Georgia's South Ossetia Conflict - Political Commentary

[Rank amateur]

If the Georgians are calculating that the Russian response will be muted because of the Olympics, I think they're badly miscalculating.

More likely Georgia decided that the best time to establish population control is when the media isn't watching. I suspect that's because they're not planning to emphasize winning hearts and minds.

[Norfolk]

Eurasia Daily Monitor reported last week that battalion of Russian Railroad Troops had finished a two month's reconstruction of a railroad that had been out of service since fighting back in 1992. With the 58th Army on the frontier, once that railroad was finished, the Georgians knew it was on. The Olympics of course are convenient to deflect international public opinion from Russian activities.

Apparently, the Russian reconnaissance battalion leading Russian troops into the South Ossetian capital today has been caught in a bit of a snare laid by the Georgians. Things are getting real interesting. I wonder if news from Abkhazia may not be far off.

Now I'm waiting to see what happens in Eritrea, too, with the imminent departure of the UN force there.

[Cougfootballfan]

been a while since theres been a good european war. I saw on the news that georgia was pulling its 1,000 troops out of iraq to help deal with this newest problem

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsO...12704620080808

[Stevely]

I hope the Georgians have learned well asymmetrical methods from its time in Iraq.

[Fuchs]

I'm almost sure that this won't become a full-scale war, but end in a few days with a cease-fire.

Reason:
A full war would be detrimental to Putin's interests.
He wants the Georgian government weakened, and eventually replaced by an at the very least neutral government.

I'm convinced that this isn't about South Ossetia, Abchasia or oil.
It's about the definition of the zone of influence of NATO/USA and Russia.
Ukraine and Georgia are the two prizes that are left in this East-West struggle, and Russia needs to destabilize their governments to pull them out of the Western influence zone into theirs.
Most importantly, it needs to prevent that they become NATO members. Warfare almost guarantees that they won't become members for a while.

The Georgian government has probably done a lethal mistake already with the apparently excessive violence against civilians.
The Russians can use this "multiple rocket launchers shot into villages/city full of civilians" thing to portrait the Georgian government as bad guys.
That would have two phenomenal advantages for Putin; disrupting the Georgian government for a higher chance of a new government and keeping Western support small.
We don't (officially) support civilians-massacring baddies, after all.

Putin has already won. His troops only need to capture some square kilometres in South Ossetia to keep the status quo ante (plus quasi-permanent presence of Russian troops in South Ossetia).
He would be stupid if he allowed an escalation or long duration of the war.

I told others that there's some major conventional war potential in Eastern Europe; especially one bloc against the other bloc's proxy was a viable scenario. I cared more about Ukraine because that country is much more relevant, though.
I encountered deaf ears mostly, and very few people seem to see the dangers of the struggles and alliance growth in Eastern Europe.

We tend to discuss celebrities' haircuts much more than vital alliance policy.

[Stevely]

That is a good analysis Fuchs.

[kaur]

Fuchs said:

I told others that there's some major conventional war potential in Eastern Europe; especially one bloc against the other bloc's proxy was a viable scenario. I cared more about Ukraine because that country is much more relevant, though

.

I suggest to read Russia's last foreign policy concept.

http://www.mid.ru/ns-osndoc.nsf/0e92...b?OpenDocument

Here Rogozin comments it.

http://www.kommersant.com/p917043/r_...ept_of_Russia/

If someone reads Russian official statements by MFA and President, it is wierd to read about that there are only two sides in conflict - bad Georgian armed forces and Russian peacekeepers plus Russian civilian citizens. There are no words about South Ossetian paramilitaries, volunteers from other parts of Russia etc. I would like you suggest to read the commentary I posted earlier 1more time.

http://www.jamestown.org/edm/article...cle_id=2373294

[Fuchs]

I'm almost sure that this won't become a full-scale war, but end in a few days with a cease-fire.

Reason:
A full war would be detrimental to Putin's interests.
He wants the Georgian government weakened, and eventually replaced by an at the very least neutral government.

I admit that I was a bit puzzled when the Russians didn't accept Georgian cease-fire offers after the Russians had taken control over SO.
Well, I assumed that the Russians wanted to test how much they could gain at the table on top of control over SO.
I did NOT expect them to be so blatant as they apparently are. Well, strong man's negotiation style, I guess.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...efer=worldwide :

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in a telephone conversation today that Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili ``must go,'' meaning he should be ousted from office, Khalilzad said.

SO is an interesting region in the mid-term. The Georgians will want it back, and whatever government they get, it would be strengthened if it gets SO back.
The Russians hold a nice piece of sugar in their hand.

------

The worst nightmare of Putin regarding Georgia might be a Georgian-U.S. bilateral alliance (even if that meant that Georgia had to recognize Abchasia and SO).

Just another way of looking at it

True.
And it shows how disastrous political national security decisions of politicians can be.
I wonder whether this head of government Saakash...something had a thorough briefing by his officers.
I cannot find an explanation for the still open tunnel, though.

This conflict reminds me a bit of the Falklands War.