"Additional security measures"
The political issues surrounding the Georgian cease fire merge into continuing Russian military operations, which will be justified by the Kremlin's international military law experts as "additional security measures".
So, we find decided discomfort by M. Sarkozy with the language he accepted:
Quote:
Last update - 02:40 17/08/2008
Russia signs cease fire agreement with Georgia
By News Agencies
.....
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed a cease-fire agreement with Georgia on Saturday, a day after Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili reluctantly signed the plan that calls for Russian troops to pull back, but that also grants them limited patrols inside Georgia.
.....
French President Nicolas Sarkozy also called on Russia to withdraw from all Georgian territory, in a letter sent to Saakashvili. In the letter, Sarkozy said the withdrawal must come, in spite of conditions authorizing "additional security measures" for Russian forces.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1012079.html
The Russian concept of "additional security measures", one suspects, will go well beyond "limited patrols" (which was not in the NY Times graphic, but may be in the final version ???).
Relevant terms of the agreement linked by the NY Times are quoted at post #123 above.
If someone has a url of the text of the final as-signed agreement, it would be appreciated. I can't find one.
Pre Planning Prevents Poor Performance?
The fine hand of the FSB...
Quote:
“An armed group consisting of Georgian and Ukrainian nationalists and Georgia-based Chechen terrorists is being urgently formed on the outskirts of Gori. They plan to make their way to Gori and wear Russian military informs to pillage and torment the local population,” an official of the Russian Defense Ministry said. He added that the information had been received through intelligence and radio intercept."
(LINK). Midway down the page.
Thus the "We're leaving" while columns go in the other direction. Gotta love it; everything old is new again.
Three bridges! :D
Finnish national security response ...
to Georgia may be quicker than I thought - three scared Finns in a room come up with uni-solution more quickly - sometimes.
So, perhaps relevant to NATO in the long run - note reference to Sweden in body of article (and poll results in #26 above).
Quote:
HELSINGIN SANOMAT
INTERNATIONAL EDITION - HOME
19.8.2008
Vanhanen: South Ossetia crisis will affect next national defence report
Finland not offered any “special role” in resolving crisis
Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen (Centre) believes that the crisis between Russia and Georgia over the territory of South Ossetia is having an effect on the upcoming government report on security and defence policy, which is now being finalised.
“It would be crazy to say that it does not have an impact, because of course it does. The real world always affects how things are dealt with”, Vanhanen said.
He voiced his views on Monday at a press conference held at his Kesäranta residence, marking the end of the summer period.
http://www.hs.fi/english/article/Van.../1135238759827
PS: Suomi shuts down during "summer period" - good time for someone to attack them; "winter period" bad time. ;)
Sorry, not trying be sarcastic
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Tom Odom
OK other than a list of 20 questions, what exactly is your point?
I offered the article as a broader look at the issue. one that specifically says it is not as simple as it seems.
Try answering your own questions and leave off the sarcasm.
Tom
so much as trying to really understand why it always seems like efforts to explain whats happening consistantly seem to focus on surrounding implications of one action or another rather than than pointedly answering the basic's.
What- was done
Why-it was done
Who- it was done for
When it started
How it came about
Then Why was what was done the right thing or wrong, and why each party would see it as such.
Why is each sides perspective right or wrong
Why is or isn't it of vital interest
Etc
The article you posted was excellent in that it showed a little more of the overall picture and placed it in a different perspective, thus allowing me to more definitively break down the questions in such a manner as to be given feedback directly related to that question (as American Pride was able to do with his follow-on posting).
The main point I have had is still the same Why was it OK for Russia to do what it did aside from the fact that supposedly noone else can do anything about it.
Truly searching for greater understanding not necessarily direction as is so often the case.
Please don't be mad at me:(
I can answer that for you...
It's 'cause the average Journalist, Pundit or Academic doesn't know any more about the essentials of the action than you do -- and quite possibly, they know even less -- ergo, they concentrate on the non-essentials and esoteric items to justify their pay and just say something.
The neat thing is I can also pontificate and I don't even expect to be paid... :D