Georgia's South Ossetia Conflict - Political Commentary

[jmm99]

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:

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.

[Ken White]

The fine hand of the FSB...

“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!

[kaur]

More than seven billion U.S. dollars left Russia during Moscow’s military campaign in Georgia, a rate more than ten times higher than earlier in the year and the product at least in part of fears that “certain political risks” are making the Russian Federation a less attractive place for investment, according to Russian Finance Minister Aleksei Kudrin.

At the same time, however, Nadorshin said that “it is early to speak about a serious blow to the economy of Russia.” The Russian government has reserves in its state funds that can be used to soften the blow. But investors are nonetheless likely to remain cautious about Russia for “another three to six months and perhaps further.”
Other experts, however, dismissed the impact of the war in Georgia on these flows. Yevgeny Yasin, a specialist at the Higher School of Economics, said that it was not the war in South Ossetia but rather actions by the Russian authorities, as in the Mechel case, and the weakening of the international economy that are to blame.
But both Kudrin’s remarks and the “Novyye izvestiya” article strongly suggest that Moscow’s war in Georgia will have an impact on the Russian economy and consequently on Russia’s behavior, especially if Western governments make it clear that they no longer view Moscow as a reliable member of the international community.

http://windowoneurasia.blogspot.com/...ia-helped.html

In sum, Russia threatens to cut up Georgia, informally but methodically, on several levels: 1) in Abkhazia and South Ossetia; 2) through additional buffer zones (glacis) beyond the secessionist areas; 3) by isolating some remote chunks of territory (Svaneti); 4) by cutting off the country’s east and west from each other and isolating Tbilisi; and 5) by controlling the seaboard.

Cumulatively, these moves enable Moscow to threaten to dismember Georgia as a means to force a change of government in Tbilisi. In the next stage, Moscow may try to install local authorities in various parts of the country. Those authorities may then be forced to act without Tbilisi’s approval or even to declare insubordination to Tbilisi. Pro-Moscow groups are a very small fringe in Georgia. The Russians, however, can create supply problems and law enforcement difficulties in order to force local authorities to work with Russian occupation authorities, even if the latter refuse to work with the Georgian government.

http://www.jamestown.org/edm/article...cle_id=2373322

[kaur]

Russia’s Market Prepares for Sovereignty

But it isn’t the very bottom yet and the recommendation to buy at large will be given no sooner than the situation becomes the most pessimistic, which may happen in November, when the U.S. elects a new president, or in December, when NATO is due to deliberate whether to grant the MAP to Ukraine and Georgia. Another danger is the slump in oil prices to below $80/bbl.

http://www.kommersant.com/p1013198/r...ialog_outlook/

[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.

MISFIRE
'We Are All Georgians'? Not So Fast.

By Michael Dobbs
Sunday, August 17, 2008; Page B01

It didn't take long for the "Putin is Hitler" analogies to start following the eruption of the ugly little war between Russia and Georgia over the breakaway Georgian province of South Ossetia. Neoconservative commentator Robert Kagan compared the Russian attack on Georgia with the Nazi grab of the Sudetenland in 1938. President Jimmy Carter's former national security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, said that the Russian leader was following a course "horrifyingly similar to that taken by Stalin and Hitler in the 1930s."

[kaur]

The last sentence.

The events of the past few days serve as a reminder that our ideological ambitions have greatly exceeded our military reach, particularly in areas such as the Caucasus, which is of only peripheral importance to the United States but of vital interest to Russia.

What next?

[Ron Humphrey]

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.

[AmericanPride]

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

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.

[Stan]

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

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...

[Tom Odom]

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