Georgian - South Ossetian - Russian Conflict

[Alex:)]

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 www.wordpolicy.org[/URL] before - could anybody comment on it, I mean, do you consider it a credible source ?[/QUOTE]

I can't say anything about wordpolicy.org, (neither wor[b]l[/b]dpolicy.org) but afaik, after revolution in Georgia it slowly became less and less corrupt. It is always possible to refer to an extensive history of human rights violations, but things have changed dramatically in 2003/2004 and are constantly changing.

 

[Oberst Villa]

OK, but what about the part "Georgia, an aggressive force in a number of border disputes" - would you say that this is a fair assessment ?

 

[Alex:)]

OK, but what about the part "Georgia, an aggressive force in a number of border disputes" - would you say that this is a fair assessment ?

no comment. If there are references to reliable documentation - one can review it and make a decision. Otherwise, it is a wordplay and the website is not trustworthy.

 

[chemisttree]

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?

The Ossetian district has been a site for separatists and terrorists who threaten the proposed http://www.progress.org/fpif11.htm" from the Caspian oil fields through Georgia and terminating in Turkey.

But other motives became apparent, although largely unnoticed by the Western press when Georgian Defense Ministry official Mirian Kiknadze told Radio Free Europe on February 27: "The U.S. military will train our rapid reaction force, which is guarding strategic sites in Georgia -- particularly oil pipelines." He was referring to the embryonic Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) project, set to reduce Georgia's and Azerbaijan's energy reliance on Russia and bring the southern Caucasus into the U.S. fold.

Russia's military establishment and domestic opinion are clearly furious, although President Putin has played soft on the issue, delighted to see his Chechen suppression campaign rebranded as a "war on terror" in return for supporting the U.S. war against Afghanistan.

"It is hard to see why Russia should react so angrily to a U.S. operation promising to neutralize not just al Qaeda fighters but also Putin's longtime Chechen bogeys," said Hovann Simonian, author of the acclaimed Troubled Waters: The Geopolitics of Caspian Oil. "The U.S. training force is unlikely to make much difference given the parlous state of the Georgian military. Clearly this is not simply about fighting terror," Simonian added.

Washington has recently injected fresh momentum into its Caspian designs, home to the world's third-largest oil and gas deposits. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage emphatically re-affirmed U.S. support for BTC on March 8 during the visit of Turkish premier Bulent Ecevit. Four days later U.S. Caspian envoy Stephen Mann told Kazakh authorities he wanted to promote pipelines bypassing Iran.

The US has a long history of dealing with regimes of questionable ethics where oil is concerned.

 

[Art]

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 www.worldpolicy.org before - could anybody comment on it, I mean, do you consider it a credible source ?

What part do you wish to question? The references to human rights violations are supported by Amnesty internationals 2008 report which as an example includes the following from the UN Human Rights Committee

In October the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concern about torture and other ill-treatment, prison conditions, interference with the independence of the judiciary, domestic violence, reports of forced evictions of internally displaced people and violations of the rights of ethnic minorities. The Committee called on Georgia to draft and implement a comprehensive action plan against torture and other ill-treatment, to investigate allegations and bring perpetrators to justice, and to ensure that victims had access to reparation including compensation. It urged Georgia to investigate women’s complaints of violence and bring perpetrators to justice, and to establish sufficient shelters for those escaping domestic violence.

http://thereport.amnesty.org/eng/regions/europe-and-central-asia/georgia

If it is America's assistance to Georgia you wish to question then the aid referenced is public knowledge and I refer you to the US State Dept's own website http://www.state.gov/p/eur/rls/fs/66198.htm

Whilst the border disputes and the aggressive attempts to resolve them are simply historical facts as witnessed by the viciousness of the civil war which erupted in the early 90's following the breakup of the USSR which led to the peace agreement in 1994 which Georgia decided to violate last Friday.

It is interesting that when Russia asked for an emergency meeting of the UNSC on Friday night to draft an immediate demand for a ceasefire both the US and the UK stalled any resolution being passed presumably to allow Georgia to complete it's mission yet now that Russia have responded with military force the US and the UK are screaming for a ceasefire. The US and Britains interests are far from altruistic as they want Georgia in NATO to further develop their encirclement of Russia but the NATO charter states any prospective members must have recognised and secure borders and so following the rejection of Georgia's membership bid by the other member states until the separatist issues were resolved it seems that Georgia possibly at the prompting of the US and the UK decided to try and 'resolve' it's border disputes by the use of force. Unfortunately for them the analysts who advise on such matters badly underestimated Russia's response time and resolve and so it would now appear Georgia's territorial disputes will indeed be settled but not along the lines they anticipated.

 

[layer_ru]

Georgia attacked s.osettia because us said to did it.Everyone knows that there is puppet us government in georgia and usa already invested a lot amount of money in georgia,so now georgia must work every $ invested.There are a couple of reasons to attack s.ossetia.First,to support mackein,he says that russia is an agressor,and s.ossetia conflict proves it.Second, to raise up the cost of currencies in russia,that means to make ruble fall.

 

[Art]

It seems the dialogue between the US and Russia is becoming quite heated,

Russia seeking regime change in Georgia: US

6 hours ago

UNITED NATIONS (AFP) — The United States on Sunday accused Russia of seeking regime change in Georgia as it pushed the UN Security Council to call for a ceasefire in the widening Caucasus conflict.

In highly contentious exchanges with his Russian counterpart Vitaly Churkin reminiscent of the Cold War, US Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad told the Council that Moscow was seeking "regime change" in Tbilisi and waging "a campaign of terror" in Georgia.

It seems the irony was not lost on the Russian UN ambassador

"This is completely unacceptable, especially from the lips of a representative of a country whose actions we are aware of in Iraq, Afghanistan and Serbia," he responded.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gwImAqSKkedSA8GjOuadBJT0Np4Q

NATO chief says Russia used excessive force

BRUSSELS, Belgium: NATO's Secretary General criticized Russia Sunday for violating the "territorial integrity" of Georgia and urged the warring sides to observe an immediate cease-fire in South Ossetia.

Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said he was concerned about the "disproportionate" use of force, in an apparent reference to Russian shelling and air attacks on Georgian troops.

In NATO's first substantive comments about the fighting in South Ossetia since hostilities began Friday, De Hoop Scheffer called for talks aimed at restoring Georgian control over its breakaway province.

He said the deployment of Russian combat troops in South Ossetia showed "a lack of respect for the territorial integrity of Georgia," according to comments relayed by NATO spokeswoman Carmen Romero.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/08/10/europe/EU-NATO-Georgia-South-Ossetia.php

One wonders where De Hoop Scheffer was when Israel was pounding the Lebanon as he made no calls for a ceasefire or condemnation of disproportionate force during that conflict.

The hypocrisy of our Western leaders is truly sickening. Over the past several years western military adventurism and their desire to achieve short term goals in defiance of international laws has established some very important and very undesirable precedents the results of which are becoming apparent. This blatant disregard of international law has left a vacuum which has been replaced with a might is right philosophy which can only lead to ever more turmoil in the world.

 

[jostpuur]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7552908.stm Georgia move fails to halt raids

Georgia insists that all its forces are now outside South Ossetia

President Saakashvili told the BBC his forces had observed a ceasefire since 0500 on Sunday morning, but had still been bombed by Russian planes. He said his government had been trying "all day" to contact Russia to discuss a ceasefire.

Georgia's announcement of its ceasefire came in a statement from the foreign ministry, stating that Georgia "today stopped firing in the South Ossetian conflict zone and is ready to begin talks with Russia on a ceasefire and cessation of hostilities".

But a Russian foreign ministry official was quoted by Interfax saying "our information does not confirm the Georgian statement".

"There are indications that exchanges of fire are continuing and the Georgian forces have not been fully withdrawn from the conflict zone," he said.

*sigh* The truth is out there Now there is information war going on about how eagerly Georgia is trying to stop the fighting, and obviously neither side is trust worthy, because they both have their preferred truth which benefits them.

 

[Astronuc]

Russians Push Past Separatist Area to Assault Central Georgia !
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/11/world/europe/11georgia.html


So now Russia goes on the offense and invades a weaker neighbor. The US (and EU) stands by while an 'ally' is invaded. Hmmmm.


So perhaps Russia could gain control of the Baku to Ceyhan pipeline.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Georgia attacked s.osettia because us said to did it.

Evidence?

 

[Vanadium 50]

A US contribution of $107M over 10 years is $11M/year. Call it $12M. Georgia'a military budget is $600M/year. So we're talking about 12/600 = 2% here.

 

[layer_ru]

There were a lot of vizits from usa just before georgia attacked ,and its well-known fact that saakashvili became president because of "roses revolution" which was financed by usa,so michael can't made such a strong decisions,without "consultating" with usa(actually there is a puppet government in georgia).

 

[Vanadium 50]

There were a lot of vizits from usa just before georgia attacked ,and its well-known fact that saakashvili became president because of "roses revolution" which was financed by usa,so michael can't made such a strong decisions,without "consultating" with usa(actually there is a puppet government in georgia).

Like I said. Evidence?

 

[layer_ru]

And you really think that us contribution is only 2%?A huge amount of american and other north atlantic alliance countries' weapons was transported to georgia directly.Just think it by yourself,there are no natural resources or any touristical resorts,etc.,where they got such a big amount of money?there is a joke in georgia:where are you working?in DNAD(doing nothing all day)department.

 

[Astronuc]

There were a lot of vizits from usa just before georgia attacked ,and its well-known fact that saakashvili became president because of "roses revolution" which was financed by usa,so michael can't made such a strong decisions,without "consultating" with usa(actually there is a puppet government in georgia).

Evidence? So far, I see only unsubstantiated claims. Please provide evidence to support one's claims.

AFAIK, S. Ossetia is part of Georgia. Does Russia support the independence of Chechnya and Dagestan, both of whom would prefer to be free of the Russian yoke? Of course, ethnic Russians prefer to remain within Russia, and Russia prefers to maintain control of ethnic minorities. Afterall, Dagestan is rich in oil, gas and minerals.

 

[layer_ru]

What evidence do you want ?May be audio record of a conversation between saakashvili and condolisa rise or may be some secret docs?I can't prove it ,but it can be seen clearly,that usa commanded georgia to attack.

 

[layer_ru]

Oh,but how about kosovo?Usa supported its separtment,why not support s.ossetia and abkhazia separatment?s.ossetia,abkhazia and kosovo are the same except the fact that s.ossetia,abkhazia does not meet with us geopolitical interest.And remember irak,whole country invaded because of american's oil lust.

 

[layer_ru]

And who told you that checnya and dagestan want to be separate from russia?nowdays there is a huge development in checnya ,more shops ,hospitals,etc. Are being built,and there is a peace in this region.All nationalities not only ethnic minorities are glad to be the part of russia.

 

[jostpuur]

There may be good reasons for Russia's proceeding beyond the original conflict zone. Putin said that the Georgia's original attack towards its own people in South Ossetia had elements of genocide. It can be difficult to get war criminals arrested if they are protected by their corrupted governments, and particularly difficult if the corrupted government is supported by some great nations. So if indeed war crimes were committed, Russia can only either let the war crimes go unpunished, or then take temporary control of the Georgia.

However, it could be that the claims of genocide are Russian propaganda, as well. We cannot know it here.

I have noticed that the western media has been reluctant to comment on the origins of the conflict. The conflict is indeed called only a "conflict", and the attention is drawn to the fact that Russia has attacked outside the "conflict zone", but it is suspicious how the original nature of the "conflict" is avoided. As long as western media is not giving description on it, the Russian claims of Georgia committing a genocide seem to be very well possibly true.

In one of the youtube clips I was watching on this, Putin said they would collect a "body of evidence" supporting their genocide claims. We will probably hear about this later.

Oh yes, and we cannot know for sure what Georgia has been doing after the original attack. That is most heavily hidden under propaganda from both sides: It could be that Georgia has been continuing fighting and at the same time crying: "look west! We have stopped fighting, but Russia continues!" Or it could be that Georgia has stopped fighting, and Russia continues claiming that Georgia keeps fighting. Who knows?

 

[Evo]

layer_ru your posts are meaningless without evidence. You may express a personal opinion on your feelings about the conflict, but you cannot make claims such as you have without proof, it is a violation of our guidelines.

 

[Art]

The Georgian president seems to live in a fantasy land with no grip on reality. In a television interview today he made many extraordinary claims which were blatantly false. To list a few;

He claimed he personally had been attacked that morning at a meet the press venue by Russian fighter planes which flew low over his head. A Sky News correspondent who was at the venue said no such thing happened.

He claims Russia attacked taking advantage of the world's press being diverted by the Olympic games. He seems to have completely forgotten that Russia responded to his attack on the citizens of S Ossetia which indeed was timed to take advantage of the Olympic games.

He claimed at that moment a fierce battle was waging in Gori which he claimed had been destroyed by Russian tanks and aircraft. Funnily enough Sky News had interrupted a live video broadcast by one of their reporters in Gori to go to his interview and that reporter was standing in the middle of Gori commenting on how quiet it was and how things were getting back to normal. The reporter also said and showed the only damaged building was an apartment block which had suffered blast damage following the bombing the previous day of an adjacent military base.

He claimed all Georgian troops had left S Ossetia but when asked in a Q&A session about Russian claims that his troops were still fighting in S Ossetia he said they were responding to Russian fire. Hard to see how they are doing that if they are not there.

Seeing as how Mikheil Saakashvili's lies are so easily disproved one must presume they are intended for domestic consumption or he really is simply insane.

Meanwhile the US who the Russians believe have their fingerprints all over this are now desperately trying to recover what they can from the situation. The attempt to seize the separatist areas having failed the focus now seems to be on trying to not lose ground as a result of this insane piece of adventurism. Understandably the Russians and the S Ossetians are not prepared to pretend as if nothing ever happened. America's pleas for peace seem more than a little hollow given they are in the process of airlifting Georgia's 2000 troops from Iraq to return them to Georgia to assist in the conflict.

Meanwhile Russian television (English language RT) is showing footage from S Ossetia particularly it's capital which has been absolutely flattened and it's streets littered with corpses from the Georgian attack. It is strange the Western news outlets aren't carrying this footage as I'm sure the Russians would be all too happy to share it with them

 

[Oberst Villa]

There may be good reasons for Russia's proceeding beyond the original conflict zone. Putin said that the Georgia's original attack towards its own people in South Ossetia had elements of genocide. It can be difficult to get war criminals arrested if they are protected by their corrupted governments, and particularly difficult if the corrupted government is supported by some great nations. So if indeed war crimes were committed, Russia can only either let the war crimes go unpunished, or then take temporary control of the Georgia.

I think it is a mistake to heat up emotions by using words like genocide. Operation Barbarossa back in 1941 was genocide, I have seen enough documentary in German TV and read enough books to say this for sure. What has happened here (as far as I understood the events) is that Georgia started this conflict by attacking South Ossetia and killed up to 2000 Russian people (if you believe Russian sources) during a military operation. Whether war crimes were comitted remains to be seen, but even then this was no genocide.

Nethertheless, I think the Russian reaction was justified: To go into South Ossetia with armed forces and to use their airpower to take out military assets in Georgia that might have inflicted further damage on South Ossetia.

Anyway, even if Saakashvili were responsible for war crimes, going into Georgia to take him under arrest would be an incredibly foolish thing to do for Russia. Even in the (very unlikely) case that they might succeed, the resulting collateral damage might poison the relationsship between the 2 countries for the next century. Not to speak of the relations with the west, if we would see trecks of Georgian refugees on youtube. (Or are you talking about some really cool Spetsnaz operation ? Get in by parachute, put Mr. Saakashvili in a bag and escape with him over the border ? Maybe we will see this in a Russian movie in some years...)

 

[jostpuur]

What has happened here (as far as I understood the events) is that Georgia started this conflict by attacking South Ossetia and killed up to 2000 Russian people (if you believe Russian sources) during a military operation.

It has not become clear to me who these 2000 people were. According to the news report to which I posted one youtube link in post #28, that number even included children. It included Russians, but I understood that it included also Georgians. At this point I might again remind of the unfortunate fact that Western media is not talking about this. It is only talking about how Russia is attacking outside the "conflict zone".

I am not yet seeing anywhere convincing evidence that Putin's claims would be plain wrong.

Anyway, even if Saakashvili were responsible for war crimes, going into Georgia to take him under arrest would be an incredibly foolish thing to do for Russia. Even in the (very unlikely) case that they might succeed, the resulting collateral damage might poison the relationsship between the 2 countries for the next century. Not to speak of the relations with the west

On the other hand, letting a possible war criminal continue in charge of his regime, and listen to the West accusing Russia of everything, would also poison the relationships. I don't see how any option for the Russia would be a good option now. Getting a new, less mad, leader to Georgia could be a positive thing though.

 

[Oberst Villa]

layer ru:

Welcome to the forum, am I right that the "ru" is for "russia" ? (I am from Germany by the way). If yes, it is certainly interesting to read what someone whose country is directly involved thinks of the whole mess (but keep in mind what Evo said in post #55...).

Would you like to make a prediction (or just a guess) what Russias next steps might be ? Let us assume for a moment that Georgia will completely withdraw from South Ossetia, and will stop firing on Russian troops. (Maybe they have already done this, to me the news reports are still a bit confusing at the moment)

In this case, do you think that Russia will agree to an armistice (end of hostilities) ? Or do you believe in reports that Russia might continue the fighting to remove Saakashvili from power ? Or to destroy as much of Georgia's military power as possible ?

 

[Alex:)]

I haven't been following this thread since last post, so am not sure if this link has already been discussed: Human Rights Watch http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2008/08/10/georgi19581.htm

disclaimer: I am neither supporting nor refuting this information. Consider it as just another point of view.

 

[Oberst Villa]

Some guesses / rumors / news snippets. Please don't take them as reliable facts, but you might correlate them with what you hear in the news:

Russian troops will advance until they have secured buffer zones around South Ossetia and Abkhazia. A German reporter in South Ossetia was told by Russian staff officers that Russia had no intention to occupy Georgian territory except for this buffer zones. I just hope they don't think that all of Georgia is their buffer zone... Seriously, another source claimed that Russia explicitly stated they would not move into Tblisi.

I read in some posts the accusation that western media do only report what happened to the Georgian population but ignore the South Ossetian refugees. I have also observed this in some media, but on a German TV channel they brought a relatively long report about South Ossetians that had fled to North Ossetia, including a statement of a woman about Georgian attrocities (I do not consider this reliable as long as I have no confirmation by an independent source, I am only telling you this to make my point that not all western media give one-sided reports).

Finally, I made the false assumption that the South Ossetians are a homogeneous population that all want to break away from Georgia. This is surely true for the majority, but today I heard reports of some South Ossetians that are loyal to Georgia and had fled there when Russian troops moved into South Ossetia.

 

[edward]

We are into Georgia militarily up to our necks and have been since 2002. It is always about oil and blood is always shed.

The Pentagon is to privatise its military presence in Georgia by contracting a team of retired US military officers to equip and advise the former Soviet republic's crumbling military, embellishing an eastward expansion that has enraged Moscow.


After a Georgian appeal for support to the US defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, during a visit last month, a team of 20-30 private defence consultants are already in Tbilisi. Their employer, a Washington security firm, Cubic, has a three-year $15m contract with the Pentagon to support all aspects of the Georgian ministry of defence.


A senior western diplomat said: "One of the goals is to make the army units capable of seizing and defending a given objective. The consultants will work with US defence liaisons in the US Tbilisi embassy and the European command in Stuttgart." He said the programme could continue for much longer than three years.


About 60 US military trainers arrived in Georgia in the summer of 2002 to help the dilapidated military deal with the perceived threat of terrorists linked to al-Qaida hiding in the Pankisi gorge, on the border with Russian Chechnya.

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11213

And it is all being done by private companies, probably Cheney's choice on this.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/jan/06/georgia.nickpatonwalsh

The price of crude is allready going up.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601082&sid=az6JIuhga_a8&refer=canada

 

[Jordan Joab]

Speculation:

WWI and WWII started out of a small regional event/conflict. WWIII just a few months away?

 

[jostpuur]

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/11/us.georgia/index.html

Bush also warned Russia against trying to depose Georgia's government, saying evidence suggests Russia may be preparing to do so.

At the United Nations in New York on Monday, Russia refused to sign off on a resolution calling for a cease-fire with Georgia despite mounting pressure from world powers.

The U.S. is trying to transport 2,000 Georgian troops serving in Iraq back home to fend off Russian advances, but beyond that "there are no discussions about the U.S. getting involved militarily,"

It looks like Russia will be taking control of the entire country now, despite what the west is crying. I don't believe WIII is coming, assuming Russia wins and ends the war quickly. If the battle starts continuing too long, I suppose anything can happen then.

 

[Pyrrhus]

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.

You know that's exactly what i thought when i first read about this war. Anyway, later as I was looking reading the countries reactions I wasn't surprised when I read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_reaction_to_the_2008_South_Ossetia_War" .

 

[jostpuur]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7555858.stm Russia 'ends Georgia operation'

Now it appears that the Russia is not heading towards the capital anymore.

 

[AhmedEzz]

I think Russia is showing the US that it will no longer tolerate its policies. US has been supplying Georgians with weapons , tanks, etc... Russia doesn't want a puppet government controlled by the US near its borders. I believe this is a way of saying "We are serious about this and you must change your policies.".

This might also be linked with the US plans to protect itself from Russian missiles. If the US went forward with this, Russia will lose power balance to US and I don't think that is a good thing.

I think that the US is simply after taking every power in the world down but then it IS "THE" superpower and it is the wealthiest nation in the world, what else do they want? This remains mystery to me.



*These are all personal opinions*

 

[Briant232]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxSvsa7I9fg&feature=related

Brings to mind that saying, "You can run, but you'll only die tired." Add to that, "You can run, but your panicked flight (to nowhere really) will be on display on youtube for years to come."

He is a puppet, which is why he had US and Israeli trainer's to prepare his military to attack South Ossetia. I guess they didn't teach his troops what to do in case of a real opponent...that's always the tricky part...when they shoot back.

Hopefully the Georgian people throw this guy under the bus.

 

[Oberst Villa]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7555858.stm Russia 'ends Georgia operation'

Now it appears that the Russia is not heading towards the capital anymore.

So the bloodshed is over ! Thanks for this wonderful news, jostpuur.

 

[seycyrus]

I find it strange that people put any credence in Russian *controlled* media.

To those who said the US involvement in this was about oil. You are correct, but not in the way you think.

Georgia has one of few (maybe the only) non-Russian oil pipeline to Western Europe. Chew on that for a moment. Now chew some more.

This is why Russia is interested in maintaining an independent, but pro-russian, South Ossetia.

We are of what Putin has been pulling over the last couple of years, aren't we?