Europe

Superpower swoop

Published 14 August 2008

What Russia and America are really doing in Georgia and who set the trap? Vladimir Putin and his thuggish FSB pals or Dick Cheney and his equally unflappable neocon friends?

Georgia's decision to seize large parts of Tskhinvali, the capital of the breakaway region of South Ossetia, on the evening of 7 August was a disastrous political miscalculation, even in an era that is increasingly defined by spectacularly poor judgement.

Within three days of the assault, Russian forces had responded by in effect neutralising Georgia's military capacity, which President Mikhail Saakashvili's government in Tbilisi had spent several years and considerable sums of money building up.

Clearly, Russia has been goading and provoking the Georgian government for several years into making the big mistake. The parastates of Abkhazia and, above all, South Ossetia, have been under the control of a toxic coalition of criminals and both former and serving FSB officers. Russian soldiers have been acting as their protectors under the guise of a peacekeeping mission, preventing Georgia's attempts to seek a negotiated reintegration of the two areas. The Georgian crisis has benefited the standing of hardliners in Moscow, still aggrieved at Vladimir Putin's decision to place the moderate, business-friendly Dmitry Medvedev in the Kremlin.

But under the influence of an energetic neo-con lobby in Washington, and with considerable support from Israeli weapons manufacturers and military trainers, Saakashvili and the hawks around him came to believe the farcical proposition that Georgia's armed forces could take on the military might of their northern neighbour in a conventional fight and win.

The Georgian minister for reintegration of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Temur Yakobash vili, revealed the depth of the illusion the day after the conflict broke out when he thanked Israel for its assistance in training Georgian troops. "Israel should be proud of its military, which trained Georgian soldiers," Yakobashvili said, with reference to Defensive Shield, the private company run by Gal Hirsch, a former general in the Israel Defence Forces.

Still unaware of what was really happening on the battlefield, Yakobashvili reported that a small group of Georgian soldiers had been able to wipe out an entire Russian military division, thanks to the Israeli training. "We killed 60 Russian soldiers yesterday alone," he said. "The Russians have lost more than 50 tanks, and we have shot down 11 of their planes. They have sustained enormous damage in terms of manpower."

Warned off

The Russians, of course, knew all about Defensive Shield and the tens of millions of dollars worth of Israeli military equipment that Georgia had been purchasing. Just over a week before the conflict erupted, Putin put in a call to the Israeli president, Shimon Peres. His message, according to a western intelligence source, was simple: "Pull out your trainers and weapons or we will escalate our co-operation with Syria and Iran." Peres does not suffer the same illusions as Georgian ministers and the Israeli set-up left Tbilisi within two days.

The KGB has also been tracking Georgia's clandestine arms procurement in Ukraine (where most weapons dealers work for Russian intelligence anyhow). The Russian army was also fully briefed about the joint US-Georgian manoeuvres, which took place in Georgia last month. Russia was not taking a military risk when responding to the Georgian attack on Tskhinvali - Moscow knew the precise contours of its enemy's capability. David's victory over Goliath was sensational because of its rarity - in the real world Goliath always comes out on top.

So the Russians set a trap and, prodded by Dick Cheney's people, Georgia walked right into it.

The consequences of this egregious error begin in Georgia itself. Not only is it now defenceless, it can kiss goodbye to any restoration of sovereignty over both South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Even though President Sarkozy of France received tentative agreement from both Moscow and Tbilisi for the establishment of international talks to settle the status of the two areas, they are unlikely to rejoin Georgia any time soon. The loss of Abkhazia, with its considerable economic potential, is a huge blow.

The EU and the US will argue that there is no parallel to be drawn between Kosovo and the Georgian breakaway regions. But that is not how much of the world, including China, South Africa and Indonesia, see it. And it is not how Russia sees it. The first chickens of Kosovo's independence are coming home to roost.

Saakashvili is now very vulnerable. The Russian invasion has cut communications between Tbilisi and the main port in Poti. BP has closed down the pipeline running from Baku to Ceyhan in Turkey through Tbilisi, and Georgian banks are freezing all loans and blocking capital flight.

After only a week, the Georgian economy is teetering. "It doesn't look very good for Georgia," Edward Parker from the credit rating agency Fitch told the Moscow Times. "Going to war with Russia is bad for your creditworthiness, to put it mildly." And if the wheels do come off the economy, it is hard to see how Saakashvili might salvage his political position - such a combination of economic distress and military defeat is usually fatal. If he goes, Georgia is likely to fracture politically into a variety of fiefdoms familiar from the 1990s and living standards will plummet.

There is one faint consolation. The west may be impotent when it comes to responding to the situation militarily but it can rally round by offering the country a financial and commercial lifeline.

The foreign implications of the error are graver still. Russia is placing a marker on Ukraine. Do not, Moscow says, even think of allowing Ukraine into Nato, otherwise what we have seen in Georgia will be child's play. So the west will have to think hard how to play Ukraine's application to join the military alliance.

This in turn has accentuated the divisions within the European Union between those countries, including Germany, which remain cautious about a course of open confrontation with Russia, and Britain, which has echoed calls from Washington demanding that Russia's application to join the World Trade Organisation be reconsidered. Speaking from Tbilisi, one senior European diplomat told me that the split on this issue, which was openly on display at the Nato Bucharest summit in April, "is running deeper within the EU than was the case in the run-up to Iraq".

But the Georgian fiasco has implications for politics in the Middle East, the European Union and the United States.

For the Bush administration (or for its hawks at least), the Georgian mistake presents an opportunity - let us recast Russia as a threat to global stability and a potential enemy. Predictably, the toughest response to the Russian invasion came from Cheney. The outbreak of the crisis coincided with President Bush horseplaying with beach volleyball players in Beijing and the vice-president was in operational control at the time.

Cheney immediately announced that the Russian invasion cannot go "unanswered", a choice of words that the American former ambassador to Nato Robert Hunter described as "inflammatory". Cheney has been spoiling for a fight with the Russians for a couple of years, and he and his allies have seized upon Georgia's and Ukraine's stated aim to join Nato as a way of riling Moscow.

This plan came unstuck at the Bucharest summit, when some European countries, led by Germany, blocked the Nato road map for the two former Soviet republics. But the final statement did concede that the two countries' aspirations would eventually be met at some unspecified time in the future.

As a democratic country, Georgia has every right to apply for Nato membership, even though its inability to assert its sovereignty over South Ossetia and Abkhazia presents a problem to some existing Nato members. But the neocons in Washington have been pushing Georgian and Ukrainian membership as a critical goal for the maintenance of the western alliance. By cranking up the dispute with Russia over Nato, Cheney is shifting the political debate in the US away from the state of the economy and towards the issue of national security.

Global dangers

If the presidential election is fought on the former issue, Barack Obama is a shoo-in. But if the central issue is national security and who would be best at dealing with a major crisis like Georgia, then his Republican opponent, John McCain, has to be favourite. McCain's response to Georgia was almost as tough as Cheney's, explained in part by the fact that until May this year his chief foreign policy adviser was working as a lobbyist for Saakashvili.

This political dynamic is driving the west towards a rift with Russia that will polarise a number of other issues, including policy towards Iran. On this latter matter, Russia has played a relatively constructive and, perhaps more importantly, a moderating role. In the next three months, the issues of Ukraine and Iran will loom large in global politics and they may well have a decisive impact on the outcome of the US election. Who set the trap in Georgia? Vladimir Putin and his thuggish pals from the FSB, or Dick Cheney and his equally unflappable neocon friends?

Whether Georgia was defeated by the Russians or lost by the neocons, a touch of diplomatic sobriety on both sides would be a welcome development, if the Georgian conflict is not to mark a very dangerous new phase in the development of global politics - serial confrontation between the west and Russia.

Post this article to

122 comments from readers

Jules Siegel
14 August 2008 at 12:37

Abkhazia has economic potential? What did you have in mind exactly? Other than tourism, it seems to have very little economic potential.

taghioff.info
14 August 2008 at 13:49

I am sure the EU must take a very, very dim view of the US playing electoral poker in its vicinity.

Is this not a very good reason that the EU should have its own military force and own military alliance apart from NATO, since its interests, in terms of defence, now diverge so strongly from those of the US?

Surely Georgia and the Ukraine are countries that one day might join the EU (though probably not very soon) so American intervention here is ultimately very destabilising for Europe.

The other option is for the EU to ask for NATO to be put under control of the UN Security council, but with no countervailing military power in the world, pigs will fly before that happens...

ikotubo
14 August 2008 at 13:59

Mr Gleny's article demonstrates the dangers we all face when power is given to a bunch of lunatics and ideological fantasists - even in a so-called democracy like the United States.

michaelpetek
14 August 2008 at 15:01

Let's compare the track records of Messrs. Saakashvili and Putin.

The man Putin recently compared to Saddam Hussein is by profession a human rights lawyer who was voted Man of the Year in 1997 by a panel of journalists and human rights activists.

He served with distinction at the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, both as its Vice-President and as chair of its committee which drew up plans for the reform of Georgia's police, judiciary and electoral system. When he became President of Georgia he cleaned up the legacy of corruption left by his predecessor.

Mr Putin has just two items on his CV.

He has been a KGB man all his life, and his agents murdered Alexander Litvinenko on the streets of London.

ikotubo
14 August 2008 at 16:56

To michaelpetek: You seem to have missed Mr Glenny's point altogether; you should, at least have read his opening questions, if not the entire article.

jhenzie
14 August 2008 at 17:02

I do not understand how anyone, and I mean anyone, is not immediately put on guard by anything Cheney or the neocons utter.

You either have very short memories or are part of the same sociopath sect.

Georgia picked a fight, they shouldn't have. Russia and the US are complicit in the circumstances leading up to the 5 day war but the trigger was pulled by a narcissistic ego maniac who thought he was the tip of the spear. He was, it just didn't have a shaft.

Douglas Chalmers
14 August 2008 at 17:24

The West, or rather the USA and its neocon lapdogs, has pretended that some kind of old Cold War tank battle could be fought and won and that would be the end of it. Forget it!

Treating Russia like another Iran or Pakistan is buying trouble. America has been doing that since 9/11 but the NATO countries are having to 'take delivery', uhh. Half of Europe will freeze in the dark this winter if they don't learn to be polite.

The days of gunboat diplomacy and forcing terms of trade onto others is now over. Russia has aligned itself with China and India and the Shanghai Co-operation Group will supersede the IMF, etc etc. The balance of power has shifted along to the side of USA's creditors.

'taghioff.info' makes an interesting point about the EU but they have actually been following an expansionists agenda themselves for some time. They must give up their dreams and illusions about their missile shields too. Being friendly with your neighbors is important.

With global warming and climate change upon us, continuing to play the old "great game" of Machiavellian politics is childish when more extensive co-operation is needed. Fighting over shrinking resources is also fatal in the nuclear age.

The West can't just pretend that Georgia is another Tibet and rant and rave endlessly. Both are dishonest and ploys to continue the illusions of faded empire and delusions of the now spent "American century". International affairs can no longer be entrusted to the thugs and crooks of the world's military-industrial complexes.

michaelpetek
14 August 2008 at 17:55

Ikotubo, I've done better than your suggestion, I've read the transcripts of the Security Council meetings.

The Russian representative asserted no material fact existing before 8 August. The Georgian representative asserted, without contradiction by Russia, that separatist forces under the direction and control of Russian defence and security agencies opened heavy mortar fire on seven Georgian villages, and that fire was returned by local police.

International law attributes to the Russian state the use of armed force on 2 August on Georgian sovereign territory, when there existed no facts which could have engaged against Georgia the enforcement powers of the Security Council under Chapter VII.

Ergo, the Russian invasion was and is a glorious dripping technicolour crime of aggression.

I should perhaps have said in regard to Putin that Saakashvili's anti-corruption drive was very probably the real reason Putin hates his guts. It's rather unorthodox of Mr P, as the capo di tutti capi della Cosa Nostra Rusiana not to have warned Mr S beforehand by leaving a horse's head in his bed.

thequickbrownfox
14 August 2008 at 18:19

Excellent analysis, but I have a couple of comments: He says "By cranking up the dispute with Russia over Nato, Cheney is shifting the political debate in the US away from the state of the economy and towards the issue of national security."

That remark has nothing to do with any fact, it is merely speculation that Cheney is creating this storm to cause distraction. He offers no proof. The economy has been in some pain for quite a while, and Republicans are not exactly known for their ability to distract from issues. In fact, they do a horrible job at cover up, they don't own the media.

A second remark that was completely gratuitous was that "President Bush horseplaying with beach volleyball players". Bush happened to be at the Olympics. Putin was there too. Bush has expressed his displeasure in no uncertain terms and has succeeded in bringing a lot of support to Georgia's side, even though Sakaashvili has handled the situation very clumsily and has provoked much of it. Bush also addressed this issue directly with Putin. So if the writer were to have done a better job of keeping score, he would have mentioned that Bush immediately talked to Putin about it, but he ignored this very vital fact to build up his case against Bush and Cheney. Bush has sent his top diplomat to the region--something which hasn't been matched by any other country except France.

Other than those two things, his geopolitical analysis and insight into Putin's dirty strategy, Nato snubs, Kosovo is superb. He condensed a large framework into a relatively small article. If only he would get rid of the chip on his should with regards to those he derisively calls neocons.

14 August 2008 at 18:58

What emerges from the conflict in Georgia is the acceleration of a trend that set in soon after the fall of the Berlin wall, certainly since the dismemberment of Juguslavia. I believe Orwell's vatic powers anticipated this trend in the world described in 1984. Here the major power blocs under Big Brother, Emanuel Goldstein and others saw a vast grey area in the Afro-Asian zone where the major powers played a kind of cat and mouse game without regard to national frontiers or secure borders. Turkey now has a free hand in norther Iraq, Nato in the tribal borderlands of Pakistan, Kosovo, etc and now Russia in Geogia. Let's hope for the best..

michaelpetek
14 August 2008 at 19:11

What's 'vatic' when it's not the name of a Serbian General?

taghioff.info
14 August 2008 at 19:28

@Doulgas Chalmers

"'With global warming and climate change upon us, continuing to play the old "great game" of Machiavellian politics is childish when more extensive co-operation is needed. Fighting over shrinking resources is also fatal in the nuclear age. "

I so, so agree, but how does one get there?

The expansion of military co-operation and some counter-balance to the US seems like one way forward, albeit admittedly a fairly conservative one.

The other option is something more radical like the G8 or G20 deciding to all halve their military spending and then pool the resources to fight climate change, perhaps by investing in renewables etc, which might lessen the need for wars in the first place...

But is such sanity just too idealistic?

michaelpetek
14 August 2008 at 21:48

The Russians invaded Georgia because they don't want a NATO country on their southern border. But if they were to overrun the whole country and grip it in the customary bear-hug, that's precisely what they'll get.

Face to face with NATO member Turkey.

ikotubo
14 August 2008 at 23:08

To michaelpetek: You obviously support the Georgian side and are clearly quite happy to ignore his deliberate (if reckless and sucidal) provocation of Russia, not to mention the gross human rights violations committed by Georgian troops during its own military incursion into S. Ossetia. I suppose the difference between me and you is that I consider the Ossetians to be just as human as any other group of humans on earth. But since you've invoked international law as the basis of your position, let me ask you: Have you ever heard of the principle of self-determination? If so, what do you make of the results of the referenda held in the disputed territories?

michaelpetek
15 August 2008 at 00:06

Ikotubo, I'll repeat the record of the Security Council which you can read on the UN website The Russian Permanent Representative began his account of events from 8 August and not before.

The Georgian Representative asserted, without contradiction from the Russian, that forces effectively under Russian command and direction opened fire on Georgian territory on 2 August, when Georgia had not done anything to threaten international peace and security. Russia's use of force on that date would not have been lawful even if the Security Council had authorised it.

Regarding the principle of self-determination: 66 per cent of the pre-war (1991-1992) population were Ossetians, and nearly all the rest were Georgians.

Most of the Georgians have been displaced into the rest of Georgia. Many of the Ossetians now live in Russia and have all been given Russian nationality, as have 90 per cent of the 38,000 who remain.

Under Georgian law any Georgian national who accepts the nationality of another state automatically loses Georgian citizenship. Many states quite reasonably prohibit dual nationality in this way.

Ossetians any any others who have Russian nationality have no right to participate in a self-determination plebiscite with respect to Georgian territory. Ossetians who remain Georgian nationals are vastly outnumbered by other Georgian nationals who either live there or have the right to return there as displaced persons.

The referenda already held have been judged illegal by the OSCE, in at least one case because ethnic Georgians were not allowed to take part.

scampy
15 August 2008 at 06:42

McCains response was almost as tough as Cheneys?

McCains response was that 'nations do not invade other nations in the twenty first century' that should give Americans some comfort.

McCain was shot down while dropping bombs on innocent Vietnamese and became a POW, does that make him a hero?

This guy is a fraud that should be exposed by swift boat type attacks.

Sasha
15 August 2008 at 07:52

Message form Russia.

I'm russia nad really proud that at alst we kicked this fu..r Saakashvili ass, belive me everyone hates him in giogjia and you know why. I'll tell you. Giorgia is for 99% percent is Christians only 1% are muslims, so he represents this very small group of people, he is a muslim.... all those electionsthat there were are totall fake.. lots of places for elections never at all were opened esprsially far away from Tbilissi..

Russia becomes stronger and stronger and 99% in russia very happy about that.

Carl Jones
15 August 2008 at 09:55

Ms Glenny and the rest of you would wise to read the article in the link below. Of course, it is accepted that many of you are surfs when it comes to the international chessboard. Big things are planned for the next US president and is clear that Sarkozy (Mossad agent) has replaced Blair....and that is an illustration of the forces against GB.

You won`t read anything as good as this in the MSM.

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/articles.asp?ID=9160

Carl Jones
15 August 2008 at 09:59

Sorry.

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=9160

nawawimohamad
15 August 2008 at 10:39

The fiasco in Georgia has created the doors of opportunity for many.

The US can use it as to strengthen its presence in the region and ultimately bringing both Russia and China to their knees.

Russia should hold Georgia as hostage against the US by retaining a very strong military presence in strategic cities in Georgia or just invade and take over Georgia. Russia should demand that the US withdraw all its military forces and machines from the region and not to install the missile shield in Poland. (by the way, the missiles are not a shield, they are poised to be fire towards Russia and China, the Iran threat is just a lousy excuse, Israel can take on Iran anytime it wants!)

France will take this opportunity to lead the reluctant EU to support the US. This is possible because of the current trend of lower oil price. Britain has always been and is already behind the US, it has got nothing to lose from Russia.

Russia however can persuade China to be on its side and although China has got nothing to do with Georgia, it can use this golden opportunity to lean on the US for its own benefits.

The other oil producing countries are able to benefit from the fiasco by selling more oil to the EU.

This will also create a better atmosphere for the stagnant arms industry everywhere in the world.

The US however with the help its allies can stay dominant and can realise its ambition to be the overall master of the world.

This is what the US has all the while wanted, to start the third world war as Israel has managed to convince the US that it can win.

ikotubo
15 August 2008 at 13:32

michaelpetek: I'm still struggling to reconcile your views with Mr Glenny's article. And I'm quite happy to concede that I'm the confused party between both of us - and wouldn't wish to comment further on it.

However, I feel obliged to comment on one small point you've made re: the referenda: neither the OSCE nor any other multilateral organization (except the UN Security Council) has any legal authority to pronounce any such process "illegal," as you've asserted. They may express an opinion, but this, as you should know, has no legal effect. At any rate, due to the obvious political pitfalls inherent in any such process, only the Security Council has the legal authority to pronounce on such matters. Alternatively, the International Court of Justice may pronounce on it - provided it considers itself to have the necessary jurisdiction.

michaelpetek
15 August 2008 at 14:49

Ikotubo, maybe I should have rephrased what I said about OSCE. International observers can verify that a plebiscite has been conducted free and fairly, which is a matter of fact, not law, so it doesn't require authority.

But any talk about a plebiscite is rather academic. When Georgia became independent in 1991 Abkhazia had a Georgian ethnic majority of about 55 per cent. Nearly all of them have been ethnically cleansed, and 90 per cent of those who remain have been given Russian nationality. Under Georgian law they lose thereby their Georgian citizenship.

In North Ossetia 25-30 per cent were ethnic Georgians at independence. 66 per cent were ethnic Ossetians, and 90 per cent of these lost their Georgian nationality when they accepted naturalisation as Russians.

They have no right to exercise self-determination in a country in which they are legally foreigners, and they have no right to settle in any country except Russia. So Georgians would almost certainly have a voting majority in South Ossetia as well.

michaelpetek
15 August 2008 at 14:49

Sorry, I should have said 'South Ossetia' not 'North Ossetia'.

ikotubo
15 August 2008 at 15:44

michaelpetek I do not doubt your detailed knowledge of the geo-political aspects of this dispute - and it is quite enlightening. My point, however, is that whatever the merits of his case, the Georgian president blundered (through sheer hubris and child-like recklessness) into this tragic mess - which has cost many lives on both sides. Whatever assurances he might have been given by his American cheer-leaders, he should have excercised his common sense - if only for the sake of the innocent lives that have now been lost. If there was provocation from Russia (as we all believe there was), he could, for example, have taken the matter to the Security Council. Yes, Russia would have wielded the veto; but his country's position would have been strengthened enormously both with both the Americans and the Europeans. And, believe me, not even the almighty Russia could have ignored the diplomatic pressure that would have followed. But as things currently stand, he will be negotiating from an infinitely weaker position (and probably will never regain S. Ossetia in its present form), and lives have been lost unnecessarily.

michaelpetek
15 August 2008 at 15:53

All you said in your post of 15:44 about President Saakashvili is OK as far as it goes. I'd go further and say that the Russians have been giving him enough cause to go to the Security Council for years. They've been agitating, and stirring, and shaking the cage, and meddling, and destabilising, and now it's come to this.

President Saakashvili may have been imprudent and foolhardy. But these aren't violations of international law. Russia, through South Ossetian irregulars under its direction and control, used force against Georgia when Georgia had done nothing to complain about before the Security Council.

That, together with the territorial conquest that followed, is aggression contrary to peremptory norms of international law and the Russian occupation will remain illegal if it continues for a thousand years, irrespective of Georgian consent or a Security Council Resolution, or anything else.

ikotubo
15 August 2008 at 16:47

michaelpetek: I agree. But I would go further and condemn Georgian atrocities too, if only because the victims are as human as anyone else.

michaelpetek
15 August 2008 at 17:13

Ikotubo, Georgian atrocities, if there are any, amount to war crimes, but not aggression, and not genocide or crimes against humanity. Georgia is a member of the International Criminal Court anyway, which makes plenty provision to investigate them.

Remember that war crimes alleged against Georgia were committed no earlier than 8 August. Russian aggression - a crime against peace - was already in place on 2 August.

writeon
15 August 2008 at 17:13

There are some very "interesting" and telling attitudes revealed in some of the above comments towards the inhabitants of South Ossetia, which verge close to something very unpleasant indeed and explain how a regime that purports to embrace freedom and democracy and respect for human rights, can launch such a brutal and deadly attack against it's own people.

This is because the people being bombed and bombarded in South Ossetia aren't really "true" Georgians at all, they are legally foreigners, with no right to self-determination within Georgia or settle there, only in Russia, because they are aliens!

Apart from the absurdity of this kind of argument and it's almost total lack of any real foundation in international law relating to the treatment and status of ethnic minorities, it's also morally repugnant. That people who have lived in a region for centuries can suddenly be arbitrarily defined as "alien" and unwanted, and that this then is used as justification for bombing them, reminds one of some of the darkest periods in European history.

The Caucasus in a patchwork quilt of differing peoples. Peoples with there own histories, languages, cultures, songs, myths, poetry, heroes and illusions. It's also an region where rival empires have confronted each other for thousands of years, much like the Balkans.

This rich cultural tapestry should be a source of pride and strength, but these cultural and etnic differences can also easily exploited and perverted by unscrupulous politicians, which light the torch of nationalism not to lighten our way in the darkness, but as a weapon to burn down the homes of the "others".

At the same time as they use, abuse and prostitute national symbols and feelings, they also make power grabs that have distinct aims, mostly robbing their own ethnic group that they say they care so much about. Nationalism seems to be cover story designed to obscure the fact that they are robbing the treasury and steeped in corruption.

Who really gains from the fighting and destruction? It certainly isn't the ordinary people, who are duped into believing, and killing and dying, for a myth or an illusion, the myth of the pure nation state where one can be "free" and the others, those who one believes are responsible for all ones woes, have been excluded, dominated or "taken care of" in some other way.

Perhaps the biggest lie of the last hundred years, certainly the bloodiest, and most dangerous, has been the lie about the importance of "blood" and "land" and the illusion that the creation of an ethnically "pure" state was the answer to all ones problems. Just give us our own country, no matter how small, no matter the cost in blood and destruction, and the land of milk and honey is just around the corner. What childish rubbish! Only an idiot or a person totally lacking in knowledge could believe such a fairytale. Yet people are fed this nationalist nonsense, over and over again, by corrupt leaders, and they die and kill for a lie.

Nationalism isn't a blessing, it's a curse, and we've had way too much of it in Europe. We've almost drowned in rivers of blood, and for what exactly? For whose real benefit and profit? Certainly not the unhappy dead!

Fortunately in Western Europe, finally after so much war, slaughter and wasteful destruction, we appear to have tamed the monster of brute nationalism. We didn't have much choice as we'd almost destroyed ourselves in two terrible, barbaric and insane wars.

It would be tragic if the people in the Caucasus learnt nothing from our suffering and history. First one has to reject unconditionally the use of violence and military force to settle ethnic differences on all sides, and people have learn to negotiate and compromise. What they can't be allowed to do is go to war. Instead of the great powers selling arms and training new armies in Georgia and elsewhere, they should do the opposite. Fighting wars should be made as difficult as possible and economic sanctions should be imposed on any country that uses violence to compel any ethnic group to remain part of a central state.

My personal feeling is that the United States is using Georgia for its own purposes and doesn't give a damn about the Georgian people or how much they suffer or bleed. The US government doesn't care about "democracy" or "freedom" for the Georgian people, God they don't even care about these things for their own people in the United States, so why would they care about foreigners? The Americans want Georgia as a stepping-stone or military base on their way towards the energy reserves of the Caspian Basin, nothing more. The ordinary Georgians mean nothing to men like Bush. The Georgians have value only as long as they serve a usful purpose for the American ruling elite. This is the harsh truth about the nature of imperialism and how great powers regard their vassal states. Pawns have little value in the Great Game. The sooner the people of Georgia realise this and learn to live together imperfectly, the better in will be for them.

ikotubo
15 August 2008 at 17:38

michaelpetek: Well, at least you do acknowledge the possibility that Georgians are capable of committing atrocities too - however you wish to classify them. That's some progress, at least. Bye.

michaelpetek
15 August 2008 at 17:53

Writeon, the people being bombed and bombarded in South Ossetia are equally entitled to the protection of the law concerning war crimes whatever their nationality. That isn't my issue.

The South Ossetians were Soviet citizens and became Georgian nationals as soon as Georgia became independent. Russia recently offered them - and 90 per cent of them freely accepted - Russian nationality. Many states disallow dual nationality, and Georgia is no exception.

Under Georgian law these Ossetians ceased to be Georgian nationals as soon as they were naturalised as Russians. They were not arbitrarily deprived of their previous nationality, they freely chose to change it.

Consequently, they have the human right to reside in, and exercise political rights (including self-determination) in relation to, Russia and no other state.

What the case law of the European Court of Human Rights gives each of them in relation to Georgia is the right to an individual, reasoned decision if Georgia wants to order them to leave the country.

writeon
15 August 2008 at 21:46

This legalistic approach is tangentally interesting and mildly entertaining, but hardly relevant to the current situation on the ground. It reminds me of the endless debates in the medieval church about how many angels could dance on the head of a pin, or whether Jesus Christ was an aristocrat or a commoner.

In the world we live in now, since the destruction of Yogoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq, and the neutering of the United Nations; there really is no international law left standing that's any use anymore. When one systematically shreds and shows contempt for international law, as the United States has done repeatedly, one can hardly appeal to international law without raising howls of laughter. Even the Americans, who think of themselves as exceptional, cannot have it both ways, but of course this is what they demand. They want to dictate and define what parts of international law apply in various circumstances, and they reserve the right to pick and choose which parts international law are "relevant", only that international law doesn't apply to them and cannot be used against them. The hypocracy and double-standards involved in this perverse attitude are obvious and absurd.

The point is that powerful nations, great powers can really do whatever they want regardless of international law, this is the reality of the situation. The entire concept of international law, is in itself, highly debatable and controversial. Today, international law is a device used by powerful countries to punish weaker countries and stigmatize them for propaganda purposes.

For example, it is almost impossible to contemplate the United States allowing one of it's generals or politicians to be tride for their various war-crimes and crimes against humanity, even though there is a veritible mountain of evidence against them, such trials are for the weak and the vanquished, not the powerful and strong.

You go into great detail in relation to the law yet your interpretation of Georgian law is highly debatable and interpreted in partisan fashion which wouldn't stand up to qualified rebuttal in a court of law, something I have no intention of getting into here.

You do seem, in my opinion, to illustrate an attitude towards the people of South Ossetia which is disturbing in its implications. You mean that they have voluntarily chosen to change their nationality and alligance and consequently have not rights, human or otherwise inside Georgia anymore, that they have almost become outlaws with all that implies.

I've questioned your interpretation of Georgian law, which I find flawed and illogical, your partisan twisting and interpretation of international law in relation to the rights of ethnic minorities of whatever nationality, is even more problematic and just plain wrong, though it is, perhaps unintentionally, highly informative.

My main point is that the hapless Georgian people have been led towards disaster by a crazed and corrupt ultra-nationalist gang, who are basically puppets of the Americans, who couldn't care less about what happens to the Georgians as long as they are usful in their struggle with Russia. What's ironic is the gang in charge of Georgia are backing the wrong horse. The United States is an empire that is on it's way down, whilst Russia is a power with a future. When the United States is finished with Georgia it wil be abandoned like a used Kleenex.

michaelpetek
15 August 2008 at 21:59

Writeon, if there is really no such thing as international law any more I hope we see the last of moralising about George Bush and the USA, at least as long as they're still the strongest superpower in the world.

With regard to Georgian nationality law, it certainly isn't the case that Ossetians - Russian citizens living in Georgia - don't have any human rights. They have the same civil rights as anyone else in the country - they just don't have the political rights and the right of abode in the country that are reserved to nationals.

So you think Russia is a power with a future? With a male life expectancy comparable to that of Bangladesh, rife with AIDS and alcoholism, its population declining by 700,000 a year, and so dependent on oil and gas for exports that it's Saudi Arabia with trees, Russia's only future as a world power is as a western province of China.

writeon
15 August 2008 at 22:36

I'm actually not pro-Russian, on the other hand, I'm definitely not anti-Russian either. I've lived in the United States and I loved it. However, I do despise and have contempt for the ruling-class. Who I think are brutal, greedy, bloodthirsty, hypocritical, imperialist, genocidal and they are steering the country towards disaster.

You are defining the people of South Ossetia as second-class citizens, well not even citizens. It's impossible to imagine Georgia being allowed to join NATO or the European Union in these circumstances.

The more you talk about Russians and the people of South Ossetia the more disturbed I become. The language you use to describe them make me feel very uneasy and is extremely revealing of your true attitude towards them. Hopefully the people of Georgia will soon see through this kind of ultra-nationalist nonsense, get a new government that represents the interests of all the Georgians and isn't full of puppets with their strings being pulled from Washington.

michaelpetek
16 August 2008 at 00:35

Writeon, in the words of Basil Fawlty, please try to understand this before one of us dies!

Article15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says that no one shall be denied the right to change his nationality. Russia offered its nationality to the South Ossetians and the Abkhazians. Ninety per cent of either group freely accepted it.

By Georgian law, which does not allow dual citizenship, they lost their Georgian nationality when they were naturalised as Russians. They then became subject to immigration control.

In general they do not have a residence permit from the Georgian government and are therefore not allowed to live there except for a short time as visitors. They do not have the right to vote or hold public office in Georgia.

I don't see what the big fuss is about. Katie Melua got the same treatment when she became a British citizen this year.

Riaz Ahmad
16 August 2008 at 01:23

To be at odds with Russia, the most sensible way is what Finland did for decades in the days of the Soviot Union. Georgia at best is nothing more than a poor republic. Its president as soon he acquired a few weopans and training from the Israelis began to have illusions of glory. How can a poor country rely on such a hot head.

As for America, one more win by the neo-cons will accelerate the decline of an already declining super power. Apart from European governments, USA has lost all respect through out the world. One must not forget the fact that a super power with out any moral standing or respect is nothing more than a mafia state, no different to Russia.

angela koretth
16 August 2008 at 07:38

in apportioning blame maybe we should go back a little further. who provoked whom? when, in the 60s the USSR tried installing a missile base in Cuba the US forced a standoff, quite rightly. when today the US tries the same, attempting to encircle Russia with bases and satellites in East Europe, there's surely going to be a reaction? it's also strange to hear condoleeza rice with a straight face talking about 21st century norms which don't allow one country to invade another's territory. was 2003 not in the 21st century?

Yu Han
16 August 2008 at 08:17

The President of Georgia, with his remarkably florid behaviour, reminds me of some kid who was dared to pull a tiger's tail. Foolishly he did so and caused much mayhem and destruction. Now he responds by running scared and blaming everyone else. I expect the International Criminal Court is not far away and he will soon seek protection in America.

writeon
16 August 2008 at 08:51

MichaelP.

In the words of a famous proverb; you can't see the wood for the trees.

Great and powerful nations, like people, do not generally observe laws that constrain their actions and interests. They use the "laws" as they see fit. International law is really a system of conventions that nations agree, up to a certain level, to abide by.

The Big Problem currently is that the United States has systematically undermined international law, a whole raft of treaties, demands exceptonal treatment for itself, and has emasculated the United Nations. The United States has also become a very and openly agressive state, ready to invade weaker states to pursue its national interests. One can substitute the words "freedom 'n' democracy" for "oil and gas" and that is basically the rationale behind their actions.

What this means is that the entire structure of international law has been undermined and has lost the minimal importance it had. Clearly other nations have watched and learnt from the Americans. The Russians certainly have. The American idea that they can dictate and define what international law is and who has to obey it, is, hypocritical, absurd, arrogant and counter-productive.

The current crazed gang which is leading Georgia towards disaster, seems to believe it can turn Georgia into a valuable and indispensible ally of the United States, similar to Israel. I believe this is a fundamental miscaculation and mistake which the Georgian people are going to pay a very high price for, whilst the leadership will go into exile and enjoy their millions in the sun.

Carl Jones
16 August 2008 at 09:05

michealpetek, using your argument, the Georgian leader is a war criminal. Of course, he`s a war criminal on several points.

The Georgian strike into South Ossettia was planned months in advance and the Georgian`s didn`t strike without Washington`s blessing, so Bush committs another war crime.

Russia has knowingly walked into the NWO trap, but this time the West is going to look stupid.

The Russians are now threatening to nuke Poland, of course, this threat has been made several times before, but has been ignored by the NWO controlled MSM.

One thing is certain, Bush, his neocon chums and Sorros are absolute nutters who are determined to save their their economic skins with another war...possibly a world war because China will side with Russia and Iran.

amanfromMars
16 August 2008 at 11:01

I think we will have to accept that President Saakashvili is the lapdog puppet of a Failed PNAC which is really no more than a Fascist Group who invented the Al Qaeda Product/Brand to justify Imperialist Adventures .... and I just love the understatement in michaelpetek statement .... "President Saakashvili may have been imprudent and foolhardy." And it is certainly something which all of us can agree upon.

And that is all supported by the Wall Street Journal, whose comic pages painting a rosy picture ahead as everything collapses around them, contains this probable cause article .... http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121884933721146317.html?mod=...

Create/Invent a conflict/war and then supply it with arms and cash to create arms and cash and further wars......... but make sure that it is not on home soil or when on home soil, you have Control of it, with breakdown in Command and Control/Defence also factored into the Plan, for Impunity of Treasonable Action against Home Systems which can Trackback Trades which would expose .... Incriminating Irregularities..... which is what WTC7 and the Twin Towers could have done/were doing? And I only ask that as a question because no one is able to deny it with evidence. Sadly is the Model no longer feasible with SMARTer Processing of Timed Information able to expose Trails of Deceit and Spin.

The Neocons once again threatening to put Sons and Daughters in Harm's Way for the Sake of Profit and not Commerce.

Shame on such Fools and their Camp Followers. With Peace in the World what will the Dollar discover about Home and the Pursuit of Money Honey?

michaelpetek
16 August 2008 at 12:09

Carl Jones, can you tell the difference between aggression (a crime against peace) and a war crime?

Russian-controlled South Ossetian forces opened fire on 2 August, in what turned out to be a Russian war of territorial conquest, when Georgia had done nothing to warrant a Chapter VII Resolution for enforcement action against it. That is a crime of aggression.

Whether Mr Saakashvili is a war criminal or not depends on whether he ordered war crimes to be committed, whether knowing about them he did not order them to cease, and whether he interfered with the course of public justice in regard to them.

The Georgian strike into South Ossetia was an internal affair of Georgia. Aggression can be committed by or against even an unrecognised state, but South Ossetia doesn't qualify, because it does not have an effectively independent government in unchallenged control of populated territory attained without foreign intreference.

South Ossetia declared independence in December 1991 while in the throes of civil war, but had not secured unchallenged control over any territory before Russia illegally intervened in political support of the rebels in February 2002.

Writeon, of course internationallaw is shaped by power politics to no small extent. Russia intervened in Georgia on the pretext of protecting its own nationals who had conveniently been given Russian citizenship for the occasion. And, yes, Russia is a big strong power which can do as it likes in its own neighbourhood.

Siberia has a Russian population smaller than that of England, and the Far Eastern provinces have a population the size of London, mostly elderly. Over the past few years it has been steadily filling up with Chinese.

When China intervenes to annex Siberia on the pretext of protecting its nationals, Russia will run whining to the Security Council like a bully wrestler who's had his come-uppance.

writeon
16 August 2008 at 15:32

Mostly I feel sorry for the ordinary people in the Caucasus and Georgia who are caught-up in a deadly "game" between great powers, like two monsterous devils playing chess with real people on the board.

The Georgian people are being used by the Bush administration, and the Georgian government is perfectly content to allow their people to suffer, die, bleed and serve the interests of a foreign power. This I would argue is really a form of high treason or treachery, serving a foreign government before one's own people. But then this is the traditional role of the vassal state leader, to betray his own and serve his imperial master. Some of these "leaders" so stupid and ignorant of the obscene game they are merely pawns in, that they appear to actually believe their own nationalist rhetoric, that they are saving their countries, whilst in reality they are leading them towards disaster and destruction.

Carl Jones
16 August 2008 at 17:27

michealpetek; it ia a war crime to use excessive military force on civilian populations, this can include the specific type of weapon used. Some 2000 plus civilians were murdered in a few days fighting. You mention an incident on the 2nd....this attack started on the 7/8th....it takes more than 5 days to organise this scale of attack, of course, carrying it off on the start of the Beijing Olympics was just a coincidence.LOL

writeon
16 August 2008 at 17:48

While I'm at it perhaps the "pawns" in the game would be better off breaking out of their allotted roles and chalenging the very "rules" of the game itself? Given the utter contempt their, oh so patriotic, leaders really have for them, maybe they should rise up like a mighty wind, and instead of killing each other turn their anger on their real enemies, their masters, sitting way behind the lines, manipulating, pulling the strings, making all the money. Smash the board, wipe out the squares, turned the whole damn thing over and start again!

michaelpetek
16 August 2008 at 18:25

Yes, Carl Jones, it is a war crime to use excessive military force on civilian populations. But it isn't a crime of any kind to pre-position weapons in expectation of an enemy attack. And it's not even evident that President Saakashvili specifically ordered war crimes to be committed. His country is, after all, a member of the International Criminal Court.

But you have to look at the record of the Security Council and at the uncontradicted assertions of fact by the Russian and Georgian representatives. The Russian representative was silent about the period preceding 8 August. The Georgian delegate asserted, and the Russian did not deny, that Russian-controlled forces fired first.

An aggressor is still an aggressor even if he fights by Queensberry rules. A lawful defence against an aggressor remains a lawful defence even if some of the defenders commit war crimes.

amanfromMars
16 August 2008 at 18:59

writeon .... 16 August 2008 at 17:48

Right on, writeon, and Perfect for Stout Hearted GoodFellas. They would certainly have the Bottle but do they have a Cracking XSScript?

And how very Quaint, that so many think that in the madness that presents a war-like situation there are any rules to follow ...... Just Do IT is normally the mad cap order of every day to seize the day. There is no more despicable a being than the war-monger and associated whoring profiteers for their very own children despise them for their work/pleasure.

writeon
16 August 2008 at 21:56

A final thought. I think people in Britain should be aware of how dangerous anti-Russian ultra-nationalism really is. These crazed nationalists aren't just anti-Russian though, they have a low opinion of lots of people and "deviants". They are also very religious. Imagine whole countries full of and ruled by exstemist Orange Men and you get a flavour of what I'm talking about. These people are Dangerous. And in an alliance with Western nationalists we are heading towards war with Russia.

michaelpetek
16 August 2008 at 23:35

Writeon, anti-Russian ultra-nationalism is similar to the anti-British ultra-nationalism that characterised the Irish nation within the first twenty years after independence.

It's understandable, too. These little nations: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Georgia, and the not so little Ukraine are fiercely proud of their languages and cultures, having emerged from seventy years of Communist barbarism and genocide.

And so what if they are 'dangerous'? If so, that means they are willing and, hopefully, able to defend themselves against their giant neighbour.

The Russians have a saying: press forward, and if you hit mush, keep going. If you hit something hard, stop.

So far they've been hitting the mush of a semi-Finlandised western Europe. We could hold our noses and come to terms with the New Order madein hell as Georgia is re-absorbed into the new Russian Empire.

Then we'll hold our noses as the Russians swallow Latvia and Estonia. We'll hold our noses when it's the turn of Lithuania, Poland and Ukraine.

We'll hold our noses as Russian tanks roll into Hungary and Romania. We'll hold our noses when the Russians overrun mushy Germany and wash their boots in the Rhine, Europe now the Finlandised vassal of a Russian leader who has a Chinese hand up his back.

We do indeed have an alternative. Prepare now for Operation Barbarossa, Round Two.

raggedyman
17 August 2008 at 00:50

michaelpetek :

Of course if the Irish Free State had signed up to the Warsaw Pact and sited Soviet missiles I wonder what 'winnie' might have done, eh?

There is a bigger picture, you know, and yours appears to be one in which the US and Israel are curiously, some might say conveniently, absent.

Humanity, according to the consensus of their scientific community, face some of the most serious challenges yet to their continued survival this century; but let's put that on the back burner for the moment in favour of Cold War Mark II.

For a while there it looked like NATO was having an existential crisis - 'hell why do we even exist any more?' the Generals were asking desperately.

But not any more folks. We're back in business - big time.

A century of perpetual war? I don't see why not, do you? That is if something else doesn't intervene in the meantime I guess.

observer
17 August 2008 at 04:59

Michaelpetek:

"We do indeed have an alternative. Prepare now for Operation Barbarossa, Round Two."

Why you did not say so from the very beginning? By saying that you made all discussion nil and void.

observer
17 August 2008 at 05:18

Michaelpetek:

I applaud your chutspah also. In case you do not know what chutspah is I give you an exsample.

A man who kill his parents ask judge for clemency on the basis of him being orphan. The man had shown chutspah. After your proposal "for Operation Barbarossa, Round Two" you will need a lot of chutspah.

writeon: I cannot agree more with all your intelligent posts about power as source of international law. I would add that while the US started to violate it covertly already under Bill Clinton, Bush openly discarded the whole principle of European "balance of power" established in 1648. That principle gave vitality to remote parochial corner of our planet that we call West and propelled it to the position of world domination. Undermined by 1914 - 1945 war and rising awareness of peoples of the world, the West was given the coup the grace by current Washington junta.

In order to do so, the same junta screwd up domestic law also. After PATRIOT Act and Military Commissions Act the US ceased to be the land of Law.

Alas, all your and other people posts were totally wasted on plain petty bigot. But we all had fun, had not we?

observer
17 August 2008 at 05:28

BTW, Ossetians, whom Pitekoman deny "rights" to live in their country, came there at least few millennia prior to Georgians. It can be proven by toponimics alone. In Ossetian language 'don' means river. Through the N. Ossetia flows Tseidon. Quite further to the west river Don flows into Azov sea. Then go rivers Dniepr, Dnestr, and up to Dunabe - all toponims of Ossetian origin. Now let bigots apply their legalistic excuses to real life.

michaelpetek
17 August 2008 at 06:44

Observer, I also have the chutzpah to cry 'Oy, Gevalt' when Russian tanks roll into places they have no business to be. If the US and the Europeans are determined never to fight the Russians, then they might as well do Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic states next year, and not stop until they've taken Portugal.

With Russia economically subservient to China, Communism wins the new coldw ar.

amanfromMars
17 August 2008 at 07:52

observer,

Thanks for the Clarity.

What apparently is missing, is Universal Leadership .... which would be a Model which could be easily Followed/Adopted/Adapted/Copied/Supplied to every Citizen/Community/Society/Country/Continent as an Acceptable and Dynamic Interactive Medium dDelivering Daily Solutions and Viable Constructive Alternatives for Future Proposals which Address Current Needs.......... thus Creating Intellectually, Properties that Feed Current and Future Needs in Mutual Benefit.

Would Statespersons here, Care/Dare 42 Suggest what More can be Added to Provide More.

And I would like to assure everyone, and on this thread, writeon, in particular, who shared .... "They are also very religious. Imagine whole countries full of and ruled by exstemist Orange Men and you get a flavour of what I'm talking about. These people are Dangerous." ....... that much SMARTer XXXXStreaming Orange Men Wedded as they Finally are to the Green and Growing Passions of the Fairest and Most Radical Colleens in the Land, can be only Dangerous when they would choose Not to exercise their Mutualised Intelligence Services. Exercising IT Together though, with their Controls and through their Controls in Loughside/Holywood Palace Barracks, does on the other Red Hand, Offer the Best Left Foot 42 Score Goals, you will ever Imagine, with an Advanced IntelAIgents Research and Development in NIRobotIQs 42 Provide Virtualised Peace Dividend and Global Governance Service, with the IT Cloud Giving Stealth Technology Covering Clouds, for Life Giving Rains/Reins/Reigns and whenever Absolutely Necessary, Tempestuous Storm Surges ....... with QuITe Alien ElectroMagneticPulses from their New Fangled and Entangling Phorm of NEUKlearer Turing Bombes ..... HyperRadioProActive ESPecial AIgents .... to Destroy Virtually Hostile Destructive Actions and Intentions with Real Constructive Powers.

Although whether the Fairy Godmother has visited Mr Evans with that Information yet, will give us all an Indication of just how Effective/Ineffective and Fit for Future Purpose the Present Executive Administration Set-up is.

And I would choose not to speculate on that today, but would only wish to share such a thought here.

fairplay
17 August 2008 at 09:53

michaelpetek

why didnt you cry "oy gevalt" when the insanely corrupt israeli regime started meddling in this affair? talk of an independent israeli company and not the government itself being involved are complete nonsense as we all know.

and as usual their involvemnet is pretty much forgotten about as far as the MSM are concerned, and the israelis will no doubt be laughing to themselves about another mess theyve created that will no doubt in some perverse way, benefit them in the long run

michaelpetek
17 August 2008 at 10:43

Fairplay, it isn't against international law for Israel to be an ally of Georgia. 'Gevalt' is Yiddish and German for 'force' and Israel didn't use any in Georgia.

fairplay
17 August 2008 at 11:04

they didnt need to. as is usually the case it looks like they coerced somebody else to do it for them

michaelpetek
17 August 2008 at 15:35

Of course they did, Fairplay! I know, 'cos it says so in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

taghioff.info
17 August 2008 at 18:52

@Michel Petek

"We'll hold our noses as Russian tanks roll into Hungary and Romania. We'll hold our noses when the Russians overrun mushy Germany and wash their boots in the Rhine, Europe now the Finlandised vassal of a Russian leader who has a Chinese hand up his back."

Michel, I really sympathise at your fury over the war of aggression Russia has waged on your state, and yes, it is nasty how the US has played your leaders and then left them out to dry. I think part of the point was to draw Putin out into the open as an aggressor.

But as you yourself state, Russia is not a credible long-term threat. You point out it internal problems, and its military spending is a fraction of the EUs, never mind the US's. Russia cannot afford a sustained war against any serious military power.

I think writeon has a point when he says that the way that international law is framed in terms of Nation states ignores the important lessons Western Europe has learnt through carnage. It is not nationalism, but NATO membership, or an effective EU military co-ordination that would have protected Georgia. So your nationalistic / legalistic line, whilst very detailed, well researched and technically correct, i strategically self-defeating.

How the EU stands up to Russia is an important question, and not one I have good answers to, but I do not fear the Russian tanks rolling across Germany, since that would most likely trigger a thermonuclear war.

Georgia is not significant in the same way in the great game, which is disgusting, but without a stronger international law, not based on the brute force of national states, that's the way it will continue to be.

So that is what you should be fighting for Micheal.

michaelpetek
17 August 2008 at 19:18

Taghioff, Georgia isn't actually my state, though you might be under a misapprehension emanating from my Slovene surname. Whether Russian tanks roll unopposed through Europe or not depends on whether the Europeans find their balls.

I was pleased to find today that German Chancellor Angela Merkel seems to have acquired a pair, since she went to Tbilisi and affirmed that Georgia is firmly on track to join NATO.

The country wouldn't be all that indefensible. It has a border with Turkey, which is a friend of Georgia and has one of the largest standing armies in the world.

taghioff.info
17 August 2008 at 21:22

OK, you are right about my assumption. From where comes your keen interest in the legal position?

(My philosophical point really is that it is important to bear in mind that Law also embodies a certain (nationalistic) ideology, and that treating it only as positive fact can lead to a lot of self-contradiction. But that is a statement about life in general also.)

And yes, if Georgia joins NATO, that changes things a lot. I think Merkel has always had balls (at least metaphorical ones) she has been pretty strong on climate change too.

And these issues are not unconnected, because in the process of dealing with climate change, the EU would effectively neutralise the Russian energy lever. I think she well understands this, and is tough enough to act.

And the connection with Turkey is very interesting. You might find my friend Erkan's blog worth a look.

http://erkansaka.net/

I am curious what your thoughts on how Turkey's potential EU membership could effect Georgia's position?

taghioff.info
17 August 2008 at 21:28

Aah, Erkan's blog is in a bad way right now...

....But he is very good value on Turkey and the EU when he is not being rolled over by his hosting company.

writeon
17 August 2008 at 22:06

Countries, states, great powers, are not people, they don't have "friends". Turkey is not a "friend" of Georgia and will not be using its large army to help its little "friend" against the big, bad, bully to the north.

Great powers don't have permanent friends, they have only have permanent interests, and their own interests come first. Great powers use smaller nations and when they no longer find them useful, they are caste aside. Empires as large, rich and powerful, like the United States, don't have "allies", they don't need them. What they have is states that serve their interests to varying degrees or one doesn't, then one is effectively the enemy of the United States and then one had better watch out.

The world functions pretty much like the movie "The Godfather" only on a even bloodier and bigger, global scale. For centuries the West, in its accendancy, has resembled a group of Mafia families carving up "territory" between them.

The European Union is an attempt to replace the rival Mafia clan model with something else, to stop them launching eternal "turf wars" over territory, wars that risk burning everything down so there is nothing left of any value to fight over anymore.

Russian tanks are not going to role over the borders of Germany heading for the English Channel, not only would this be insane, it would, more importantly, be unproductive and unprofitable. Who would then buy Russia's oil and gas? It makes no sense for kill one's best customer. Why bother to take over Western Europe with tanks when one can just buy it?

Germany is building a longterm strategic alliance with Russia not confronting Russia. In the last couple of years alone German exports to Russia have boomed, Russia is now one of Germany's best markets. The Russians have the money and Germany has the manufactured goods. The idea that Germany would sacrifice it's relationship to Russia for Georgia is ridiculous. This is not the way the world works, at least not as long as one can keep the nationalist lunatics and their dangerous mythology under control, which is fundamentally what the European Union is all about.

Europe can become even wealthier and successful in an integrated economic partnership with - Russia, which has a vast storehouse of resources which we need. However, the United States doesn't want this mutually beneficial relationship to happen, because this will mean Power moving away from the United States and towards Europe and Russia.

The United States is trying to split Europe in two, it has mobilized it's most loyal vassal states; notably Great Britain, Poland, Georgia, in a cold war aimed at Russia, talk to people in Bruxelles in private, off the record, and they will tell the same basic story. A new cold war aimed at Russia isn't in Europe's interests, but it is in the interests of the United States. At least that's the attitude of powrful groups in the ruling elite, the most ignorant, the most nationalistic, the most dangerous.

The desire to confront Russia is also echoed in right-wing nationalist groups in some parts of Europe, though especially in "new europe". These groups don't have much else to sell but the nationalist myth and Russia is an easy target for them. But none of this has anything to do with democracy, or freedom or human rights. It's about power and wealth and who has it and who doesn't.

What's gratifying is that there are powerful elements in the European elite; in Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, Spain, Holland, Sweden, who realize what's happening and why, and have no intention of joining the American confrontation crusade against Russia. A crusade that will eventually lead to war. A war fought in Europe, wiping out Europe once and for all.

michaelpetek
17 August 2008 at 23:00

Writeon, you're completely off track here. Bush and Rice have been following a policy of wishful thinking with Russia, as though Putin were a man they could do business with.

Now that the mask has dropped, the Russians are going to retreat to their start-line in Georgia while the rest of the world knows what sort of people the Russian leaders really are. They will have made a net loss on their Caucasian adventure.

When the Chinese share of Siberia's population grows beyond a certain size, just watch China intervene on the pretext of protecting its own nationals.

fairplay
18 August 2008 at 07:21

why should everyone be so eager to do business with the USA? time and time again they have been proven to be back stabbing fifth columns who have no respect for anything or anyone. its about time someone stood up to them and made them think they are not as big and powerful as they think they are. putin's move may have positive repercussions for the whole world in the lond run. ie: stop meddling where you dont belong

writeon
18 August 2008 at 08:15

This idea, that somehow Bush and Rice, idealists that they are, have endulged in wishful thinking and been duped or tricked into thinking that Putin was something he isn't, is ridiculous.

The American leadership don't give a damn what foreign leaders are like as long as they follow orders and don't get in the way of American interests, namely free access to their markets, resources and they don't obstruct US global strategy.

Unfortunately for the US Putin is a Russian patriot/nationalist unwilling to see Russia turned into an American vassal state like the rest of EasternEurope. Putin and the circle around him want to see Russia successful and powerful and free of foreign domination, in this respect they are supported by the vast majority of the population of Russia. Is this so hard to understand? Surely it's obvious? What country actually wants to be weak and pushed around by foreigners?

One may not like Putin, I don't think I'd vote for him, but one cannot deny his faction has reversed Russia's decline into third world status and total chaos. Of course one can be so blinkered by anti-Russia animosity that one can confuse one's antipathy with reality. This is the curse of the nationalist mindset. Mythology pushes reality and one's own self-interest aside.

Of course one can do business with Putin. The Russian leadership wants to do business because business will make Russia richer and stronger. But the regime in Moscow refuses to subordinate their national interests and development and accept American leadership, and this is the core of their problems with the West and the United States. Russia due to its size and potential wealth and growing power, cannot be anything but a rival to the United States, and this is seen as unacceptable in Washington.

The Russian leaders don't have masks on, they aren't hiding anything. The Russian leaders are exactly the same sort of people Western leaders are. They are more or less "democratic". Russia is a rival market state, some would call it a rival imperialist, capitalist, state, like China or India.

From the very beginning Putin has expressed views that questioned, criticised and increasingly ridiculed the idea that the United States could rule the world and dictate the way it developed. He didn't accept US hegemony or even believe it was possible or desirable to attempt to turn such an arrogant and dangerous illusion into reality. Such and attitude, of course, put the elite in Moscow and Washington on a collision course, like tow rival Mafia clans dividing up a city.

But, to be honest, I'm weary of trying to explain reality to someone who appears to be living in a dream, where there are people in white hats and people in black hats and their are lovers and defenders of "democracy" and others who fear it with all their being and wish to crush it. One doesn't fear something that's an illusion, unless one's mad of course and deluded.

But this could have something to do with the size of my royalty check from my Russian publisher and colour my veiw of the country. The richer they become the richer I become. I like doing business with Russia!

michaelpetek
18 August 2008 at 12:29

Unfortunately for the US and everyone else, Putin is by profession a KGB hit man. How many police officers can you name who have ever become Prime Minister or President?

taghioff.info
18 August 2008 at 14:19

Off the top of my head? George bush Snr ex CIA, Iran Contras, springs to mind, I am sure there are one or two more.

writeon
18 August 2008 at 17:00

Putin is far more than a mere professional hitman, he is also one of the illuminati, as are Bush, Blair and Obama.

Handmjones
18 August 2008 at 18:21

You're all not learning from Cheney's past performance. He directed the State department and Soros to fund Shakashvili for his own purposes.

Now it suits his purposes to direct Shakashvili to attack Russia. Iran wasn't working out as a way to frighten the US public into electing McCain. This may do the trick with a few tweeks closer to the election.

michaelpetek
19 August 2008 at 13:03

A new development!

It's Tuesday 19 August and it's clear the Russians lied when they said yesterday that their troops were pulling back, so we can't believe any of their accusations against Georgia.

Douglas Chalmers
19 August 2008 at 20:39

Quote michaelpetek, 18 August, 12:29: "Putin is by profession a KGB hit man. How many police officers can you name who have ever become Prime Minister or President...?"

He was head of the KGB, not a "hitman" as you so weakly suggest.

But, to answer your question, George Bush, senior (former U.S. President George H. W. Bush) was also the head of the CIA, uhh.

Thus, we come back to the crux if this issue - the US global hegemonic agenda. And, no doubt, having "daddy" as former president, director of the CIA and a Texas oil man helped the present incumbent become the first unelected president of the uSA.

writeon
19 August 2008 at 21:05

I've now learnt from four different sources, two public and two private, that when the Russians rolled into South Ossetia they had two batteries of rockets with them that might/probably were armed with tactical nuclear weapons, and that they warned the United States that if they were attacked or opposed by US precison weapons or airstrikes, they would reply with nuclear strikes.

It's difficult to know how much credence to give these kinds of stories, but the two private sources are people I trust and respect. They could of course have been misled. The two public sources, Frank Gardener and Paul Craig Roberts, are perhaps being used as channels to get this kind of information into the public domaine by circles in the Pentagon or CIA, that are fearful of the course the Bush regime and it's dangerous allies, inside and outside the United States ,are leading the country, and the rest of us.

michaelpetek
19 August 2008 at 21:43

Douglas Chalmers, George Bush Senior was the political head of the CIA, not a professional spook.

Writeon, I hope the rumour about nuclear weapons is untrue. I really do. Because if true it shows just what kind of evil bastards inhabit the Kremlin.

Of course, if you think that a job with Halliburton's a fate worse than nuclear genocide, then I have no difficulty in seeing the logic of your argument, even if the premiss is bollocks!

writeon
19 August 2008 at 23:02

MichaelP,

I find many of your statements rather confusing. I don't think you're really qualified to expand on the use of logic in discourse and critize one's use of false premisses, or "bollocks" as you so eloquently describe them.

I was merely relating and speculating about a disturbing story/rumour relating to the lowering of the nuclear threshold again. Moving rockets into Poland and deploying them in Iraq, the Gulf and Afghanistan is also part of this dangerous process. However, your obvious anti-Russian phobia clouds your judgement and colours everything you write.

michaelpetek
20 August 2008 at 06:09

Writeon, according to one of your previous posts a difference between you and me is that the Russians pay you, while I don't get paid by anyone.

writeon
20 August 2008 at 07:26

Once again bizarre and confused "reasoning", you really must learn to pay attention. Nowhere have I stated that the Russians pay me, compared to you. But then again you specialize in twisting the truth to suit your obvious predjudices and animosities.

I get royalty checks from my Russian publishers for my books. I also get checks from the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Denmark, Sweden, China, and number of other countries. I would imagine this would mean I was in the "pay" of all these countries according to your superior "logic" wouldn't it?

I'm sorry to hear that no one pays you, by the way. I contribute to charity that supports young people in the arts, perhaps you could apply for a subsidy?

gnuneo
21 August 2008 at 21:16

the frankly unbelievable arrogance shown by Georgia committing extraordinary ethnic-cleansing, and claiming it somehow 'legal', as can be seen through "michaelpetek"'s posts, along with the rest of Georgia's actions, are almost beyond the realm of possibility - what boggles the mind is how the neo-cons could convince this president away from the common sense reality shown in this thread (by everyone except the obvious poster), into apparently believing in an almost suicidal position - it is possible the only benefit from this event is that Israel's rulers will see what Washington's "guarantees" are worth if an "asset"/ally starts a regional fight.

"What apparently is missing, is Universal Leadership .... which would be a Model which could be easily Followed/Adopted/Adapted/Copied/Supplied to every Citizen/Community/Society/Country/Continent as an Acceptable and Dynamic Interactive Medium dDelivering Daily Solutions and Viable Constructive Alternatives for Future Proposals which Address Current Needs.......... thus Creating Intellectually, Properties that Feed Current and Future Needs in Mutual Benefit. "

you are right. We need democratic structures, democratic schools*, democratic companies** - companies profoundly capitalist *because* they are owned by the workforce - the ultimate capitalist, free market expression, according to information theory, Adam Smith, system theorists, and democratic arguers throughout the ages.

it is like the internet ideal - distributed information, equal access, openness of structure. And like the internet model, it will never live entirely up to it. But it is a good model to aim for. IMHO. xx

(btw, it has been an *extraordinary* pleasure to read this thread).

*http://www.teachers.tv/video/4971

http://www.educationfutures.org/Respect.htm

http://www.teachers.tv/video/3480

**http://www.newstatesman.com/south-america/2007/08/argentina-...

moderngypsy55@gmail.com
22 August 2008 at 14:06

michaelpetek :

"Article15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says that no one shall be denied the right to change his nationality. Russia offered its nationality to the South Ossetians and the Abkhazians. Ninety per cent of either group freely accepted it.

By Georgian law, which does not allow dual citizenship, they lost their Georgian nationality when they were naturalised as Russians. They then became subject to immigration control."

So according to you there was a very clear solution staring at the face of the world for a long time. Since the native ossetians are illegal aliens and have been for while - kick them out? Why is the world so blind? This problem didn’t have fester so long!!

I hear Ossetians saying "but isn’t this the land that we call our homeland. It’s because of the administrative decision of Stalin (a Georgian) that Ossetia became an autonomous region within Georgia SSR?” And by the way the relationships between Ossetians and Georgians even during the Soviet times were not what one would describe as cordial.

I think we have a clear choice here. Follow rules and laws – which have been selectively applied depending on who is involved or, appreciate the recent history, the will of the people and the fact that it has been essentially a break away region soon after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

The same principles apply to Abkhazia

BTW a recent item in the BBC points the enormous love that Ossetians have for Georgians – especially after this current conflict (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7558619.stm )

moderngypsy55@gmail.com
22 August 2008 at 16:25

michaelpetek:

It’s like assuming Georgian citizenship for people who fought a brief war which have since then been termed as “break away” regions. The people, who never considered themselves Georgian, had to suffer an administrative link with Georgia during Soviet times because of Stalin’s arbitrary decisions. After the war in the early nineties, Russia offered citizenship to people. They mostly accepted. I haven’t seen any record or evidence of coercion in this process.

If you are implying that this makes them aliens in their own land, then I have to say that this is not just silly but unacceptable.

michaelpetek
23 August 2008 at 12:10

Moderngypsy55, earlier this year singer Katie Melua and her parents and brother becae British citizens. Under Georgian law they lost their Georgian nationality, though they are all full-blooded Georgians.

If any of them want to settle in Georgia in the future they will need visas and residence permits, same as you and I, and same as any citizen of the Russian Federation or any other country, because they are now aliens.

The Abkhazians and the South Ossetians were naturalised en masse five years ago. It has been the responsibility of the Russian authorities to evacuate them to Russia, and they have had all the time in the world to do so properly, and without causing any human suffering.

Since they have overstayed for five years, they are indeed illegal aliens. Each should be served with an individual reasoned decision on their expulsion, as is required by the European Convention on Human Rights, and then taken to the border under treatment the Convention prescribes for people under detention.

Of course, the Abkhazians and Ossetians could have kept their Georgian nationality and retained their right to vote on their territorial status.

The pre-conflict population of Abkhazia was about 530,000, and Georgians were within 5 per cent of an ethnic majority. Ethnic Abkhaz were 17 per cent.

300,000 ethnic Georgians, all citizens, have been ethnically cleansed to other parts of Georgia.

Today the population of Abkhazia is 180,000. Of these only 18,000 are Georgian nationals.

300,000 versus no more than 18,000 means no basis to raise the issue of self-determination for Abkhazia.

South Ossetia had a pre-conflict population 100,000, of whom 25-30,000 were ethnic Georgians. 60,000 were ethnic Ossetians who are now Russian citizens. 6,000 were ethnic Ossetians who remain Georgian citizens.

25,000 Georgians out of a total citizen population of 40,000 means the NO vote romps home by a comfortable 60 per cent, assuming people vote their ethnicity.

John Black
23 August 2008 at 15:04

Republic of South Ossetia

The Republic of South Ossetia consists of a checkerboard of Georgian-inhabited and Ossetian-inhabited towns and villages. Until the armed conflict of August 2008, the largely Ossetian capital city of Tskhinvali and most of the other Ossetian-inhabited communities were governed by the separatist government, while the Georgian-inhabited villages and towns were administered by the Georgian government. This close proximity and the intermixing of the two communities has made the Georgian–Ossetian conflict particularly dangerous, since any attempt to create an ethnically pure territory would involve population transfers on a large scale.

The political dispute has yet to be resolved and the South Ossetian separatist authorities govern the region with effective independence from Tbilisi. Although talks have been held periodically between the two sides, little progress was made under the government of Eduard Shevardnadze (1993–2003). His successor Mikheil Saakashvili (elected 2004) made the reassertion of Georgian governmental authority a political priority. Having successfully put an end to the de facto independence of the southwestern province of Ajaria in May 2004, he pledged to seek a similar solution in South Ossetia. However, the de facto republic governed by the secessionist government held a second independence referendum[2] on November 12, 2006, after its first referendum in 1992 was not recognized by the international community as valid.[3] According to the Tskhinvali election authorities, the referendum turned out a majority for independence from Georgia where 99% of South Ossetian voters supported independence and the turnout for the vote was 95%[4] and the referendum was monitored by a team of 34 international observers from Germany, Austria, Poland, Sweden and other countries at 78 polling stations.[5] However, it was not recognized internationally by the UN, European Union, OSCE, NATO and the Russian Federation, given the lack of ethnic Georgian participation and the legality of such referendum without recognition from the central government in Tbilisi.[6] The European Union, OSCE and NATO condemned the referendum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Ossetia

2008 South Ossetia war

By preliminary estimate the 2008 South Ossetia war began on 7 August 2008 with a military attack by Georgia into its break-away province South Ossetia, since 1992 a de facto independent entity.[20][21] Russian armed forces responded with a counter-attack into South Ossetia, also advancing into provinces of Georgia outside South Ossetia. A preliminary cease-fire was arranged by the President-in-Office of the European Union, French President Nicolas Sarkozy, on 12 August and signed by Georgia and Russia on 15 August 2008.

The war involves the country of Georgia, the Russian Federation and the breakaway republics of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Just hours after Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili declared a cease-fire with South Ossetian separatist troops, Georgian military forces unleashed a barrage of shelling on the province's capital, Tskhinvali, late Thursday and early Friday. Georgia then proceeded to launch a massive military offensive in South Ossetia.[22][23] The Georgian government said the troops had been sent to end the shelling of Georgian civilians by South Ossetian secessionists.[24] In the following battle, the capital of South Ossetia, Tskhinvali, was damaged. Starting on 2 August and increasing with the intensifying fighting, a stream of refugees from South Ossetia fled into Russian region of North Ossetia, reaching an estimated 30,000 of the 70,000 overall population.[25] More than 11,000 of them returned after the intervention of Russia in the war.[26] South Ossetians later claimed that 1,492 were killed as the result of the bombing of Tskhinvali[27][28]

The Ossetians are a distinct Iranian ethnic group whose origin lies along the Don River. They came to the Caucasus after they were driven out of their homeland by Mongol invasions in the 13th century. Some of them settled in the territory now known as North Ossetia-Alania (currently part of Russia), and South Ossetia (currently part of Georgia).[39]

South Ossetia, which has a Georgian ethnic minority of around one fifth (14,000) of the total population (70,000),[40] broke away from Georgia in the 1991–1992 war

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_South_Ossetia_war

michaelpetek
23 August 2008 at 15:25

John Black, you're fully correct, but for two points that need to be made in clarification.

South Ossetia does not meet, and has never met, the conditions required of even an unrecognised state in international law.

The separatist government, which declared independence in January 1992, has never succeeded in exercising in South Ossetia, to the exclusion of Georgia, the functions of a state, without assistance from Russia given in violation of international law.

The South Ossetian government is not constitutionally independent, as its Prime Minister and Minister for the interior are officials of the Russian Federation; its Defence Minister is a serving General in the Russian Army, and its armed forces are under Russian control and direction.

If you read the record of the UN Security Council you will find that the first shots were fired on 2 August, by South Ossetian forces under Russian control and direction.

Their activities are attributed by international law to the Russian state, and in so far as they are not accredited peacekeepers they represent an aggressive Russian presence on Georgian territory of much longer standing than the present crisis.

John Black
23 August 2008 at 15:36

August

* 1 August - Late evening, intense fighting began between Georgian troops and the forces of South Ossetia. Georgia claimed that South Ossetian separatists had shelled Georgian villages in violation of a ceasefire. South Ossetia denied provoking the conflict.[50]

* 2 August - South Ossetians started to evacuate into Russia.

* 5 August - Russian ambassador Yuri Popov warned that Russia would intervene if conflict erupted.[51][52]

* 7 August - President Mikheil Saakashvili ordered Georgian troops to cease fire.[53][54]

Despite the declared ceasefire, fighting intensified.[55][56] Hours after the declaration of the ceasefire, in a televised address, Mikheil Saakashvili vowed to restore Tbilisi's control over what he called the "criminal regime" in South Ossetia and Abkhazia and reinforce order.[56]

During the night and early morning, Georgia launched a military offensive to surround and capture the capital of separatist Republic of South Ossetia, Tskhinvali [57] thus breaking the terms of the 1992 ceasefire and crossing into the security zone established therein[20]. The heavy shelling, which included Georgian rockets being fired into South Ossetia[58] left parts of the capital city in ruins, causing a humanitarian crisis which Russian government sources claimed amounted to genocide. The news of the shelling was extensively covered by Russian media prior to the military reaction that followed, as Russia claimed to have responded in defense of South Ossetians against what they called "a genocide by Georgian forces."[59] Russia claimed up to 2,000 dead in Tskhinvali following the shelling.[60] The extent of civilian casualties was later disputed in a number of sources.[61]

* 8 August - In the morning, Georgia announced that it had surrounded the city and captured eight South Ossetian villages.[62] An independent Georgian TV station announced that Georgian military took control of the city[63]

Russia sent troops across the Georgian border, into South Ossetia. In five days of fighting, the Russian forces captured the regional capital Tskhinvali, pushed back Georgian troops, and largely destroyed Georgia’s military infrastructure using airstrikes deep inside the smaller country's territory.[64]

At Russia’s request, the United Nations Security Council held consultations at 11pm (US EST time), followed by an open meeting at 1.15am (US EST time), with Georgia attending. During consultations, Council members discussed a press statement that called for an end to hostilities. They were unable, however, to come to a consensus.[65]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_South_Ossetia_war

amanfromMars
23 August 2008 at 15:54

It is hard not to conclude that a certain kind of structured madness invades all such mindless clashes/armchaired conflicts/contrived plays ........ http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Frontpage/2008/01/02/0....

War is for losers so who wins in such Seedy Great Games for they would usually be the Architects of the Misfortune.

michaelpetek
23 August 2008 at 18:17

I see! 24 hours of violence in Tskhinvali and the Russians were already saying it was genocide.

moderngypsy55@gmail.com
23 August 2008 at 19:53

Michaelpetek: “earlier this year singer Katie Melua and her parents and brother becae British citizens. Under Georgian law they lost their Georgian nationality, though they are all full-blooded Georgians.

I don’t dispute what happened to Katie Melua.

But the issue with South Ossetia is quite different.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, a brief war created a de facto separate state (South Ossetia). Are you suggesting that the residents of South Ossetia ought to have taken Georgian passports? That in my opinion is just being blind to reality and preposterous. With all the support they got from Russia and their brethren across the mountains, is it very surprising that they accepted Russian passports?

I find it impossible to accept that this act made the South Ossetians aliens in their own land. They never agreed to be part of Georgia, fought a war to be separate, lived from then till now outside Georgia’s control, only to find that Law terms them illegal aliens? You must be joking! Or the Law you quote is not applicable here.

Also, you must be the only person in the world who has such a view. Even the Georgian government and its megalomania president don’t have this view.

Riaz Ahmad
24 August 2008 at 11:59

Misha Glenny did not even bother to hide her bais, so why should any one take her clap trap journalism seriously. Please note her remarks, 'Putin and his thuggish FSB pals ........', but she did not paint the neocon warlord Dick Cheney and his equally brutal and thuggish CIA pals with the same brush. If she is either too naive or too biased to be objective. Misha, your virtues will be far more appreciated by the readers of the 'Spectator'.

moderngypsy55@gmail.com
24 August 2008 at 13:15

Michaelpetek: also I wonder why Georgia's misguided attack by grads on populated areas was not termed as a move to rid Georgia of illegal aliens? I did hear of attempts at ethnic clensing (a term you are pretty familiar with). According to you this shameless attack on civilians would have been clearly a legitimate step - albeit 'disprortionate' ;) In case Georgia's megalomaniac president - who also is a lawyer - isnt aware of his country's rights, then this presents a great opportunity for you to get rich fast. Keep away from South Ossetia though, they may not be too pleased to see you!

michaelpetek
24 August 2008 at 15:44

Moderngypsy55, the South Ossetians declared separation from Georgia in 1990, but affirmed the supremacy of the USSR - it wasn't a declaration of independence.

When the USSR ceased to exist on 26 December 1991, its title to South Ossetia passed to Georgia.

South Ossetia was fighting a war of independence at this time, but it was never able to establish itself as a de facto state without the intervention of Russia. That intervention was illegal, as there were no facts to indicate that the Ossetians were in clear and present danger of genocide or crimes against humanity.

The South Ossetians were always Georgian nationals from Georgian independence on 9 April 1991 until 2003, when they took Russian nationality and so automatically lost their former citizenship. So yes, they are illegal aliens unless and until the government of Georgia says they aren't.

Now, as for Georgia's attack with GRAD milliles on Tskhinvali, I find it suspicious that the Russians haven't shown the world's media any civilian remains to back this up, neither has any humanitarian or human rights organisation been able independently to come up with a scrap of evidence of Georgian war crimes.

Mind you, to take South Ossetia out of Georgian sovereignty is to remove it from the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. Georgia is a member. Russia isn't, and judging by the way the Russians wage war, I'm not surprised.

moderngypsy55@gmail.com
24 August 2008 at 16:52

michaelpetek:

In all this arcane discussion, you forget the Ossetians. It’s undeniable that they have consistently refused to live with Georgia. It’s their land and it’s for them to decide their future - aided or unaided by those they consider as their friends.

You are so bogged with your interpretation of the law that you fail to see justice.

I doubt if your viewpoint has any merit at all as I don’t see any analysis in the newspapers and journals I read and which are commonly referred to, remotely supporting your views on citizenship or lack of it. Nor do the statements that the Georgian government and the West make have any support of your views. If there was even a shred of possibility the idiot in Georgia would have extracted a lot of mileage.

Isn’t this something you should worry about? That notwithstanding the legal jargon that you hide behind, we are essentially dispossessing a people from their own land - a land on which Georgia has had no practical control ever since it was independent; that the inhabitants refuse to have anything to do with Georgia. Doesn’t all this tell you something?

But first, do try to find out why no one appears to be having the same views as you. Is everyone missing something? Or more realistically, are YOU missing something?

moderngypsy55@gmail.com
24 August 2008 at 17:02

michaelpetek:

"Now, as for Georgia's attack with GRAD milliles on Tskhinvali, I find it suspicious that the Russians haven't shown the world's media any civilian remains to back this up, neither has any humanitarian or human rights organisation been able independently to come up with a scrap of evidence of Georgian war crimes. "

Do you read newspapers or do you read them selectively to retain only those scraps that tend to point to what you would love to believe?

Admittedly, the reality has been exaggerated by the Russians - objectivity of reporting is one the first casualties of war. But to say that there are no civilian remains makes me wonder how far you will twist information to suit your standpoint. Shakshvili would be extatic to have you by his side.

michaelpetek
24 August 2008 at 17:30

While I was away since my last post I had a look at the website of the Institute of War and Peace Reporting. They've got stringers all over the place.

One of them, Larisa Sotieva, is an Ossetian who was in Tskhinvali during the Georgian assault.

She states at:

http://www.iwpr.net/?p=crs&s=f&o=346117&apc_state=henpcrs

that the city was heavily bombarded as Georgian and Ossetian forces fought for it hand to hand.

There is no indication in her report that either side committed war crimes, as distinct from lawful acts of war albeit resulting in heavy civilian casualties.

moderngypsy55@gmail.com
24 August 2008 at 18:07

Michaelpetek:

Clearly this was the period when Russia intervened. Perhaps you chose to forget the bombardment by Georgia that started the conflict. As you will recall that it was a battery of grads that rained death and destruction on Tshkinvali. Ofcourse there were no civilian casualties, the munitions were programmed to hit only military targets. And the citizens fleeing to Nort Ossetia were obviously compelled to take a holiday. What else could they be doing? The barrage was after all peaceful and "proportionate". Right?

BTW: Have you spoken to the Disinformation Ministry in Georgia yet? I understand they are looking for fresh ideas.

moderngypsy55@gmail.com
24 August 2008 at 18:23

OMG! I missed your statement implying that the barrage on Tskhinvali was a lawful! act of war (albeit against your own illegal aliens) You have great future in law!

michaelpetek
24 August 2008 at 19:02

Moderngypsy55, the first shots were fired by South Ossetian forces on 2 August, and these were under the command and direction of Russian defence and security agencies.

These forces represented an aggressive Russian presence on Georgian sovereign territory well before 2 August.

Since aggression is the crime of crimes, it is justified to use whatever force it takes to reverse it, even at the cost of many lives.

Tskhinvali wasn't an undefended town. It was fiercely defended by South Ossetian forces. This is not a case of Georgian forces taking a town undefended and killing its population, nor continuing to fire after its defenders tried to surrender.

Larisa Sotieva's report gives indicates that civilians were killed as a side effect of fighting, not murdered by either set of belligerents.

moderngypsy55@gmail.com
24 August 2008 at 19:24

michaelpetek:

"Since aggression is the crime of crimes, it is justified to use whatever force it takes to reverse it, even at the cost of many lives"

Bravo. Bombarding sleeping civilians is justified

I am begining to appreciate your wit!

In any case, as you clarify, the civilian deaths were "side effects". The massive and indiscriminate shelling of Tskhinvali was effected by munitions that were programmed to kill and maim South Ossetian "terrorists" and to destroy their infrastructure. Though civilians lived in the same city, the Israeli defence firm, which was assisting the Georgians, had programmed the munitions to kill civilians only as a side effect. Cleary Israeli technology is great.!

Afterwards, as you said, no "civilian remains" were found by investigators who were wearing specially developed glasses (again by that resourceful Israeli defence firm) that see no civilians.

I must say, your brand of humour may make your rich man some day (though admittedly only in Georgia).

michaelpetek
24 August 2008 at 20:35

Moderngypsy55, if you were only to read closely the Statute of the International Criminal Court for its definition of a war crime, you're likely to find material there which you're sure to find helpful in not vocalising out of your posterior!

Whether a bombardment is a war crime or not depends not on programming but on whether there is an intention to kill the innocent, and not enemy combatants only.

It's the same principle as the distinction between murder and reckless manslaughter, or between unlawful killing and excusable homicide.

The South Ossetians themselves knew what they were doing when they set up defensive positions among civilians and when they decided to fight for the town instead of doing the sensible thing and surrendering it unfought, in order to spare the civilians unnecessary bloodshed.

Don't forget, they've been citizens of only Russia for the past five years, so they've had plenty of time to move house to the only country they have any legal ties to.

moderngypsy55@gmail.com
24 August 2008 at 21:11

michealpetek:

Oh God! There we go again..... I am not a lawyer and I have no intentions in pouring through the statutes.

Ofcourse the Georgians wanted to effect maximum damage. They were planning this for a while and wanted to effect an exodus of what you term as illegal aliens, hold a referendum and then reintegrate the territory that they had no moral claims on. The idiots made a fatal flaw in their planning - they didnt consider a Russian response.

Firing battlefield munitions that flatten large areas will always kill and maim civilians if a city is the target. The bomardment late night, aware of the clear possibilty of large civilian deaths is nothing short of criminal. No matter what you claim as the legal position, this act must be severely condemned as inhuman, immoral and uncivilized.

Ofourse the imbeciles had no intention to kill innocent aliens. But the silly people put themselves in the line of approaching missiles. How can Georgia be responsible for this silly behaviour?

I am sure you will one quote one more useless law that suits your crazy view. But no matter what statute you mumble now or the thoroughly jaundiced view you take, its fait acompli.... South Ossetia and Abkhazia are never going to be reintegrated with Georgia. The idiots in Georgia might as well disband the Ministry of Reintegration. (I do hope you havent got a job offer there)

Anyhow I will leave you to your delusions and your plans for a lucrative career in Georgia.

p.s I thought vocalizing through the posterior was oneof your many skills - which you keep displaying with great effect.

michaelpetek
25 August 2008 at 09:14

Follow this link, Moderngypsy55, you might learn something.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/article/600/42/369836.htm

moderngypsy55@gmail.com
25 August 2008 at 12:58

michaelpetek: thanks. Well it does seem that the press in Russia is not as shackled as it is sometimes made out to be. But coming back to the conflict in South Ossetia, objectivity in reporting is the first casualty of war. The process of counting deaths will continue for a while. People have little choice wherw they die - in times of conflict conflict. Surely the body count will continue amidst ruins of buildings and in the countryside. I am sure that the final figure will be less than the initial figure claimed by the Russians. But where does that take us? Does it make the unjustified and misguided acts of the Georgians any less reprehensible?

michaelpetek
25 August 2008 at 23:51

Moderngypsy55, if you want objectivity in reporting the best website for you is the Institute of War and Peace Reporting. Moscow Times has the most intelligent commentary I've yet seen on it.

Whatever the acts of the Georgians were they weren't unjustified. Russia was in the process of finalising the use of armed force for the territorial conquest of parts of Georgia in the most egregious aggression since Saddam Hussein conquered Kuwait.

When you consider that aggression is the crime of crimes - and it seems Medvedev has just made a veiled threat to give Moldova the same treatment if in makes a grab for Transdniestria - the deaths of civilians in the low hundreds isn't particularly shocking, especially when there's no evidence they were murdered.

oxforduniversity
26 August 2008 at 00:01

Russia is a Superpower again as the United States, CNN and other news media's have admitted http://www.kommersant.com/page.asp?id=768929 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8dNr2GH08I, this is an NATO expansion war. US former president Ronald Reagan promised Russia there would be no NATO expansion into post Soviet Union countries back 1989 which has clearly been violated. NATO is the new cold war, they are expanding and we cannot trust NATO. NATO is evil and Russia is the ally here. People need to Google the truth about what NATO means and what relation is NATO, EU & Bilderberg together. I support Russia and I am against NATO, NATO is the enemy here. NATO wants to expand membership and spread anyway they can. NATO is about building a military block and when countries apply for NATO membership, they wave their rights to protect themselves or govern themselves but are under the rules of NATO. It is communist movement on a private sector by NATO and this is wrong. Russia & China has been dead set against NATO and this is why. I want Russia to make its stance and stand against NATO, this evil lying agency that has no business taking countries rights

Superpower swoop

Warned off

Global dangers

More related to Georgia

'Everything is in ruins'

Did Kosovo open up Pandora’s Box?

Is Ukraine next?

Hard power in the Caucasus

122 comments from readers