called unresolved territorial
conflicts in the area of the former Soviet Union. These are Abchasia
and South Ossetia in the former soviet republic of Georgia, Nagorno-Karabakh
in the former soviet republic of Azerbaijan, and Transnistria in Moldova.
Because of these unsolved conflicts, those countries cannot stabilize;
their development is hindered, thus their emancipation from Russia is
only partially possible.
From the point of view of power politics, Moldova is least interesting.
The destitute country between Romania and Ukraine is not particularly
interesting for the West; and in Moscow as well, the support for the
Stalinists of Transnistria has probably more to do with old boys' networks
than with geostrategic interests. The matter is very different with
Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia: This land-bridge between the Black
and the Caspian Sea is the road that leads from Europe, between Russia
and Iran, all the way to China. On this route not only Oil and Gas from
the Caspian Basin get to Europe - Gas and Oil from Turkmenistan and
Kazakhstan are planned to take the same route as well.
Russia could not prevent Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia from declaring
their independence after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, but the
territorial conflicts allowed Russia to keep weighty influence. The
status quo thus was and is the best imaginable situation for Russia.
The question is therefore, retroactively, whether Russia can manage
to restore the situation in Georgia, or continue stirring in Karabakh.
the web address for the article above is
https://www.abelard.org/news/georgia2008.php#georgia_context_210808
“President Bush dispatched US military hardware to the heart
of the Caucasus yesterday and warned Russia that it could be frozen
out of international bodies as punishment for its aggression in Georgia.
“In his toughest criticism of Russia since becoming President,
Mr Bush accused it of breaching the provisional ceasefire agreed with
Georgia only 24 hours earlier.
“He cited intelligence showing that Russian troops had again
taken the town of Gori and could threaten the capital, Tbilisi. He insisted
that Moscow respect the former Soviet republic’s territorial integrity.
There were also reports of Russian-backed militia in South Ossetia looting
ethnic Georgian villages and killing inhabitants.
“ "To begin to repair the damage to its relations with the
United States, Europe and other nations, and to begin restoring its
place in the world, Russia must keep its word and act to end this crisis,"
Mr Bush said.
“The US is in talks with allies about whether to suspend Russia’s
membership of the G8 club of industrialised nations. There is a growing
clamour to block Russia’s membership of the World Trade Organisation
and to rescind an invitation for it to join the Organisation for Economic
Cooperation and Development.”
Keep an eye on commentary by Hunter, as he seems to
be keeping up better than most:
“Robert Hunter, a former U.S. ambassador to NATO who worked
to expand the alliance's relationship with Russia in the 1990s, said
that while Moscow may have provoked Georgia into a fight, the fact that
Saakashvili took the bait by moving his forces into South Ossetia was
a clear sign he believed he would have Washington's backing.
“ "Saakashvili thought he had room to play," Hunter
said. "He did it in the mistaken belief, I believe, that he had
"friends" in the Bush administration." ”[Quoted
from philly.com]
“[...] Poland's President Lech Kaczynski had blasted a six-point
peace plan negotiated with Russia by Sarkozy, whose country is at the
helm of the 27-nation EU, saying it failed to mention the need to respect
Georgia's frontiers, which have been a source of conflict ever since
the country broke from the crumbling Soviet Union in 1991.
“In what appeared to be a further swipe at Sarkozy, the statement
issued by the five leaders [of Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania, Latvia and
Estonia] also comprised six points.” [Quoted from eubusiness.com]
the web address for the article above is
https://www.abelard.org/news/georgia2008.php#georgia_update1_130808
update 2 - the 2006 referendum in ossetia by dr.
quite
Ossetia is an “ethno-linguistic” entity - i.e. to a reasonable
extent, it is a region whose inhabitants share ancestry and language.
Theory suggests that matching geographical space with ethnolinguisticity
is the best way to ensure a happy time for people and harmonious relations
with your neighbours. It was the justification for turning a blind eye
while the Czechs expelled Germans from the Sudetenland, and it’s
even claimed to have “saved” the European nation-state after
WWII.
I’m not much concerned with accusations of hypocrisy. Consistency
is a hobgoblin. As far as I'm concerned, the West can support the autonomy
of one region (such as Taiwan or Kosovo), while respecting the “territorial
integrity” of another country where secessionists are causing trouble.
However, self-determination still seems like a good solution for lots
of territorial problems. In 2006, Ossetia held a referendum on independence.
Should it retain its status as an independent state?
The answer was Yes.
“On Sunday 12 November 2006, South Ossetians went to the polls
to vote in a referendum confirming the region's independence from Georgia.
The result was an overwhelming "yes" to independence, with
a turnout above 95% from those among the territory's 70,000 people who
were eligible to vote.” [1]
Those figures look dodgy. And they probably are. Firstly, the BBC counts
the population of Ossetia at around 70,000, so it’s unclear how
many Ossetians living outside Ossetia were bussed in to vote. Secondly,
OECD election observers suggested that ethnic Georgians (who are around
40% of the population) weren't allowed to vote - participation was conditional
on holding an Ossetian passport, which most Georgians don’t.
But the referendum was observed by 34 foreign delegates, and there don’t
appear to have been significant irregularities.[2]
This is on top of the fact that Ossetia won its autonomy from Tbilisi
in warfare in 1992 (albeit with considerable help from Russia).
I’m not blind to the massive problems a nominally independent Ossetia
would entail - the constant interference by Moscow and Georgia, the presence
of a large Georgian minority, the issue of oil pipelines, and so on.
But a solution seems to me to involve choosing the lesser of two evils
- permitting the self-determination of a corrupt and Moscow-backed region
that has shown some desire for independence. It would be, after all, progress.
I’m not interested in the West being able to exercise sheer influence
in Ossetia for the sake of a bulwark against Russia. I’m interested
in Ossetia being free to exercise its will. In such a condition of relative
freedom, people open shops, lay telephone lines, get educated and generally
refrain from shooting their neighbours. These are features of a peaceful
society and a peaceful society doesn’t constantly have to appeal
to the world for support.
the web address for the article above is
https://www.abelard.org/news/georgia2008.php#georgia_update2_140808
update
3 - russia’s secret policeman / is putin running a criminal regime?
russia’s
secret policeman
Recommended reading.
“This was a direct warning to Russia's few remaining human rights
and trade union activists, as they well understood. He continues to
believe instead, as Soviet secret policemen did before him, that all
important decisions should be made in Moscow by a small, unelected group
of people who know how to resist these foreign conspiracies.
“Given his world view, it's not very surprising that Putin and
his entourage have been so openly hostile, not only towards Georgia,
but also towards Ukraine and Estonia, the post-Soviet countries that
present the greatest contrast to his vision of Russia.
“These, after all, are countries in which genuine elections have
taken place - sometimes with the help of street demonstrations - and
in which people who have not been picked by the ruling oligarchy can
rise to power.
“In some cases, they have also moved much farther along the path
of genuine economic reform, and at least intend to create real market
economies, in which people who have not been picked by the ruling oligarchy
can set up businesses and make money.”
is
putin running a criminal regime?
“One of the curious trends of recent years has been the Western
business community’s enduring love affair with the unlovely Russia.
With every passing week, it becomes clearer that this is a country run
by and for people little different from gangsters. The tanks rolling
into Georgia have reminded us that they are gangsters with keys to a
big arsenal.
“The largest Western companies, Shell and BP included, have been
bullied, intimidated and forced into concessions by the Kremlin and
its cronies. This week a Moscow court joined in the harassment, targeting
the head of BP’s troubled joint venture in Russia.
“This is a country that defaulted on its overseas debts less
than ten years ago; a country that, after its journey from feudalism
to kleptocracy via totalitarian communism, has little truck with Western-style
capitalism; a country alive with corruption and not averse, it has been
suggested, to the occasional state-sponsored murder. Hardly the ideal
recipient of Western capital, you might think.”
I have some discomfort over Ossetia, but much more
with a Russian ‘general’ threatening to nuke Poland. What
is central is whether ‘Russia’ keeps its agreements. It is
clearly failing in that over oil contracts and property rights, and appears
to be involved in political assassinations. Will Russia get out of main
Georgia, as it claims?
Putin has also been frigging ‘elections’.
The list of dubiety is growing longer.
We should do what is in our interests. The
map of the area suggests to me that there are more vital interests
than Georgia. Saakashvili gives every appearance of being a first class
idiot, but eighty years of socialism doesn’t exactly prepare a citizenry
for self determination.
The West seems to have been surprised in Georgia, which
is close to ridiculous.
Comparison
of miltary strengths
- Georgia :
- Total armed Forces Personnel: 26,900
82 - Main Battle Tanks (T-72)
139 - Armoured Personnel Carriers (BMP and BTR variants)
7 - Combat aircraft (Su-25 ground attack)
95 - Heavy artillery pieces (including Grad BM-21 122mm multiple rocket
launchers)
-
- Russia :
- Total armed forces personnel: 641,000
6,717 - Main Battle Tanks (T-55, T-62, T-72, T-80, T-90)
6,388 - Armoured Personnel Carriers (BMP and BTR variants)
1,206 - Combat aircraft (Including: MiG-29 'Fulcrum', MiG-31 'Foxhound',
Su-27 'Flanker', Su-30 'Flanker', Su-35 'Flanker', Su-24 'Fencer', Su-25
'Frogfoot', Su-34 'Fullback')
7,550 - Heavy artillery pieces (multiple types)
[Data from Jane's
Sentinel Country Risk Assessments]
the web address for the article above is
https://www.abelard.org/news/georgia2008.php#georgia_update3_160808
end notes
- opendemocracy.net
- rferl.org
|
