Fair enough. But as Steve opined, not real easy to gauge where you're coming from based on 2.5 kids at home and a dog on the way.Originally Posted by badtux
Two Wait & See Items
Stan's link to EDM turned up a couple of items (when I looked at the most recent archive) which relate to the subject matter of some of my prior posts.
The first is more background on how the Russians outfoxed Zarkozy.
http://www.jamestown.org/edm/article...cle_id=2373326RUSSIAN TROOPS IN GEORGIA: PULLOUT, PULL-BACK, OR STAY PUT?
By Vladimir Socor
Friday, August 22, 2008
....
On August 19 Medvedev assured Sarkozy that “Russian troops would withdraw from Georgia’s interior to South Ossetia and to Russia by August 22, with the exception of 500 troops needed for additional security measures,” according to the Kremlin’s communiqué (Interfax, August 19). Withdrawal “to South Ossetia and to Russia ” blurs the distinction between the two destinations, hinting at Moscow’s intention to relocate some Russia-based forces to South Ossetia in violation of the armistice. The 500 “excepted” troops are almost certainly earmarked to garrison a buffer zone (“security zone”) beyond South Ossetia, in Georgia’s interior. The buffer zone scheme does not figure in the Sarkozy-brokered armistice, but was added by him on August 14-16 at Russian insistence.
The Russians also misled Sarkozy linguistically. Medvedev used the Russian word “otvod,” meaning pull-back, rather than “vyvod” for “pullout.” The French should have been alert to this deception. It had already been used by Col.-General Anatoly Nogovitsyn in his daily briefing on August 18, when Nogovitsyn announced that at least some Russian forces would do an otvod, not a vyvod, and explained the Russian linguistic nuance for the world media (Interfax, August 18). This means that Russian troops would be pulled back within Georgia, rather than out of Georgia. Oblivious or perhaps undaunted, the Elysee Palace declared, “President Medvedev announced to President Sarkozy that the withdrawal would be concluded on August 21-22, with the exception of 500 personnel charged with implementing additional security measures under article five of the August 12 agreement” (Agence France Presse, August 19). .....
--------------------------
The second is the Turkish proposal for what could amount to a Caucasian "buffer zone" (previously slammed by some observers of the region).
http://www.jamestown.org/edm/article...cle_id=2373327RESPONDING TO GEORGIA CRISIS, TURKEY SEEKS NEW CAUCASUS SECURITY INITIATIVE
By Alman Mir - Ismail
Friday, August 22, 2008
The Georgian-Russian military conflict has created new security dilemmas in the South Caucasus. ....
.....
Partly because of the desire to refute these rumors and partly to achieve Turkey’s long-awaited goals in the Caucasus, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyib Erdogan came up with the “Platform for security and cooperation in the South Caucasus” initiative. The initiative, which Erdogan plans to discuss with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, is intended to create a regional security framework. It intends to accomplish this by encouraging greater integration between Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Armenia and empowering Russia and Turkey to play the leads roles of regional security guarantors. Erdogan’s vision is to solve the frozen conflicts in the region on a sustainable and long-lasting basis and to satisfy the national interests of Russia, which regards the West’s influence in the region as a “zero-sum game.” Under this initiative, NATO would be limited to an outside role in providing security for the region -- a clear effort to minimize Russian distrust and anger. .....
---------------------------
As a brief comment on K's links, I find it interesting how many of them point to Abkhazia - re:, perhaps, the discussion above re: Poti and Black Sea control, etc.
Fair enough. But as Steve opined, not real easy to gauge where you're coming from based on 2.5 kids at home and a dog on the way.
If you want to blend in, take the bus
Now that's rich...Great catch JMM
The Russians also misled Sarkozy linguistically. Medvedev used the Russian word “otvod,” meaning pull-back, rather than “vyvod” for “pullout.” The French should have been alert to this deception.
If you want to blend in, take the bus
A different angle...
Link to EditorialInvestors Looking To Leave Russia?
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, August 22, 2008 4:20 PM PT
The Georgia Invasion: In contrast with the West's otherwise tepid response to Moscow's new nationalism, one group has taken a tough stance — investors, who are leading the march out of Russia's markets.
Now, normally, IBD editorials aren't heavy hitters (at least to me). But IMO, they are reading the investment pulse really tight on this one. Money is indeed moving, and the only questions are (1) Is this "investment re-allocation/re-direction" short term or just the start, and (2) What are capital managers seeing, and how are they currently measuring capital risk in terms of Russian investment?
Just as an aside, very recently heard a story from an investment guy who has oversight responsibility over a few dollars at risk in a project in the Russian business environment. He asked his onsite contacts about current risk updates taking into account Georgia, etc. Answer was that as long as they weren't "political", should be just fine. Which lead to the obvious question along the lines of: "Would we fall into the Political category?" Answer being "All Western investments in Russian infrastructure are somewhat political". He's not sleeping too well after that one.
Subprime CDO's may start to look good again compared to Russian investments.
badtux said:
You are right. There are small newspapers, radio stations and websites. They admit that they can say really nasty things about politics, ... but they are too small to influence masses. They are like mental first aid package for thinking people.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.
In Russia the methods are much more rough if power groups intend to force their will. This is cultural question and this defines the habits of actors. Pain level is relativele high.
I think we can compare Russian and Soviet systems propaganda mechanisms. During Soviet time there was powerful department in party's central commitee, that directed propaganda. This time the same unit works in Administration. They do the same things.
The other question is the building of enemy figure in Russia. The drums are beating so loud that it feels to live in Russia like in castle undre siege. US is the biggest enemy. Later come Georgia, Baltic states etc. This is not any more self-sensor, this is attitude towards outside world.
I personally don't dare to compare the freedom level of press in Russia and USA.
Reporters tend to swarm like bees or wolves. This is good analysis material for swarming tactics researchersIn 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.
Those are good questions. I think I would be nervous if I were a Western investor in Russia also. The actions of the Russian government have not been reassuring over the past eight years. Thus far their actions have largely been directed at Russian companies in order to consolidate ownership away from oligarchs opposing Putin and into the hands of Putin cronies, but if they start using those same tactics (bogus lawsuits, rubber-stamping judges, tossing oligarchs into jail and so forth) against Western-owned companies...
So I think Western investors in Russia were already nervous. Georgia is just giving them an opportunity to raise their level of nervousness one notch more, perhaps enough to make many of them decide to cease investing in Russia or pull out their existing investments if possible. In short, I think Georgia is merely the tip of the iceberg insofar as why Russia may not be positively viewed as an investment destination at the moment. The question is whether President Medvedev is going to do anything to reassure investors that their investments are safe -- and whether any such assurances are worth anything, given popular perception (and perhaps reality) of Putin pulling the strings behind the scenes.
This morning Russian business daily writes (again) about Russian stock market dive. Artikle is in Russian, but on the right hand there is table you can zoom in and take a look at numbers.
http://www.vedomosti.ru/newspaper/ar...8/08/26/159069
Another interesting reading about Russian economy.
Russian tycoons are Russia’s largest foreign investors
http://www.neurope.eu/articles/89405.phpSkyrocketing foreign direct investment to Russia does not necessarily mean that the country has received much more foreign capital. This paradox stems from the fact that round-tripping represents an enormous part of Russia’s FDI stock. The extremely large share of Cyprus and the Netherlands of Russian FDI stock (two-thirds) is a clear indication of this round-tripping. To put it differently, Russian business tycoons are most probably the largest foreign investors in Russia.
Intriguing considering the USA has been the leading source of foreign investment in Georgia, to the sum of 22%. Probably explains what our ships are doing in the harbor. Sure hope retired Navy Captain McCain feels the same way come JanuaryJust as an aside, very recently heard a story from an investment guy who has oversight responsibility over a few dollars at risk in a project in the Russian business environment. He asked his onsite contacts about current risk updates taking into account Georgia, etc. Answer was that as long as they weren't "political", should be just fine. Which lead to the obvious question along the lines of: "Would we fall into the Political category?" Answer being "All Western investments in Russian infrastructure are somewhat political". He's not sleeping too well after that one.
Subprime CDO's may start to look good again compared to Russian investments.
Kaur, Jõudu !
What do think about Chancellor Merkel's visit to Estonia today ? EU relations with Russia you dare say ?
Why do I have this sinking feeling Nordstream (plumbing) will be addressed. Gotta love the press, can't even distinguish the difference between an oil and gas pipeline !
Last edited by Stan; 08-26-2008 at 10:16 AM.
If you want to blend in, take the bus
Stan, just came back from Rogozin's press conference. After political consultations (with Medvedjev) it was decided that Russia will not block the NATO transit to Afganistan. He added that poor NATO, after Pakistan regime change it is so hard to bring stuff from that direction, but Russia will not let NATO down in that hard moment. In the end NATO will undestand that they supported wrong man.
About EU-Russia.
http://www.economist.com/world/europ...ry_id=11986010
Investors quit Russia after Georgia war
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/60abb0d4-6...nclick_check=1The moves come as President Dmitry Medvedev faces pressure from business leaders concerned that the impact of the global credit crisis is starting to be felt in Russia.
Kosovo and South Ossetia More Different Than Similar
.But perhaps the biggest difference between Kosovo and South Ossetia is this: the Kosovo campaign was, fundamentally, about Kosovo. Then, many countries, including Russia, were united in seeking a solution. Russia was, in fact, instrumental in convincing Milosevic to settle. Kosovo was a key moment in the evolution of the post-Cold War era, its resolution a product of years of Balkan conflict and international efforts to respond.
The conflict between Georgia and Russia is not about South Ossetia. The breakaway province, and Georgia's ill-advised action there, is the pretext Russia has used to demonstrate its power to its neighbors and to the world
http://www.rand.org/commentary/2008/08/25/RFERL.html
Russia-Georgia Conflict in South Ossetia: Context
and Implications for U.S. Interests
August 13, 2008
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL34618.pdf
Now, "occupation zones"
Hei K,
Good links - esp. the CRS report as a backgrounder thru 13 Aug.
Yesterday, from EDM:
The lesson learned is - make sure the written document squares with what you understood to have been negotiated.RUSSIAN FORCES SETTING UP OCCUPATION ZONES IN GEORGIA
By Vladimir Socor
Monday, August 25, 2008
Russian forces remaining in Georgia have switched from the role of invasion troops to that of occupation troops, seizing chunks of territory in Georgia’s interior as well as key logistical nodes and arteries. The quick and smooth switch from the invasion to the occupation mode, as well as its ready-to-use diplomatic cover, bespeaks advance planning at the military and political level in Moscow. The land grabs extend southward from South Ossetia and Abkhazia, deep inside Georgia, as military buffer zones.
.....
The new occupation zones and demarcation lines were shown on detailed maps by Col.-General Anatoly Nogovitsyn, Deputy Chief of Staff of Russia’s Armed Forces, briefing the Russian and international media in Moscow on August 22 and 23. The Russians refer to the new occupation zones as “vnutrigruzinskie,” meaning “in Georgia’s interior.” Sarkozy may now realize that Russian President Dmitry Medvedev deceived him by promising, most recently on August 19, that Russian troops would withdraw from all vnutrigruzinskie territories (Interfax, August 19).
The Russians are rapidly building up a system of military posts for the long term in Georgia’s interior. These posts number 37 in all, including 18 in the buffer zone near Ossetia and 19 in the buffer zone near Abkhazia. Labeled as “blokposty,” they involve more than checkpoints. Russian troops are already constructing fortifications at some of these points. According to Nogovitsyn, “because blokposty on the main roads and in populated localities are going to be permanent, they are being endowed with the necessary living quarters and technical facilities.” This plan reflects Russian intentions to occupy these territories on a long-term basis.
Two Checklists
The following do not add much of anything to discussions here, but one might use them as checklists to organize one's own views on the subject matter:
http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=314910Q&A: What could happen next in Caucasus conflict
REUTERS
Reuters North American News Service
Aug 26, 2008 09:54 EST
MOSCOW, Aug 26 (Reuters) - Russian announced on Wednesday it recognised the rebel Georgian regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent countries. Here are some questions and answers about what might happen next. ....
http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=315362Key events in Georgia crisis
Some key events in crisis over Georgia's separatist regions
The Associated Press
AP News
Aug 26, 2008 14:07 EST
Key developments in conflict over Georgia's South Ossetia and Abkhazia regions: .....
One more aspect of russian thinking about foreign investors
I happen to know someone who is involved since years in the reconstruction of the sewage/water system of a big russian city. They are hungarian engineers working together with polish constructors and bulgarian quality controllers. It is a rather odd selection of medium and small sized eastern european companies.
After years of cooperation and a couple of vodkas they asked why they were chosen over western companies with much bigger capacities and experience. The answer was: We want to avoid being colonized economically the way your countries were. If you let a western company with capital in, it will find a way to privatize everything it can lay his hands on. And that was years ago!
Nihil sub sole novum.
Ships Ahoy ...
From the NY Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/28/wo...in&oref=sloginNATO Ships in Black Sea Raise Alarms in Russia
By ANDREW E. KRAMER
Published: August 27, 2008
MOSCOW — Russian commanders said Wednesday that they were growing alarmed at the number of NATO warships sailing into the Black Sea, saying that NATO vessels now outnumbered the ships in their fleet anchored off the western coast of Georgia.
As attention turned to the balance of naval power in the sea, the leader of the separatist region of Abkhazia said he would invite Russia to establish a naval base at Sukhumi, a deep-water port in the territory.
But in a move certain to anger Russia, Ukraine’s president, Viktor A. Yushchenko, said he would open negotiations with Moscow on raising the rent on the Russian naval base at Sevastopol, which is in Crimea, a predominantly Russian province of Ukraine. ....
...
In Moscow, the naval maneuvering was clearly raising alarms. Russian commanders said the buildup of NATO vessels in the Black Sea violated a 1936 treaty, the Montreux Convention, which they maintain limits to three weeks the time noncoastal countries can sail military vessels on the sea.
Col. Gen. Anatoly Nogovitsyn, the deputy chief of the Russian General Staff, said at a briefing in Moscow that under the agreement, Turkey, which controls the straits of the Bosporus and the Dardanelles, must be notified 15 days before military ships sail into the sea, and that warships could not remain longer than 21 days.
The legal squabble here involves the 1936 Montreux Convention.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreu...urkish_StraitsThe Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Straits was a 1936 agreement that gives Turkey control over the Bosporus Straits and the Dardanelles and regulates military activity in the region. Signed on 20 July 1936, it permitted Turkey to remilitarise the Straits and imposed new restrictions on the passage of combatant vessels. It is still in force today, with some amendments.
The Convention gives Turkey full control over the Straits and guarantees the free passage of civilian vessels in peacetime. It severely restricts the passage of non-Turkish military vessels and prohibits some types of warships, such as aircraft carriers, from passing through the Straits. The terms of the convention have been the source of controversy over the years, most notably concerning the Soviet Union's military access to the Mediterranean Sea. ....
This rather archaic convention has more holes in it than Ankara cheese. So, it is something that both sides can squawk about. The US is not a signatory; but, in the view of the USN, is indirectly bound:
http://www.ntip.navy.mil/montreux_convention.shtmlTurkey is a NATO partner, and the United States is obligated to take no action that would undermine Turkey's authority to control transit through or over the Straits, as provided for in the Montreux Convention.
And, from the same source:
So, Nogovitsyn seems to be correct on the 21 day limit - not much time to mount an offensive operation - which seems the point of the convention.Warships of non-Black Sea powers may not remain in the Black Sea longer than 21 days.
A real piece of work ....
that Russian at NATO.
From the NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/28/wo...pagewanted=allRussia Adopts Blustery Tone Set by Envoy
By CLIFFORD J. LEVY
Published: August 27, 2008
MOSCOW — Here is one measure of the aggressive shift in Russian foreign policy in recent weeks: Dmitri O. Rogozin, Russia’s representative to NATO, a finger-wagging nationalist who hung a poster of Stalin in his new ambassadorial office, is not sounding so extreme any more.
“There are two dates that have changed the world in recent years: Sept. 11, 2001, and Aug. 8, 2008,” Mr. Rogozin said in an interview, explaining that the West has not fully grasped how the Georgia conflict has heightened Russians’ fears about being surrounded by NATO. “They are basically identical in terms of significance.”
“Sept. 11 motivated the United States to behave really differently in the world,” he said. “That is to say, Americans realized that even in their homes, they could not feel safe. They had to protect their interests, outside the boundaries of the U.S. For Russia, it is the same thing.”
That comparison should raise some bristles and hackles among the readers of this post.
Reuters backgrounder on Gospodin Rogozin:
http://www.reuters.com/article/world...ldNews&sp=truePutin appoints firebrand as Russia's NATO envoy
Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:27am EST
By Guy Faulconbridge
MOSCOW (Reuters) - President Vladimir Putin has appointed a firebrand nationalist as Russia's permanent representative to NATO as the Kremlin takes a more assertive stance towards its Cold War foe. Putin signed a decree appointing Dmitry Rogozin, the former head of a nationalist party in parliament, to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, a Kremlin spokeswoman said on Thursday.....
Finnish attitudes shift slowly
First some words from the President.
http://www.hs.fi/english/article/Pre.../1135238989222HELSINGIN SANOMAT
INTERNATIONAL EDITION - FOREIGN
27.8.2008
President Halonen told in advance of Russian decision to recognise breakaway areas
Vanhanen: No impact on Finland's "direction"
Russian President Dmitri Medvedev informed Finnish President Tarja Halonen in advance of Russia's decision to grant recognition to the Georgian breakaway provinces of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Helsingin Sanomat has learned that Medvedev informed Halonen by letter in good time before the information was made public. Russia is believed to have sent similar letters to other countries - at least to France, the holder of the EU Presidency. ....
....
According to the President, a war in Europe, in which Finland’s neighbour Russia is taking part, is an unsettling phenomenon, and a cause for serious consideration.
“The war in South Ossetia clearly showed that so-called frozen conflicts are very volatile. Their causes are historically complicated, and resolving them is very important, but difficult.
Halonen praised Finnish activities as the holder of the chairmanship of the Organisation of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), and said that Finland has been successful in its mission.
With respect to Finnish foreign policy, Halonen emphasised the importance of perseverance and the maintenance of a credible national defence.
“We are one of the few European countries with a capability of defending ourselves. We will not give this up, and we will develop our defence further.”
Brave words from cousin Tarja. Hopefully, she knows more about defense than milking a cow.
----------------------------------------
And from the ministers:
http://www.hs.fi/english/article/Van.../1135238960449HELSINGIN SANOMAT
INTERNATIONAL EDITION - FOREIGN
26.8.2008
Vanhanen and Stubb criticise Russian military action in Georgia
PM “disappointed” at use of military force, FM sees impact on ties with NATO
Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen (Centre) says that the European Union must remain calm and united when dealing with the crisis in Georgia. ....
.....
Vanhanen also said that there is no need for Finland to worry, or to reconsider the country's foreign and security policy line, with its regional defence system and conscription.
Minister for Foreign Affairs Alexander Stubb (Nat. Coalition Party) discussed the conflict between Georgia and Russia at a meeting of Finnish Ambassadors in Helsinki. In his speech, he said that the date with three eights (August eighth, 2008, or 080808, when the fighting began) has become a dark turning point in world politics.
Stubb says that the crisis affects the agenda of Finnish foreign and security policy, as well as relations between Finland and NATO.
“Now there is reason to consider membership. The time for a decision is not yet at hand. However, flexibility and frequency in the assessment of security policy should be increased. It cannot be like a slow-motion black-and-white film.”
Tarja & opponent Sauli Niinistö in last election - "country folk"
SO does that mean
That you can keep your ship there 21 days then leave for a day then come back for 21 more?
Any man can destroy that which is around him, The rare man is he who can find beauty even in the darkest hours
Cogitationis poenam nemo patitur
Yup ...
that's what it means to me - assuming the Turkish government agrees to the 2nd passage.from Ron
That you can keep your ship there 21 days then leave for a day then come back for 21 more?
Also there are some other limitations on number and types of ships - again, more or less in the discretion of the Turks. E.g., aircraft carriers are banned, but the Russians got around that by declaring the Kiev a special kind of cruiser.
There is also a limit to 8" and below naval guns. However, a 12" dia. missile qualifies since, to the Turks, a missile is not a gun - and missiles weren't contemplated in 1936. US took advantage of that.
Zaman has begun (28 Aug) a multi-part series on the history involved:
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/de...ay&link=150870Montreux Convention after the South Ossetia war (1)
Historical situation of the Turkish Straits
by
HASAN KANBOLAT
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks