Georgia's South Ossetia Conflict - Political Commentary

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom Odom

I was going to post thios yesterda but we had comms issues so here tis. It gives a broader view of the issues.

---

And brings up more questions.

Were the Georgian forces that did this in 1991 the same as those now, or have there been some major changes?

Are Kosovo and SO/Abkhazia the same thing? If so why, if not why not?

Although SO has been autonomous they were firing rockets into Georgia proper, Russian "peace keepers" were there yet this continued. It is still for all intensive and from what I can see so far internationally considered part of Georgia not Russia. So they have to eventually respond somehow to the continuing rocket attacks. What were they supposed to do, go driving in on golf carts with zip-ties and tasers and ask the rebels to pretty please stop shooting rockets at them?

As to vital interests why are these countries of vital interest to Russia other than to

1- Get their resources
2- Control their resources(enable international blackmail)
3- Reestablish a semblance of their authoritarian control over the various polities
4- ????

Still not getting IT?

BTW why is it everybody is always so touchy about armchair generals. You'd think they actually think armchair generals actually think their in charge of something rather than just trying to get to a better understanding of whats going on.

Quote:

---

Are Kosovo and SO/Abkhazia the same thing? If so why, if not why not?

---

An article from RFE/RL addressing your question: http://www.rferl.org/Content/No_Comp...a/1191723.html

Quote:

---

Although analogies may be drawn and arguments may be made for the existence of a precedent, they won't resolve the conflict in South Ossetia. In fact, such analogies actually underscore the differences between Kosovo and South Ossetia, rather than build a compelling case for precedent.

---

An Initial Look at Russian Military Performance in Georgia

A great summation and quick read without all the glitter from FPRI, by Felix K. Chang

Quote:

---

It is no surprise that tensions between Russia and Georgia have mounted. On August 3 Moscow warned of the growing danger of a “large-scale military conflict” between Georgia and its separatist province of South Ossetia; that warning drew a reply from Washington two days later urging Moscow to refrain from provocative actions in the region.[1]

As the conflict unfolded during the night of August 7 with a Georgian military offensive into South Ossetia, it soon appeared that Tbilisi miscalculated the Russian response. By the morning of August 8, Russian forces were streaming into Georgia. While news reports from the frontlines remain preliminary and incomplete, the scale and speed of Russia’s military operations between August 8 and 12 do shed some light on Russian military capabilities and operational readiness and raise new questions regarding the events leading to the conflict.

Russian Ground Forces
Russian Air Forces
Russian Naval Forces
Operational Axes

---

Much more at the link...

re: AmericanPride

Thanx for the explanation - energy output and requirements = special relationship. The Gazprom links seem to run from south (Turkey, another thread here) to north (Baltic pipeline) and in between (where I am dumb).

So, recent flap in Helsinki (noted by Stan above - one step ahead of me :)) ties in as well

Quote:

---

HELSINGIN SANOMAT
INTERNATIONAL EDITION - BUSINESS & FINANCE
18.8.2008
....
Politicians take mainly positive view of Lipponen pipeline lobbying effort
The announcement that former Prime Minister and Speaker of Parliament Paavo Lipponen (SDP) is taking on a job as a lobbyist for the Russian-German company Nord Sream, which is planning to set up an undersea gas pipeline through the Baltic Sea from Russia to Germany, brought both approval and critical comments from Parliamentary party group leaders and other politicians.

---

http://www.hs.fi/english/article/Pol.../1135238727769

Seems like a conflict of interest to me; but Gazprom seems to make many pretty packages for people and nations.

PS: One wonders if Putin didn't start to shape this plan (in his head) when he was in East Germany, since economic warfare seems to have been his bent. If so, will + foresight.

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. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ron Humphrey

And brings up more questions.

Were the Georgian forces that did this in 1991 the same as those now, or have there been some major changes?

Are Kosovo and SO/Abkhazia the same thing? If so why, if not why not?

Although SO has been autonomous they were firing rockets into Georgia proper, Russian "peace keepers" were there yet this continued. It is still for all intensive and from what I can see so far internationally considered part of Georgia not Russia. So they have to eventually respond somehow to the continuing rocket attacks. What were they supposed to do, go driving in on golf carts with zip-ties and tasers and ask the rebels to pretty please stop shooting rockets at them?

As to vital interests why are these countries of vital interest to Russia other than to

1- Get their resources
2- Control their resources(enable international blackmail)
3- Reestablish a semblance of their authoritarian control over the various polities
4- ????

Still not getting IT?

BTW why is it everybody is always so touchy about armchair generals. You'd think they actually think armchair generals actually think their in charge of something rather than just trying to get to a better understanding of whats going on.

---

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

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:(

http://www.nato.int/docu/pr/2008/p08-104e.html

Statement from NATO

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ron Humphrey

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:(

---

Not mad at all. Seeking a greater clarity for what you are asking.

I would say that attaching "right or wrong" values to this situation simply adds false moral clarity to a long standing issue that is anything but clear.

Russia is being Russia--not the USSR but Russia in that she is seeking to preserve her buffers and in this case using an ethnic conflict or two to do so.

I am not a specialist on this area; my knowledge is generalist at best. But aside from not staying at Holiday Inn Express last night (or last year for that matter), I do know that Russia has maintained along standing tradition/policy of controlling buffer states. Putin could give a rat's behind about the SO's or the Abkhazians. He gives a very large rat's behind about Georgia joining NATO or missiles in Poland.

In my estimation, much of what we have pushed in the past decade with regards to expanding NATO was done because we could do so without penalty or push back. If I tried to guess what was going through the Georigians' minds, it would be a similar thought. They could do some push back without penalty. I think Putin read that one correctly. Using the situation Putin pushed back hard.

If you want a parallel issue, I would have to say Cuba in 1960 is a closer match than Czechoslavakia, 1968. But not just the Cuban side of the Cuban crisis but also the intermediate range missiles we had in turkey at the time that we pulled when all was said and done.

It's not right and it's not wrong. It is what it is and that is power applied.

Tom

Quote:

---

from Ron Humphrey
Why was it OK for Russia to do what it did ...

---

Here is Russia's answer from Sergei Ivanov, my favorite Kremlin saatana:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoXuHl6V1Kg

5 minutes of worthwhile viewing - knowing the adversary.

"the temporary security zone".

Quote:

---

Russia says to pull back Georgia force by Aug 22
REUTERS
Reuters North American News Service
Aug 19, 2008 11:50 EST

MOSCOW, Aug 19 (Reuters) - President Dmitry Medvedev said on Tuesday that by Aug. 22 Russia will pull its troops in Georgia back to the positions set out in a French-brokered ceasefire agreement.

Medvedev told French leader Nicolas Sarkozy by telephone that "by 22 August... a part of the peacekeepers will be pulled back to the temporary security zone," the Kremlin said in a statement.

"The remaining contingent that was used to reinforce the peacekeepers will be pulled back to the territory of South Ossetia and to Russia," the Kremlin said.

---

http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=304671

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stan

Nordstream not only has Gerhard Schroeder at the helm, they've gone and found yet another former PM to force the Sierra through Scandinavia and the Baltic Seabed -- ex-Finnish PM Paavo Lipponen. Lipponen was quoted:

---

Now that is interesting; I had read that Lipponen had turned the offer down a little while ago. Well, that has reversed pretty quickly. Hmmm...

These are the things I have learned from watching and reading about all this. They of course are only my opinion.

- Georgia acted very foolishly and did not fight effectively. That is of
secondary consideration.

The main points are:

- Russia wants its empire back, or at least a reasonable facsimile thereof.

- Russia's military is rather more effective than it was 10 years ago.

- The outcome of this conflict will increase greatly the confidence of the
Russian gov in the power of its armed forces and will make them that
much more likely to use them in the future.

- In addition to the military side the Russians are proving fairly adept at
the pr game, "nothing but peacekeepers in those tanks", and therefore
the diplomatic side.

- All this is especially worrying because Russia does a pretty good imitation
of a criminal state.

- Georgia did its best to align itself with the US, to the extent of dispatching
soldiers to help us in a war that had nothing to do with Georgia, and
now it is facing ruination.

The west had better start thinking how far they will let the Russians go and once this is decided (I don't really expect this to happen, but it would be the honorable thing) communicate this clearly to the Russians and to the nations that comprise the "near abroad".

The most important thing the nations in the "near abroad" have to think about is how much the west is willing to help them; really willing to help, not just what they say, and how much they can help themselves.

not too long ago (yesterday), equaled "the temporary security zone", which now equals "the security corridor" (permanent ?)

Quote:

---

NY Times
Russia Sends Mixed Signs on Pullout From Georgia
By MICHAEL SCHWIRTZ and ELLEN BARRY
Published: August 19, 2008
POTI, Georgia — Russia showed small signs of moving a few troops away from Georgia on Tuesday. But Russia retained its grip on the country, and Russian forces bound and blindfolded 21 Georgian soldiers at the Black Sea port of Poti, parading them with five seized Humvees belonging to Georgia’s backers — the United States......

---

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/20/wo...=1&oref=slogin

Now for the international military law aspects of the NYT article.

Quote:

---

from same source
A 1999 document written by the Joint Control Commission, an international body that monitored tensions in South Ossetia, the breakaway enclave over which hostilities between Russia and Georgia flared this month, gives peacekeepers access to a “security corridor” that extends about five miles in each direction from the enclave’s perimeter.

Under that document, the corridor reaches into Georgian-held territory, including portions of the country’s main east-west highway, and right through Karaleti.

Mr. Medvedev has said Russian peacekeepers will pull back from other Georgian territory but remain inside the security corridor.

---

These prior legal documents and agreements will keep coming out of the woodwork as the Russian FSB legal machine continues to fine tune its presentation.

Quote:

---

from same source
At the United Nations on Tuesday the Security Council considered a new, abbreviated resolution demanding that Russia withdraw all of its troops from Georgia.

But during the acrimonious session, Vitaly Churkin, Russia’s ambassador to the United Nations, declared that his nation could not support a resolution that did not endorse all six points of the cease-fire agreement, which he said should be included “verbatim.”

---

As well he should argue “verbatim”, since the cease-fire agreement favors his country.

carl said:

Quote:

---

The most important thing the nations in the "near abroad" have to think about is how much the west is willing to help them; really willing to help, not just what they say, and how much they can help themselves.

---

President Bush said:

Quote:

---

"Georgia is a beacon of liberty for this region and the world," Mr Bush said. "The path of freedom you have chosen is not easy, but you will not travel it alone ... the American people will stand with you."

---

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/may/10/georgia.usa

This statement sounds almost like "Ich bin ein Berlinier"

carl said:

Quote:

---

- Russia's military is rather more effective than it was 10 years ago.

---

I'd like to ask why you say so? Do you compare Georgian-Russian war with Chechen-Russia war? If yes, then I think that for example in the 1st phase of Russians did the same things and even better. To my knowledge they were much better prepared. They had of course more time. Artillery conquered and infantry (mechanized) occupied. Georgians stopped after 1st round, but Chechens continued after conventional phase with unconventional warfare. And the war goes on. It depends ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stan

(and I am fairly sick of telling ethnic Russian here I have no need to learn Russian, as we are living in Estonia),

---

Racist! Nazi! Xenophobe!

I just thought I'd introduce you to the political rhetoric of immigration politics in America. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ratzel

Racist! Nazi! Xenophobe!

I just thought I'd introduce you to the political rhetoric of immigration politics in America. :D

---

Hmmm, let's go back to my childhood days in NE DC for just a second :eek:
I joined the Army to get outta there :D

To be frank, 13 years ago, having taken all the required exams in order to legally work and live here, I have little to say to folks that have spent 50 years here thinking they live in Russia, and yet, can't muster a "thank you" in Estonian. I have even less sympathy for the current youth that align themselves with whatever is in fashion. Such fashion statements include bomb threats to schools and shopping centers (250 or more a year, all false).

I've said it a hundred times this year: If you're so Russian, the border to Russia is that way, 240 clicks or so...Should I now offer you a ride ?

How's my political rhetoric :)

Regards, Stan

Hei K,

Quote:

---

from kaur
This statement sounds almost like "Ich bin ein Berlinier"

---

Agreed; but Pres. Kennedy was willing and able to stand behind that statement with military force. I give Pres. Bush the benefit of the doubt that he is willing, but I do not see the "able" is presently available (leaving aside the wisdom of the policy if it were).

Hence, a policy based on "I am a Georgian" sounds good; but lacks a credible base in real terms.

Sorry to be so gloomy about this situation, but I still am seeing Hungary 1956.

kaur:

By "the west", I meant the entire west, especially western Europe. I would be shocked speechless if any country west of Poland was prepared to do anything substantive to help the "near abroad".

For all our stated good intentions, the US is fully occupied elsewhere. US forces are strained severely right now and we haven't show much inclination to make our forces bigger in order to ease that strain.

I remember a Republic of South Vietnam that we abandoned. If I remember correctly we encouraged the Kurds once and then changed our minds. More recently we cheered on the Shiites and sat on our hands while Saddam crushed them.

My opinion about the Russian military is based mostly on results. It is also based on all that I've read, things like the the FPRI article mentioned above by Stan. My opinion though is that of someone with zero practical experience.

Short history and timeline

http://www.freedomfighter56.com/en_history.html

Quote:

---

The Hungarian Revolution of 1956 Created and maintained by the European Division Collections and Services Directorate
This year marks the 50th anniversary of the Hungarian Revolution of 1956. This page provides links to sites commemorating the event or providing resources for research.

---

http://www.loc.gov/rr/international/...s/hu-1956.html

Collections of the 1956 Digital Archive - In Depth

Quote:

---

Donald and Vera Blinken Collection - Hungarian Refugee Interviews from 1957 to 1958More than 30,000 pages of several hundred in-depth interviews, together with 3,000 pages of subject files.

Zwack CollectionSpecial collection of newspaper clippings on 1956.

National Security Archive Collection - declassified intelligence documents on 1956
CIA daily briefings and weekly analyses, October-December 1956.
This collection comprises the daily briefings and weekly summaries prepared by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) during the 1956 revolution. These top secret documents were made accessible between 2001 and 2005 as a result of the repeated efforts of the civil organization called National Security Archive

RFE/RL Collection - Media CoverageNewspaper clippings and press releases relating to Refugee issues from 1956 to 1967.

RFE/RL Collection - Background ReportsBackground Reports written on Hungary by the Research Institute of RFE/RL from 1954 to 1989.

RFE/RL Collection - Evaluation Information ItemsSelected documents from the Evaluation Information. Items written by RFE field bureaus on Hungarian Refugee issues from 1952 to 1971.

1956 OSA Audiovisual Collection - 69 films and film excerptsDocumentaries, fiction and propaganda films, reports and newsreels.

Hoover Institution Archives - Audience Opinion Surveys by RFE/RLFrom the Archives of the Hoover Institution.

OSA Reference Information Paper on 1956A thematic guide prepared by archivists at OSA.

Selected Online Collections

---

http://www.osa.ceu.hu/digitalarchive/#nsa

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmm99

Short history and timeline

http://www.freedomfighter56.com/en_history.html



http://www.loc.gov/rr/international/...s/hu-1956.html

Collections of the 1956 Digital Archive - In Depth



http://www.osa.ceu.hu/digitalarchive/#nsa

---

One would hope that the Russians see Hungary 1956 as well

Quote:

---

Hungarian university students gathered and marched to the statue of József Bem, a Polish General who led Hungarian freedom fighters during the 1848 Revolution, to express solidarity for the Polish workers fighting against communism. The protest soon swelled to 200,000 Hungarians demanding independence in front of the Parliament.

---

And Hungary/ the many many other countries with similar experiences as they have been after the 80's

Is it truly realistic for any one nation/country/man to think that they can acheive much more than temporary results in controlling those around them through these historically horrific practices. One would think that they know better. Especially with the information environment today.

The Hungarians lost in 1848 too. It was not until 1918 that Hungary was stripped out of the Hapsburg Empire as an independent nation.

You'd think that Georgians would study history insofar as the response of Western nations when Russian tanks invade (i.e., crickets), but that, apparently, just doesn't happen anymore. Doing a Finland and being very, very careful not to prod the bear is pretty much the only way to deal with the situation if you're in Russia's "near abroad", but some nations just don't seem to get the hint...

30 years plus, where the US accepted that there would be no rollback of SovCom & ChiCom borders as they then existed. The policy became definitely one of containment - which in the end worked through Reagan.

The SovCom & ChiCom response (after Hungary) was then to institute the proxy wars - of which, Vietnam was one. Perhaps, Vlad & Co. want to see another go-around; perhaps, thinking they will do better this time. I dunno.

I see this situation as even more unstable, but then I am a skeptic and pessimist, whose crystal ball has been often proved wrong.

I think it important to note that because Russia defeated an inept and so far not very determined Georgia, it does not mean it is the Soviet Union of 1975. It is a country with a lot of weaknesses, the most glaring of which is demographic. Their population is falling.

They outnumber the countries of the west "near abroad" but not overwhelmingly so. The combined population of Poland, Czech Rep, Slovakia, Finland, Ukraine and the Baltic countries is around 111 million. Russia's is 141 million (numbers based on a quick internet search).

People need to be serious about the threat they pose and the effort required to oppose it but that does not mean it would be hopeless to try. Russia has to be stressed in order for those weaknesses to come into play.

If Vlad got them into a really serious situation, I don't think it is certain the population would go along with it.

what I've read about the Russian army -- all their services -- in this operation are pretty far from awe inspiring. Lot of tactical errors on view, foot deployment and weapons handling sloppy as all get out, obviously not the greatest morale in the world, lot of mechanical and maintenance problems and a lot of older equipment -- with few antennae.

I didn't worry much about them 30-40 years ago when I was supposed to, I worry less now than I did then.

Russian journal "Vlast" writes:

Quote:

---

A 6,000-word article in the current issue of “Kommersant-Vlast” attempts to answer the most basic questions about the war between Moscow and Tbilisi, including “why did the war begin?” “Why hasn’t it ended?” “What were the losses on the Russian and Georgian sides? And “What did each side learn from the other?” (www.kommersant.ru/doc.aspx?DocsID=1011909).

---

http://windowoneurasia.blogspot.com/...tried-but.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carl

I think it important to note that because Russia defeated an inept and so far not very determined Georgia, it does not mean it is the Soviet Union of 1975.

---

Concur.

From my admittedly limited open source views, I find the operation to be on about a par with the US mission to Grenada, coupled with the ability to have done the kind of extended train up that the US had prior to DS. I do not find the outcome to be too impressive. I do note that they did a real good job of knowing what the key nodes were and how to set themselves up to be able to respond to counter measures AKA Terrain IPB). IOW the OPPLAN seemed well done and the execution was what one might expect of a unit that was basicaly doing an end of training cycle FTX. To draw the conclusion that the Russian military is really a world class power is a little beyond the premises' strength I think.

Since the start of the recent hostilities I have been scanning the news in vein looking for something by Thomas Goltz, the author of several books I've read on the Caucasus. Goltz is a great, he's a mad man, what a foreign correspondent should be. He writes with a great historical depth. Apparently he was in Istanbul at the outbreak of hostilities and headed off to Georgia, he is reporting over at The Overseas Press Club. Enjoy:

Vintage Russia Makes Its Comeback, 12 August 2008
Georgia: A Five-Hour Lunch, 18 August 2008
Georgia's Western Ambitions, 18 August 2008
South Ossetia as Bait, 19 August 2008

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bourbon

Since the start of the recent hostilities I have been scanning the news in vein looking for something by Thomas Goltz, the author of several books I've read on the Caucasus. Goltz is a great, he's a mad man, what a foreign correspondent should be. He writes with a great historical depth. Apparently he was in Istanbul at the outbreak of hostilities and headed off to Georgia, he is reporting over at The Overseas Press Club. Enjoy:

Vintage Russia Makes Its Comeback, 12 August 2008
Georgia: A Five-Hour Lunch, 18 August 2008
Georgia's Western Ambitions, 18 August 2008
South Ossetia as Bait, 19 August 2008

---

Bourbon, thanks for posting that - that was some entertaining reading. I will stay tuned in to the fella's dispatches.

Not my usual media outlet, but some more in-depth coverage of the continued Russian legal offensive.

Quote:

---

Thursday, August 21, 2008
01:34 Mecca time, 22:34 GMT
Russia builds Ossetia 'buffer zone'
Russian troops are fortifying a "buffer zone" around the disputed South Ossetia region with eight military posts and a ban on Georgian aircraft, a senior Russian commander has said. Russia will also maintain a military presence around Abkhazia, another separatist region in the west of Georgia, Anatoly Nogovitsyn, the deputy head of Russia's general staff said in a televised news conference in Moscow on Wednesday.

---

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/eu...346769471.html

Quote:

---

Wednesday, August 20, 2008
03:31 Mecca time, 00:31 GMT
Russia rejects UN draft resolution
Russia has rejected a UN Security Council draft resolution demanding full compliance with the Georgia ceasefire, saying the text did not fully reflect a peace plan agreed to on Sunday.

---

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/eu...733542234.html

The full text of the Russian draft UN resolution seems simply to incorporate the text of the cease-fire agreement reported a while ago by the NY Times. So, there seems to have been some "interpretative" spin of the as-signed agreement by our side. Unfortunately, word games do not work well against a prepared adversary.

Quote:

---

TEXT-Russian draft Security Council resolution on Georgia
REUTERS
Reuters North American News Service
Aug 20, 2008 14:42 EST
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Following is the full text of a draft U.N. Security Council resolution on Georgia circulated by Russia to council members Wednesday.

---

http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=307562

It is the 40th anniversary of the Warsaw Pact USSR led invasion of Czechoslovakia, which ended the Prague Spring, a human face to socialism. BBC Radio 4 is broadcasting some repeats of the news reporting, although I've yet to see any commentary in the main press / TV.

Note the similarities: small nation decides on a course of action and big neighbour disagrees. Uses force to end small nation's actions.

The 1968 invasion is one of my first political / history events that I followed and flew back from a holiday listening to live radio reports (when not in the air).

davidbfpo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wm

Concur.

From my admittedly limited open source views, I find the operation to be on about a par with the US mission to Grenada, coupled with the ability to have done the kind of extended train up that the US had prior to DS. I do not find the outcome to be too impressive. I do note that they did a real good job of knowing what the key nodes were and how to set themselves up to be able to respond to counter measures AKA Terrain IPB). IOW the OPPLAN seemed well done and the execution was what one might expect of a unit that was basicaly doing an end of training cycle FTX. To draw the conclusion that the Russian military is really a world class power is a little beyond the premises' strength I think.

---

The Georgia-Grenada comparison has been put out in quite a few places lately, and it seems to be an accurate enough one. Still, it seems strange to compare the Mexican standoff between Cuban construction workers and the Rangers and the 82nd at Point Salines airfield to the Russian occupation of much of Georgia. At least the US disposed of the matter in only 3 days; the Russians are, for the moment at least, still stuck outside Tblisi. Though certainly no one is laughing.

One of the things that has really struck me when viewing pictures and videos of Russian troops has been the great preponderance of Motorised Infantry; not surprisingly given that it was elements of a MRD that hit the Georgians in South Ossetia. But Georgian claims that they took out 40 Russian tanks (out of a reported total of some 90, with 150 APCs/IFVs) mostly north of T-town don't seem implausible, even if the Georgians still cracked in the end. Now, whether that count is more or less accurate, and whether or not the "tanks" really were tanks and not a combination of all manner of AFVs, it still seems likely that the Russians took a bit of a beating themselves in the early stages.

Even if the Russians do mostly withdraw, it seems unlikely that they'll settle for anything less than seeking to install a client-government, at least, in the long run in Georgia. It seems difficult to imagine Georgia being able to successfully resist such pressure over the long haul.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Norfolk

The Georgia-Grenada comparison has been put out in quite a few places lately, and it seems to be an accurate enough one. Still, it seems strange to compare the Mexican standoff between Cuban construction workers and the Rangers and the 82nd at Point Salines airfield to the Russian occupation of much of Georgia. At least the US disposed of the matter in only 3 days; the Russians are, for the moment at least, still stuck outside Tblisi. Though certainly no one is laughing.

---

I'd like to see some links to the other sources making the Grenada comparison if possible.

You've sort of made my point in your next few sentences. It took the the 82d's DRB and the 22d MAU/MEU about 3 days to disarm a bunch of Cuban construction workers on a 132 Sq. mi. island. It took less than a division-sized force of the Russian Army about the same time to slash through a breakaway province of 1500 sq. mi.
I recognize differences in the force composition (light infantry/airborne vs mech infantry/armor) and the terrain of the two AO(an island versus versus a single mountain road through a tunnel) but I see the point of the two ops as being rather similar--a need to squirt a little testosterone after some period of feeling emasculated by other events in the world (Beirut Marine Barracks bombing for the US and Bosnia, among other recent events, for Russia.)

BTW, some folks have commented on the proximity of the event to the Olympics. Anyone happen to note how many medals Russians are taking home from China? As of this AM, they have 53 (16 gold) to the US's 100 (30 gold)and China's 83 (46 gold). Is diversion of the world's attention from this poor showing part of the determinant for the operation's timimg?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wm

BTW, some folks have commented on the proximity of the event to the Olympics. Anyone happen to note how many medals Russians are taking home from China? As of this AM, they have 53 (16 gold) to the US's 100 (30 gold)and China's 83 (46 gold). Is diversion of the world's attention from this poor showing part of the determinant for the operation's timimg?

---

If we're back to going to war to decide disagreements / avoid embarrassment I guess The Romans Empire is already back.:wry:

Quote:

---

Russia to keep 500 troops in Georgia buffer zone
REUTERS
Reuters North American News Service
Aug 21, 2008 07:29 EST

SOCHI, Russia, Aug 21 (Reuters) - Russia intends to keep 500 troops in a security zone surrounding Georgia's breakaway South Ossetia region, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Thursday.

"Tomorrow, 8 checkpoints will be established in the security zone in which 500 peacekeepers will be deployed, no more than that," Lavrov told reporters. "Other peacekeepers will be moved to South Ossetia, while other troops will be moved to Russia."

Lavrov did not specify how many troops Russia planned to keep in South Ossetia.

"I want to state this clearly and unequivocally that Russia is carrying out in full the six principles agreed between Medvedev and Sarkozy," he said. .....

---

http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=308583

And, from the other side of the issue.

Quote:

---

Saakashvili says West must make Russia quit Georgia
REUTERS
Reuters North American News Service
Aug 21, 2008 15:37 EST

PARIS, Aug 21 (Reuters) - The European Union and the United States should act to make Russian forces leave Georgia and stop further expansionism, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili told a French newspaper on Thursday.
....
Saakashvili criticised the French-brokered ceasefire as "ambiguous and unclear" and said it left the Russians the room to do as they wanted on the ground.

"The result is that we now have to depend on the goodwill of Russia. The only forces on the ground are Russian. All we can do is make declarations," he said.....

---

http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=309399

Hope is not a strategy. S's bottom line assessment is realistic given the totality of circumstances.

PS: "Hope" comment is not directed vs. Ron's discussion above. It is generally a comment on S's request to West, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wm

I'd like to see some links to the other sources making the Grenada comparison if possible.

You've sort of made my point in your next few sentences. It took the the 82d's DRB and the 22d MAU/MEU about 3 days to disarm a bunch of Cuban construction workers on a 132 Sq. mi. island. It took less than a division-sized force of the Russian Army about the same time to slash through a breakaway province of 1500 sq. mi.
I recognize differences in the force composition (light infantry/airborne vs mech infantry/armor) and the terrain of the two AO(an island versus versus a single mountain road through a tunnel) but I see the point of the two ops as being rather similar--a need to squirt a little testosterone after some period of feeling emasculated by other events in the world (Beirut Marine Barracks bombing for the US and Bosnia, among other recent events, for Russia.)

---

Here be, wm (I'll just add my disclaimer here that I don't recommend some of them, for obvious reasons):

http://atlanticreview.org/archives/1...n-Georgia.html

http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarp...7-46d900ce3973

http://www.thewhig.com/ArticleDispla...%20WORTHINGTON

http://fabiusmaximus.wordpress.com/2.../16/georgia-5/

http://www.fff.org/blog/jghblog2008-08-13.asp

http://www.deanesmay.com/2008/08/10/...-on-our-minds/

Edited to Add:

No disagreement on your take, Wayne, especially in the Grenada-Georgia comparison.

Besides the traditional Russian penchant for brute force at the tactical level, the thing that stands out most about the Russian invasion is the also traditional Russian emphasis on the Operational level of war; wielding a sledgehammer at the tactical level, while playing a cello (or at least a respectable violin) at the operational level. The Russians still know how to wire and channel all that brute force into an effective campaign - even if the Georgian Government remains in place, at least for the time being.

Quote:

---

Russia Stages a Substantial Withdrawal
Georgian, Foreign Officials Dispute Assertion of Compliance With Cease-Fire
By Jonathan Finer
Washington Post Foreign Service
Saturday, August 23, 2008; A01
GORI, Georgia, Aug. 22 -- Russia pulled troops and armored vehicles out of vast swaths of seized territory and ended its 10-day occupation of this Georgian city Friday, but Georgian and foreign officials disputed Russia's claim that it had complied with the terms of a recent cease-fire agreement. .....

---

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...200580_pf.html

Quote:

---

Georgia buffer checkpoints "permanent" - Russia
REUTERS
Reuters North American News Service
Aug 22, 2008 04:58 EST
MOSCOW, Aug 22 (Reuters) - Russian military checkpoints being built in the area adjacent to Georgia's breakaway region of South Ossetia will be permanent, a senior Russian military official said on Friday. .....

---

http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=310168

Quote:

---

US: Russia has not complied with Georgia ceasefire
Jeremy Pelofsky
Reuters North American News Service
Aug 22, 2008 15:21 EST
CRAWFORD, Texas (Reuters) - Russia has not pulled its troops out of Georgia, the United States said Friday, rejecting Moscow's declaration that it has fulfilled a pledge to withdraw under a French-brokered ceasefire agreement. ...

---

http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=311017

Quote:

---

Russia's first Georgia move legitimate: U.S. envoy
Reuters
August 22, 2008 at 6:33 AM EDT
MOSCOW — The U.S. ambassador to Moscow, in a rare U.S. comment endorsing Russia's initial moves in Georgia, described the Kremlin's first military response as legitimate after Russian troops came under attack. .....

---

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl.../International

----------------------------------------
Some decent Turkish coverage

Quote:

---

Zaman
Aug 23, 2008
US warship sails through straits, Russia suspicious
The guided missile destroyer USS McFaul passed through the Dardanelles and the Bosporus on Friday.
In a move likely to heat up tensions between the United States and Russia over a conflict in the troubled Caucasus, a US Navy warship sailed through the Turkish Straits yesterday to take relief supplies to Georgia. .....

---

http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/de...1006&bolum=102

Quote:

---

Turkish Daily News
Turkey insists US did not seek authorization
Friday, August 22, 2008
ANKARA – Turkish Daily News
Turkey insists that the United States had not sought authorization for the passage of two U.S. military hospital ships “Mercy” and “Comfort” through the straits to dispatch humanitarian aid to war-hit Georgia. ...

---

http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/a...enewsid=113355

-----------------------------------------
Still would like a graphic (or full text) of the as-signed Russian-Georgian agreement, but here is the AP update....

Quote:

---

Provisions of the Georgia-Russia truce agreement
By The Associated Press
Fri Aug 22, 3:46 PM ET
Provisions of the agreement reached between Georgia and Russia to end fighting in Georgia. Text is according to the Kremlin following the Aug. 13 announcement of the agreement. Below the text is explanation of Russian plans for a withdrawal and "additional security measures" allowed under point 5. .....

---

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080822/...a_truce_glance

Remember the 3 fat pigs -- Russian gas, electricity and rail ? Estonia's rail connections were also mysteriously "turned off" following a bout with the Motherland, but thankfully not mined with UXO :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

... a train carrying fuel has exploded after hitting a mine near Gori, Georgia's interior ministry said.

Interior ministry spokesman Shota Utiashvili said there had been several explosions near an abandoned Georgian military base where the Russian troops, on leaving Gori, had left a stockpile of munitions taken from the Georgian army.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stan

Remember the 3 fat pigs -- Russian gas, electricity and rail ? Estonia's rail connections were also mysteriously "turned off" following a bout with the Motherland, but thankfully not mined with UXO :rolleyes:

---

Given that the USS McFaul had just made port at Poti, the western terminus for this rail line and the port for oil transshipment from that rail line, should we conclude that someone is trying to make a statement that merely gaining access to the port is not enough to guarantee the flow of oil?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wm

Given that the USS McFaul had just made port at Poti, the western terminus for this rail line and the port for oil transshipment from that rail line, should we conclude that someone is trying to make a statement that merely gaining access to the port is not enough to guarantee the flow of oil?

---

Hey Wayne !
Oh Yeah, intrigue and espionage at sea... glad I joined the Army :D

Quote:

---

From Mcfaul's site - Mission: To conduct prompt and sustained combat operations at sea in support of national interests

---

Is the the whole kit and caboodle just about oil and pipelines ? Could someone - theoretically speaking - turn off the pipes at the harbor :eek:

Jeez, talk about sand paperin' a tiger's Alpha :)

in the evolving story. Poti has a long history, which included the presence of significant Russian Black Sea Fleet elements until late 1998.

Quote:

---

On October 9, 1993, a war-torn Georgia had to legalize the Russian military presence in the country, and lease, among other military facilities, the Poti base to the Russian navy. However, Georgia continued, though fruitlessly, to claim the vessels formerly stationed at Poti as a part of a tripartite Russo-Ukrainian-Georgian dispute over the Soviet Black Sea Fleet shares.[14] By September 1998, the Russian military personnel had been withdrawn from Poti to then-Russian base at Batumi under a Russo-Georgian agreement signed earlier that year.[15]
[14] Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty's Newsline. Vol. 1, No. 42, Part I, 30 May 1997.
[15] Georgian Border Guards pressure Russian counterparts to leave. RFE/RL NEWSLINE Vol. 2, No. 172 Part I, 7 (September 1998).

---

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

While Poti became a depressed area post-1991, cracking an UAE invesrtment deal in May 2008 (hmm....) gave some future promise.

Quote:

---

Arab Times, Kuwait
Georgia lures Arab investors to build 'Black Sea Dubai'
POTI, Georgia, May 18, 2008 (AFP) - The port city of Poti has long symbolised Georgia's collapse, but President Mikheil Saakashvili sees potential for a Black Sea Dubai in its crumbling buildings and pot-holed streets -- and Arab investors are listening. ....

---

http://www.arabtimesonline.com/clien...=17042&ccid=18

Re: Poti, Abkhazia's proximity makes that area more important to Russia's Black Sea policy than South Ossetia (whose major import is as a salient to cut Georgia in two).

One might also keep in mind that Batumi to the south also has an autonomous history with Russian military links.

Quote:

---

Batumi was also host to the Russian 12th Military Base. Following the Rose Revolution, the central government pushed for the removal of these forces, and in 2005 an agreement with Moscow was reached. According to the agreement, the process of withdrawal was planned to be completed in a course of 2008, but the Batumi base was officially handed over to Georgia on November 13, 2007, ahead of planned schedule.[2]
[2] Russia Hands Over Batumi Military Base to Georgia. Civil Georgia, Tbilisi. 2007-11-13.

---

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

Finally, despite its limited lead, the following article from Bloomberg updates a number of different facets in the on-going Georgian political story.

Quote:

---

Protesters Chant `Russians Go Home' at Georgian Port (Update5)
By Helena Bedwell and Maria Levitov
Aug. 23 (Bloomberg) -- Hundreds of Georgians chanted ``Russians go home'' at the Black Sea port of Poti today to protest checkpoints set up by Russian troops manning armored personnel carriers. ....

---

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...o&refer=europe

PS: Had problems with Arab Times link from this page (works fine from Google). Same story at

http://www.thefinancialexpress-bd.co...&news_id=33994

Quote:

---

The day before Georgia introduced forces into its breakaway region of South Ossetia, there were 48 Russian journalists there, one of the clearest indications yet that Moscow not only knew Tbilisi was planning to introduce forces into that breakaway region but also was planning its own military response and wanted to ensure both were extensively covered.
Said Tsarnayev, a Chechen freelance photographer with Reuters, told RFE/RL’s North Caucasus Service that he had gone to South Ossetia to take nature pictures and that he was surprised to find what RFE/RL’s Brian Whitmore yesterday said was “a virtual army of Russian journalists at his hotel”

---

http://windowoneurasia.blogspot.com/...ositioned.html

Hei K,

Seems the Russians were well prepared on the civil front (withdrawal of non-combatants, agitprop in place, etc.). Leaving aside the military aspect (which others have discussed), I've never discounted their capabilities for deception, disinformation and political infiltration.

Tying into Goble's before picture at Tskhinvali, is an after picture in one of today's CSM's leads:

Quote:

---

Behind checkpoints, a look at Russian actions in Georgia
Our correspondent describes a tour led by Kremlin press attaché SashaMechevsky through Russian-controlled villages and the South Ossetian capitalof Tskhinvali.
By Paul Rimple
from the August 25, 2008 edition
Since agreeing to a cease-fire deal with Georgia Aug. 15, Russia has been under close scrutiny. Is it pulling troops out or not? Is it protecting smoldering villages or pillaging them?

Moscow has frequently said one thing while eyewitnesses have reported another during the conflict. Even after Friday's withdrawal, US officials said Russia – which left troops at military checkpoints ringing South Ossetia – had not gone far enough. Georgia blamed the weekend explosion of a train carrying crude oil on a Russian-planted land mine.

As someone who has lived in and reported from Georgia for six years, I knew how rumors could fly around here. I wanted to see for myself what Russia was doing. ....

---

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0825/p07s02-woeu.html

This article links to three other CSM articles which might be of interest.

Another view of the same guided tour from McClatchy:

Quote:

---

Posted on Sunday, August 24, 2008
Russians give tour of Georgia, but try not to show too much
By Tom Lasseter | McClatchy Newspapers

KARALETI, Georgia — Russian Col. Igor Konoshenko looked at the building that had been burned by looters — who'd entered the town earlier this month after Russian troops drove through — and quickly tried to shift the reporters' attention elsewhere.

"The other buildings are fine, look at them," he said, waving his hand assertively.

That sort of redirection was typical of a seven-and-a-half-hour tour that the Russians conducted Sunday for reporters in the occupied countryside of Georgia. ....

---

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/world/story/50479.html

Some of the comments to the McClatchy article are real pieces of work - LOL !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kaur

http://windowoneurasia.blogspot.com/...ositioned.html

---

Uhm, only problem there is that fighting started on August 1. So Russian journalists being there on August 7 would not be unusual, it would be a case of journalists rushing to the nearest hot-spot in hopes of scooping each other (and Russian journalists because, well, nobody outside of Russia and Georgia really cared if Ossetian and Georgian forces were sniping and shelling each other, and certainly you would not see Georgian journalists in Tskhinvali!). If the Russian journalists were there *before* August 1, that would be unusual... but thus far we have no indication of that.

In other words, if you want to prove a conspiracy theory whereby Russia chose the time that Georgia invaded, this won't do it. Not to mention that it greatly mis-states the role of the Russian government in the Russian press. Russia is not the former Soviet Union, and the Russian press isn't a branch of the government. The Russian press is not a free press by any means -- media outlets that report things not beloved by the government find themselves charged with "extremism" and shut down, so they tend to self-censor very well, and as with the U.S. many major media outlets are owned by government supporters -- but a government official can't just say "Report on this or you go to the gulag" like back during Soviet days. All they can do is issue press releases and hold press conferences, just like here in the USA. If the U.S. government held a press conference and said that Mexican Army snipers were shooting across the border at El Paso and killing Americans, and that Mexican artillery had fired on a few houses near the border, you'd see the same stampede of American reporters to El Paso. But this doesn't mean the U.S. government controls the U.S. press. It just means that reporters stampede to where there's a story.

badtux wrote:

Quote:

---

In other words, if you want to prove a conspiracy theory whereby Russia chose the time that Georgia invaded, this won't do it. Not to mention that it greatly mis-states the role of the Russian government in the Russian press. Russia is not the former Soviet Union, and the Russian press isn't a branch of the government. The Russian press is not a free press by any means -- media outlets that report things not beloved by the government find themselves charged with "extremism" and shut down, so they tend to self-censor very well, and as with the U.S. many major media outlets are owned by government supporters -- but a government official can't just say "Report on this or you go to the gulag" like back during Soviet days.

---

What firm is the owner of biggest TV companies? Gazprom media. Who is the owner of the firm? Bank Rossija. Who are the owners of the bank? 2 brothers, who are friends of Putin from the middle of 90s. How the state bacame owner of Gazprom? Too long story. Who is the owner of English language Russia Today? Russian state structures. How does Presidential administration give direct orders to TV? Just read Russian free newspapers. This show is really manipulated. Belive me. Plus there is intensive narrative building. You can't underestimate this. To fight terrorists or states, in the end this is all the same. It is all about belief and narratives.

To illustrate little bit this thinking I suggest you to look at this table that is originally from Russian business daily "Vedomosti".

http://www.compromat.ru/main/putin/image/kovalchuki.gif

If you can read Russian, then in the beginning of August this article was published by Russian "Newsweek."

http://www.compromat.ru/main/prismi/tvcenz.htm

Conspiracy theories started already couple months ago. For example. During 10 days in may Jamestown reported.

ANNEXATION AND MILITARIZATION OF ABKHAZIA CONTINUE APACE
http://www.jamestown.org/edm/article...cle_id=2373020

RUSSIA REINFORCES FORCES IN ABKHAZIA AS A POSSIBILITY OF ARMED CONFLICT LOOMS
http://www.jamestown.org/edm/article...cle_id=2373024

RUSSIA DOUBLING ITS TROOPS IN GEORGIA’S ABKHAZIA REGION
http://www.jamestown.org/edm/article...cle_id=2373028

RUSSIA’S STRANGE “PEACEKEEPING” OPERATION IN ABKHAZIA
http://www.jamestown.org/edm/article...cle_id=2373029

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS PASSIVE AS RUSSIA MOVES TROOPS INTO ABKHAZIA
http://www.jamestown.org/edm/article...cle_id=2373032

THE WEST RESPONDS WEAKLY TO RUSSIAN CHALLENGES IN GEORGIA: PART I
http://www.jamestown.org/edm/article...cle_id=2373036

THE WEST CAN RESPOND MORE EFFECTIVELY TO RUSSIA'S ASSAULT ON GEORGIA: PART II
http://www.jamestown.org/edm/article...cle_id=2373040

THE WEST CAN RESPOND MORE EFFECTIVELY TO RUSSIA'S ASSAULT ON GEORGIA: PART III
http://www.jamestown.org/edm/article...cle_id=2373044

WILL PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV’S FIRST CRISIS BE GEORGIA?
http://www.jamestown.org/edm/article...cle_id=2373050

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by badtux

Uhm, only problem there is that fighting started on August 1. So Russian journalists being there on August 7 would not be unusual, it would be a case of journalists rushing to the nearest hot-spot in hopes of scooping each other (and Russian journalists because, well, nobody outside of Russia and Georgia really cared if Ossetian and Georgian forces were sniping and shelling each other, and certainly you would not see Georgian journalists in Tskhinvali!). If the Russian journalists were there *before* August 1, that would be unusual... but thus far we have no indication of that.

In other words, if you want to prove a conspiracy theory whereby Russia chose the time that Georgia invaded, this won't do it.

---

I'll just say that Russian antics are certainly not limited to prepositioning journalists in this region. Kaur has mucho time there and here, and, I have at least 13 years of proof to back that statement.

Additionally, I previously asked you to introduce yourself here, and I think sufficient time has passed. Please do take the time to do said.

EDIT:
RUSSIAN JOURNALISTS USED AS CHANNEL FOR TBILISI-MOSCOW CONTACTS

Quote:

---

Thursday, May 15, 2008

Last week Georgia and its breakaway province of Abkhazia were close to a war that would surely have involved Russia.

---

Regards, Stan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kaur

What firm is the owner of biggest TV companies? Gazprom media. Who is

---

What firms are the owner of the biggest TV news companies in the USA? GE (NBC/MSNBC), the nation's largest defense contractor. News Corporation(Fox News), run by a media mogul with immense political clout and widely credited with being the voice of the current administration. Time-Warner (CNN), which has a long history of conservative pro-government reporting dating back to the days of the oligarch Henry Luce.

The biggest difference between the two occur with smaller media outlets. Here in the United States, smaller outlets such as McClatchy feel comfortable, within limits, of doing reporting that the government doesn't like (I say "within limits" because they also face the problem of losing major advertisers if they go beyond what the oligarchs who own those advertisers are comfortable supporting). In Russia, there are a variety of mechanisms in place to make sure that reporters and editors self-censor. Go too far and the Putin Youth invade your offices and trash the place, someone kills you, or the State jails you for "extremism". So the State can and does punish you in Russia if you cover stories in a way the government disagrees with. But once again, there is no direct way for the government to order smaller outlets to cover any particular story.

And indeed, no such direct way is necessary. As I pointed out, if you had someone shooting U.S. citizens in the streets you would see a rush of U.S. reporters there just as if you had someone shooting Russian citizens in the streets you'd see a rush of Russian reporters there. No "orders" on the part of the government are needed to see to that, just self-interest on the part of reporters who want to rush to get the next scoop for their newspapers. The difference between Russia and the former Soviet Union is that today's Russian government (as with the U.S. government) understands that self-interest is a better way to control the press as compared to direct state control, as vs. the Soviet Union, where direct state control was imposed upon all press. The difference between Russia and the USA is that Russia will impose indirect or direct state sanction if something is reported that the Russian government does not want reported, while the US government does not have that ability at present. That is why the US has a free press while Russia does not.

In any event, this is a big divergence from the original point, which was that if shooting started on August 1 you would naturally expect reporters to be on the scene by August 7. It's just that I have friends in Russia (one of whom is a personal friend of Mark Ames of Exile.ru fame) who are familiar with the system there, and I have more than a little experience with the system here, so it frustrates me when people make statements that clearly are at odds with the facts, such as implying that there's no difference between the Russian media today and the Soviet media during Brezhnev's time. That simply is not true. As with the USA, in today's Russia direct government control "ordering" reporters to a region is not necessary to insure coverage of stories that the government wants covered. Simple self-interest -- editors not wanting to get "scooped" by other publications -- is enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stan

I'll just say that Russian antics are certainly not limited to prepositioning journalists in this region.

---

Indeed. That is a given.

Quote:

---

Additionally, I previously asked you to introduce yourself here, and I think sufficient time has passed. Please do take the time to do said.

---

I started to do so. Unfortunately there are limits on what I can say that came into play when I started to do so, and the results were... unsatisfying. A non-disclosure disclosure is somewhat less than useful. I will continue to think of a way that I can give an idea of what I am doing without divulging information that is not to be divulged for reasons I can't say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by badtux

Indeed. That is a given.



I started to do so. Unfortunately there are limits on what I can say that came into play when I started to do so, and the results were... unsatisfying. A non-disclosure disclosure is somewhat less than useful. I will continue to think of a way that I can give an idea of what I am doing without divulging information that is not to be divulged for reasons I can't say.

---

Perhaps, but it's still helpful for those you're conversing with to have at least a basic idea of your interests and (when possible) a bit of background. Otherwise it's all too easy to come off as a troll or agitator (which isn't to say that's what you're doing...but to point out the reasoning behind such introductions). You'll notice that even some of our more prolific posters have pretty brief intros.