Caucasus Crisis

Vick · Post by **Vick** » 12 Aug 2008 20:12

Wasn't Saddam also genociding the Kurds? Oh wait, that doesn't count because the Kurds weren't provided with US passports earlier, so a proper casus beli was absent.

Naked agression by a large powerful country against a small pipsqueak troublemaker of a country to further the large powerful country's interests. Hmm...

Nayak · Post by **Nayak** » 12 Aug 2008 20:14

Thats some serious russkie firepower used on the georgian musharaffs. Bakis please note, all that amreekan technology and training means diddly squat when the yindoos attack across the yellow sea.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 12 Aug 2008 20:15

Vick, you need to get some history lessons.

Read about Hawaii.

Read about Manore doctrine

then try meddling in the affairs of USA

Look at Venezuevelan affairs

On May 14, 2002, Chávez alleged that he had definitive proof of US military involvement in April's coup. He claimed that during the coup, Venezuelan radar images had indicated the presence of US naval vessels and aircraft in Venezuelan waters and airspace. The Guardian published a claim by former US intelligence officer Wayne Madsen alleging US Navy involvement.[41] US Senator Christopher Dodd, D-CT, requested an investigation of concerns that Washington appeared to condone the removal of Mr Chávez,[42][43] which subsequently found that "US officials acted appropriately and did nothing to encourage an April coup against Venezuela's president," nor did they provide any naval logistical support.[44][45] According to Democracy Now!, CIA documents indicate that the Bush administration knew about a plot weeks before the April 2002 military coup. They cite a document dated April 6, 2002, which says: "dissident military factions... are stepping up efforts to organize a coup against President Chávez, possibly as early as this month." According to William Brownfield, ambassador to Venezuela, the US embassy in Venezuela warned Chávez about a coup plot in April 2002.[46] The United States Department of State and the investigation by the Office of the Inspector General found no evidence that "US assistance programs in Venezuela, including those funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), were inconsistent with US law or policy" or "... directly contributed, or was intended to contribute, to [the coup d'état]."[47][44] Payments by the NED had been stepped up in the weeks preceding the coup. According to The Observer, the coup was approved by the government of the United States, acting through senior officials, including Otto Reich and Elliott Abrams, who had long histories in the US-backed "dirty wars" in Central America in the 1980s, and top coup plotters, including Pedro Carmona himself, began visits to the White House months before the coup and by the man President George Bush tasked to be his key policy-maker for Latin America, Otto Reich.[48][48]

The Monroe Doctrine is a U.S. doctrine which, on December 2, 1823, stated that European powers were no longer to colonize or interfere with the affairs of the newly independent nations of the Americas. The United States planned to stay neutral in wars between European powers and their colonies. However, if later on, these types of wars were to occur in the Americas, the United States would view such action as hostile. President James Monroe first stated the doctrine during his seventh annual State of the Union Address to Congress, a defining moment in the foreign policy of the United States. Most recently, during the Cold War, the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine (added during the presidency of Theodore Roosevelt) was invoked as a reason to intervene militarily in Latin America to stop the spread of Communism.

KLA IS MERCENARY ARMY
For example, most reports don’t make it clear that the so- called Kosovo Liberation Army is a foreign mercenary army in the pay of the Western imperialist powers.

The KLA did not exist until recently. It became active only in the last few months.

The June 6 New York Times reported that KLA forces are entering Kosovo through Albania. But they are not from Albania. According to the report, most of them come from Germany—where they were born—and most speak only German, not Albanian. The report claims that many of them, but not all, have parents or grandparents who emigrated from Albania.

All the funds for the mercenary army come from abroad, primarily from the United States, reported the May 26 Washington Post. The money is funneled through Albanian immigrant groups. These are the sort of anti-communist groups long promoted by the CIA.

Reading a bit history is always good.

The Banana Wars is an unofficial term that refers to the United States military interventions into Central and South America.

Often, these interventions were carried out by the United States Marine Corps. On occasion, U.S. Naval gunfire and U.S. Army troops were also used.

The source of the term "Banana Wars" is from the alleged connections between the interventions in the regions and the preservation of various United States commercial interests in the region. Most prominently, the United Fruit Company had significant financial stakes in production of bananas, tobacco, sugar cane, and various other agricultural products throughout the Caribbean, Central America and the northern portions of South America.
Americans advocating imperialism in the pre-World War I era often argued that these conflicts helped Central and South Americans by aiding in stability. Some imperialists argued that these limited interventions did not serve U.S. interests sufficiently and argued for expanded actions in the region.

American observers opposed to imperialist theories argued that these actions were a first step down a slippery slope towards American colonialism in the region.

Histroy repeats itself, thats thegood part of history.
and finally US non role in Hotel Rwanda.

"Throughout the crisis, considerable U.S. resources--diplomatic, intelligence and military--and sizable bureaucracies of the U.S. government were trained on Rwanda. This system collected and analyzed information and sent it up to decision-makers so that all options could be properly considered and 'on the table.' Officials, particularly at the middle levels, sometimes met twice daily, drafting demarches, preparing press statements, meeting or speaking with foreign counterparts and other interlocutors, and briefing higher-ups. Indeed, the story of Rwanda for the U.S. is that officials knew so much, but still decided against taking action or leading other nations to prevent or stop the genocide. Despite Rwanda's low ranking in importance to U.S. interests, Clinton administration officials had tremendous capacity to be informed--and were informed--about the slaughter there."

"All s fair in Love and war because in both cases its the victors who compose poetry about it."
Spinster

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 12 Aug 2008 20:18

Vick wrote:Wasn't Saddam also genociding the Kurds? Oh wait, that doesn't count because the Kurds weren't provided with US passports earlier, so a proper casus beli was absent.

Naked agression by a large powerful country against a small pipsqueak troublemaker of a country to further the large powerful country's interests. Hmm...

'helping the kurds' would have meant dangerously destablising Turkey - a key US ally, which would not have been a smart move

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 12 Aug 2008 20:20

I still remember the heady days of the shomali plains and the talibs adandoning
kabul in middle night leaving 3 lil talibs sleeping. in morning they were seen
climbing up trees and firing on NA. they were shot like dogs in the street.

Vick · Post by **Vick** » 12 Aug 2008 20:21

What makes you think I don't know of these issues? That's the main reason why I find it perplexing that while US interventionalism and exceptionalism is demonized, the same from the Russian side is cheered as if it somehow promotes Indian interests.

BTW, stow the pateralistic tone.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 12 Aug 2008 20:24

IF you knew histroy and yet posted those views , cease reading history as it makes no difference and you will repeat.

Good luck with your flame baits and switches.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 12 Aug 2008 20:25

Vick - you are wrong in your analysis. we are not talking about the same type of actions here

Vick · Post by **Vick** » 12 Aug 2008 20:25

John Snow wrote:Good luck with your flame baits and switches.

Same to you with your non sequitors

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 12 Aug 2008 20:26

It's also interesting to note that some of the most outspoken people on this forum against the Iraq invasion is gleeful of the invasion of Georgia.

What makes you think I don't know of these issues? That's the main reason why I find it perplexing that while US interventionalism and exceptionalism is demonized, the same from the Russian side is cheered as if it somehow promotes Indian interests

No glee about invasion in either of the places.........in fact both are equally bad. But glee about exposing some thinkers in the US (like? Cheney). The Russians have exposed the flaws in US strategies. After all history works both ways.

On Iraq, the US invaded it. everyone pretty much agrees that the US should have been out of Iraq.

Everyone agrees that Georgia invaded SO. What, even the US, say is that the Russian "response" has been disproportionate. No one has said that the Russians should have kept to their side of the border and done nothing.

The US made military reality on the ground in Iraq and Afganistan, where was the glee then

Iraq, even within the US there are not too many takers - TODAY, so that is not an issue.

A'stan, outside of Pakistan, I have to wonder who would not be gleeful. And, who is not? The lack of glee here is because the US never finished the job they started, inspite of a lot of help from regional wisdom (and by extension lack of it in the US).

Vick · Post by **Vick** » 12 Aug 2008 20:39

NRao wrote:No glee about invasion in either of the places.........in fact both are equally bad. But glee about exposing some thinkers in the US (like? Cheney). The Russians have exposed the flaws in US strategies. After all history works both ways.

Of course all strategies have flaws? You think Putin's "bash anyone who stands in his way" strategy is flawless? In fact that strategy is exactly what has lead the Baltic States, Poland and Ukraine to seek NATO membership. But that of course is considered proding the Bear not "exposing flaws in Russian strategy."

NRao wrote:Iraq, even within the US there are not too many takers - TODAY, so that is not an issue.

It doesn't matter who the takers are. The US is pushing a fait accompli of having Iraq within its sphere of influence. The same that Russia is trying to accomplish with Georgia and Belarus and the CA states.

NRao wrote:A'stan, outside of Pakistan, I have to wonder who would not be gleeful. And, who is not? The lack of glee here is because the US never finished the job they started, inspite of a lot of help from regional wisdom (and by extension lack of it in the US).

Nothing would serve the cause of anti-terrorism more than putting 20 LGBs down on ISI HQ. That is a military reality that India will have to pursue as TSP has shown that it can turn on a dime to change suitors if it means staving off destruction. If TSP is willing to be the condom, why would the US (or China) disregard the condom's efficacy by destroying it?

mayurav · Post by **mayurav** » 12 Aug 2008 20:50

Vick wrote: Nothing would serve the cause of anti-terrorism more than putting 20 LGBs down on ISI HQ. That is a military reality that India will have to pursue as TSP has shown that it can turn on a dime to change suitors if it means staving off destruction.

The Indian state behaves like Hindus when it comes to foreign affairs. It is dhimmified. Just like the Hindus in India don't realize that the Indian state is secular and will not help them but help itself, India does not realize that the existing world order does not help India, they just help themselves. Hindus need to help themselves in India, just like India needs to help itself in the world.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 12 Aug 2008 21:09

Vick, FWIW, I strongly supported and still support the 1991 Gulf War to kick Saddam out of Kuwait, and I would have supported a push to Baghdad to hang Saddam in the street then.

I did not support the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 because it was very obviously unprovoked aggression that the Iraqis did everything reasonably possible to avert by doing what the US and world community asked. Obviously he couldn't surrender his "WMD" because, as he said repeatedly, he didn't have any. The US invasion was based on "reasons" that were proved to be blatant, deliberate lies. Even State Dept veterans say that without hesitation.

The Russian intervention in South Ossetia followed the genocide by the Georgian goon gang. The Georgian regime is certainly NOT the "democracy" that the head goon claims it is - the Opposition leaders are in asylum in France, or are in jail, or are beaten up by Shaakashvili's goons. The regime is nepotist, with top officials being family members of the head goon. This is a state which has been taken over by the Georgian mafia, plain and simple.

They committed deliberate, planned genocide. Now they will pay for it. The Russian intervention came after 2000+ civilian deaths, when 30,000 refugees had already crossed into Russia, refugee columns were being shelled by the Georgian army, and people were making desperate pleas for help from hiding places under buildings in the shattered city of Tkshinvali. For at least some of those people, the Russians were life-savers.

People who believe that Shaakashvili is a civilized human, or believe that this is "Big Country beating up on small democracy" do need to pay attention and read up the background, as Spinster recommends, and you don't have to go that far back.

South Ossetia is not some secessionist movement that rose up yesterday - they have been living as a separate state since 1992, and there was a peace agreement in place. So there is absolutely no way to explain away a massive armored and artillery and aerial attack on a populated city, followed by systematic murder of surviving civilians. The Georgian regime needs to be executed, and there is no glee or pro-Russianism here. I wish it had been done by the American "friends of democracy" before the Russians HAD to intervene.

How much attention have you seen in the American or British press to the murder of over 2000 civilians, and what really happened in Tkshinvali on August 8-9 and later? Why is that? Russian-origin people are not humans? Harvard and Columbia grads are exempted from laws against murder?

Baljeet · Post by **Baljeet** » 12 Aug 2008 21:56

Vick
do you think russians are stupid? Before Iraq invasion or as proscribed by the NeoCons, the righteous one's, Russia didn't feel confident to confront US. Iraq invasion gave russians a god send opportunity. After careful analysis and by virtue --forces of free market, russians realized they are sitting on gold. Russians figured Iraq war will tie US down, have deep impact on US Economy, there is no quick end in sight. They portrayed themselves as underdogs while Gun Slinging Cowboy was out to pave the way for Second Coming of Messiah. Things didn't turn out that way...as oil and gas prices rained dollars on Russia, she was able to pay off their debt, build a solid reserve of hard cash cold, started slapping around some countries including India, China--remember arms deals. Quietly pin pricking Georgians, profiled their Harvard educated leader, watched American Masters train Georgians and shower them with their UAV's etc, when they got the opportunity they struck so hard, all americans and europeans can do is issue statements, keep yelping like a wounded dog. Bush's statement, "....russian response is disproportionate...." well Mr. Presidente you invaded a sovereign nation on false pretext of WMD, Terror Links, etc etc, led to annihilation of close to 500k Iraqis, destroyed the only secular nation in middle east, a dictator who hated Al-Keeda, kept Iran and KSA in check.
Whose response is more disproportionate, Americans or Russians. Atleast Russians are protecting their own citizens who got slaughtered by American Bikini wearing president who was feeling all powerful poking Russian bear while hiding behind American Eagle. He forgot Eagle is no match to Bear.
If possession is 90% of the law then Russia just sent the ultimatem to Europeans, We control your energy supplies, either you can play ball with us or stay in recession till ice age comes back.

I say Kudos to Russians. Putin has outsmarted Bush, stared and challenged Cheney. In this lame duck and fag end of this administration, US just can't pick a fight with Iran anymore. Georgians just rescued Iranian Nuke program, put Russia solidly behind Iran in case of any hostility the Arms pipeline will be opened to Iran. I dare if Bush is such a Macho Man to pick a fight with Iran now.

Vick · Post by **Vick** » 12 Aug 2008 22:03

So N, it's ok to violate sovreignty in order to stop genocide? If the US (or any power) were to be inclinded, it would be ok to overrun Sudan and give Darfur its independence and make Sudan a vassal of the conquering power? I can only imagine the gnashing of teeth and lamentations if the US were to do something like that.

Nepotism, willfull shelling of civilian targets, ethnic cleansing, etc. these justify outside force and regime change. Have you heard of a little place called Grozny? Should Putin be strung up? Are Russians exempted from murder charges?

How much have you seen on Pravda and RuTV regarding the destruction of Grozny and forced rehabilation of its people? You'd be lucky to even see Kasparov or any other Russian opposition leaders on RuTV, let alone anything that goes against the Putin line. Why expect impartiality only from BBC, CNN, etc. Why not also from others? Oh wait, because we're heavily anglo-ized and only intake from the anglo-sphere, so the anglo-sphere becomes the source and the sink for the hate.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 12 Aug 2008 22:09

Vick wrote:
Rishi wrote:OT, but I guess the Rooskie re-assertion fits right back into the bipolar worldview that many once held, or the multipolar world that many (might) hope for. For this and many other reasons (very likely due to all those Mir and Raguda publishers books gathering dust somewhere ), there will be many russophiles here.

For US citizens, this of course will be anthema, coz after all, the CCCP was the Evil Empire. The same revulsion is not really shared by others.
Just as one must realize that many Indians are not russophiles and can in fact be yankeephiles. To each their own...

Russia pulverizes a weak country to further national interests (prevent NATO expansion) and control oil resources (pipeline), good.

US pulverizes a weak country to futher national interests (control ME SLOCs) and control oil resources, bad.

No, no equivalence at all...

Wake me up when India acts in its national interest, in any manner even similar to either USA or Russia. Till then this talk for national interest driven righteous action between two behemoth is like a eunuch critiquing / eulogizing the virility of wrestlers in the ring.

When you see the Russia/US conflict thought the lens of Indian interest, this equal-equal equimanny between Russia and US will disappear. And from my little understanding of Panchtantra, Russian action is righteous. It is another matter that it is advantageous for India to see a bipolar/multipolar world structure so that India can ascend to its rightful place. Unipolar world is inherently temporal, and not worth betting in its future.

Philip-saar: Thanks for being so clear-headed and eloquent in speaking of bigger game and what matters for India.

Baljeet · Post by **Baljeet** » 12 Aug 2008 22:11

Vick
This will be my last response to you, we can talk off line after this. It is not about you and me, its about everyone having a dialogue. As far as Grozy is concerned I don't have any sympathy toward them. Chechens got what they deserved for killing innocent children in Beslan. I am glad Russians did what they have to do, to avenge the death of innocence.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 12 Aug 2008 22:13

Vick,

You are seeing it completely wrong.

What is world today? A place where US gets most of its decisions upheld. A place where US tries to place caps on others growth potential. How can India, i.e. say number 7 or 8 on list, itself be on the global table. Only when the number 2s and 3s challenge 1.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 12 Aug 2008 22:16

Vick wrote:So N, it's ok to violate sovreignty in order to stop genocide? If the US (or any power) were to be inclinded, it would be ok to overrun Sudan and give Darfur its independence and make Sudan a vassal of the conquering power? I can only imagine the gnashing of teeth and lamentations if the US were to do something like that.

Nepotism, willfull shelling of civilian targets, ethnic cleansing, etc. these justify outside force and regime change. Have you heard of a little place called Grozny? Should Putin be strung up? Are Russians exempted from murder charges?

How much have you seen on Pravda and RuTV regarding the destruction of Grozny and forced rehabilation of its people? You'd be lucky to even see Kasparov or any other Russian opposition leaders on RuTV, let alone anything that goes against the Putin line. Why expect impartiality only from BBC, CNN, etc. Why not also from others? Oh wait, because we're heavily anglo-ized and only intake from the anglo-sphere, so the anglo-sphere becomes the source and the sink for the hate.

Why are you giving a free pass to US and its actions, but not to Ru. Should Bush be hung up for invading a sovereign country, iraq for NO reason? I am still able to see Kasparov, but not Saddam mind you. Ru doesnt give advices to us like these BBC, CNN does.

Anglocized or not, strategically speakin we have no reason to hate Ru, but the biggest supporters of our western and eastern neighbors, hell yeah.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 12 Aug 2008 22:19

Israel backs Georgia in Caspian Oil Pipeline Battle with Russia

...DEBKAfile discloses Israel’s interest in the conflict from its exclusive military sources:

Jerusalem owns a strong interest in Caspian oil and gas pipelines reach the Turkish terminal port of Ceyhan, rather than the Russian network. Intense negotiations are afoot between Israel Turkey, Georgia, Turkmenistan and Azarbaijan for pipelines to reach Turkey and thence to Israel’s oil terminal at Ashkelon and on to its Red Sea port of Eilat. From there, supertankers can carry the gas and oil to the Far East through the Indian Ocean.

Aware of Moscow’s sensitivity on the oil question, Israel offered Russia a stake in the project but was rejected.

Last year, the Georgian president commissioned from private Israeli security firms several hundred military advisers, estimated at up to 1,000, to train the Georgian armed forces in commando, air, sea, armored and artillery combat tactics. They also offer instruction on military intelligence and security for the central regime. Tbilisi also purchased weapons, intelligence and electronic warfare systems from Israel.

These advisers were undoubtedly deeply involved in the Georgian army’s preparations to conquer the South Ossetian capital Friday.

In recent weeks, Moscow has repeatedly demanded that Jerusalem halt its military assistance to Georgia, finally threatening a crisis in bilateral relations. Israel responded by saying that the only assistance rendered Tbilisi was “defensive.”

This has not gone down well in the Kremlin. Therefore, as the military crisis intensifies in South Ossetia, Moscow may be expected to punish Israel for its intervention.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 12 Aug 2008 22:23

So N, it's ok to violate sovreignty in order to stop genocide?

Absolutely! What's the question there again? The fact that someone might gnash their teeth or scratch their musharraf is no reason to stand by when genocide is being committed, and you have the resources to stop it. In fact it is criminal not to intervene.

The UN Charter recognizes the sovereignty of nations, but also abhors genocide, and abhors the use of military force against unarmed civilians. Human conscience, however, leave no choice but to intervene if you have any hope of succeeding, and even if not.

I assume u weren't around reading the newspapers in 1969-71? This lesson would be burned in your mind otherwise, Vick. Many of us would not have thought twice about facing death if we could get at the Pakis who were committing genocide in East Pakistan, and we had no idea of the religion of the victims. We just wanted to stop the horrors being committed.

The ex-leaders of the "Free World" now go around bleating about "consciences" (see Slick Willy for example) because they did not intervene in Rwanda.

Vick · Post by **Vick** » 12 Aug 2008 22:25

ravi_ku wrote:Vick,

You are seeing it completely wrong.

What is world today? A place where US gets most of its decisions upheld. A place where US tries to place caps on others growth potential. How can India, i.e. say number 7 or 8 on list, itself be on the global table. Only when the number 2s and 3s challenge 1.

India can't even effectively deal with number 127 on the list... Never mind the Lanka, asked to show some sort of leadership in the Lanka conflict, India gave its leadership up to Finland or Norway. It's like the Indian hockey team dreaming of winning the bronze medal in this year's olympics... oh yeah... the qualifiers come first.

Vick · Post by **Vick** » 12 Aug 2008 22:32

N, there you have it. I guess, the US invaded Iraq and is in the process of putting it in its sphere of influence to stop the injustices that the Kurds were enduring. But cleverly, the US couched its actions differently so as not make the UN look inept as the UN (and the Hague) is the body that has the right to censure countries and leaders for crimes against humanity.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 12 Aug 2008 22:40

Back from lunch.

So, have we decided if we should be gleeful or not?

Raju · Post by **Raju** » 12 Aug 2008 22:44

we need to be sombre, as the situation is comparable to Iraq.

Shivani · Post by **Shivani** » 12 Aug 2008 22:47

War in South Ossetia.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 12 Aug 2008 22:59

Looks like they read the entire Paki playbook... ICJ time...

Georgia sues Russia for alleged ethnic cleansing

The Georgian security council says it has filed a lawsuit in the International Court of Justice for alleged ethnic cleansing.

negi · Post by **negi** » 12 Aug 2008 23:00

Vick wrote:Moral of the story:
Russia beating up on a weak country, good.
US beating up on a weak country, bad.

Million dollar question .. what business/right does US have to attack IRAQ when the latter a country hundreds of thousands of miles away in Asia attacks its neighboring state ?
Okay in the first war there is atleast a scope of building a case against IRAQ, but what was the Khujli which lead to GW-II ? To me US attack on IRAQ is in no way different from Pakistan's or Chinese Incursions on India , And btw I am still looking for those imaginary WMD/Biological weapons which were cited as a global threat.

Georgia's case is albit different wherein the latter chose to launch a surprise attack to regain control of South Ossetia, which has had de facto independence since the end of a civil war in 1992. And all this when even RU has more or less respected the agreement and there exists peacekeeping force constituting both RU and Georgia established to prevent such escalation.

Russia has every reason to be concerned and react to a violent situation near its borders , I fail to see any analogy between America's attack on Iraq or even Bosnia vis a vis the present condition in Georgia.

Now if you are advocating RU to follow our example and show restraint then completly agree with you.

Vick · Post by **Vick** » 12 Aug 2008 23:11

Distances involved doesn't necessarily have to have a bearing on what is and isn't national interest.

The US invaded Iraq to protect the pro-Western Kurdish minority and to stop Iraqi SAMs from taking pot shots at US peace enforcement planes

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 12 Aug 2008 23:47

Vick wrote:Distances involved doesn't necessarily have to have a bearing on what is and isn't national interest.

Absolutely correct. And there are those who argue that Indian nuclear missile based credible deterrence need not extend beyond 5000Km, and in no way reach 12,000+ km.

Vick wrote:The US invaded Iraq to protect the pro-Western Kurdish minority and to stop Iraqi SAMs from taking pot shots at US peace enforcement planes

Remind me again the main reason(s) US Government gave to US Congress and also to UN on the need for "Regime Change by force/war" in Iraq? I hope you see the disconnect.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 12 Aug 2008 23:49

Vick wrote:Distances involved doesn't necessarily have to have a bearing on what is and isn't national interest.

The US invaded Iraq to protect the pro-Western Kurdish minority and to stop Iraqi SAMs from taking pot shots at US peace enforcement planes

The same pro-western kurdish minority was allowed to be thrashed by Turkey!!!

US peace enforcement planes??give me another one. How many planes were brought down and you are talking about planes in a sovereign iraqi territory. Moral of the story from you: western attack far far away from home when nobody was attacked - good good
russian attack near its borders when georgia actually attacked ossatia - bad bad.

If you cant see the logic/moral of what you said, good luck to you. Nobody is saying Ru is doodh ke dhule, recognise that.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 12 Aug 2008 23:57

Russia wants to redraw map of Europe in peace terms with Georgia

"You know, lunatics' difference from other people is that when they smell blood it is very difficult to stop them. So you have to use surgery," President Medvedev said.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 13 Aug 2008 00:00

Mikheil Saakashvili, the man who lost it all

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 13 Aug 2008 00:04

The redraw map of Europe article content has nothing about the title. Asking for buffer zone around the breakaway provinces hardly amonts to redrawing maps.

Vick · Post by **Vick** » 13 Aug 2008 00:09

Arun_S wrote:Absolutely correct. And there are those who argue that Indian nuclear missile based credible deterrence need not extend beyond 5000Km, and in no way reach 12,000+ km.

And Indian leadership would be every bit of what you think them to be if they agree to cap the range.

Arun_S wrote:Remind me again the main reason(s) US Government gave to US Congress and also to UN on the need for "Regime Change by force/war" in Iraq? I hope you see the disconnect.

Well, the US tried it's level best to couch its arguments for war within some reasonableness. As opposed to "we got prodded and got pissed off and want to teach a lesson".

Why was there so much angst at Kosovo being declared independent? Because people on the forum were against setting a precedent for certain other parts of the world. Now, Russia is doing the same as NATO did, and people are back slapping each other oblivious to the fact that Kosovo might have set the precedent but Russia is making it a trend.

In all this, remember that Iraq still has its territorial integrity from before 1991. Whereas Russia wants to carve up Georgian territory.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 13 Aug 2008 00:15

Vick:

N, there you have it. I guess, the US invaded Iraq and is in the process of putting it in its sphere of influence to stop the injustices that the Kurds were enduring. But cleverly, the US couched its actions differently so as not make the UN look inept as the UN (and the Hague) is the body that has the right to censure countries and leaders for crimes against humanity.

Vick, I thought you had some serious point. Now I don't know about you, but I am sure glad that the Russians didn't just roll around on the floor laughing and waiting for the UN to exercise it's right to stop genocide in South Ossetia. Some 30000 people are alive today who would be dead already otherwise.

I am not sure what point you are trying to make, or whether you are doing a Saakashvili-type Victory Dance with that

reaction. I am very happy that you feel so happy.

Also, the US never did anything meaningful to protect the Kurds. Not when the Kurds were being massacred in the 1980s, and not even after the 1991 war when Saddam went back to murdering the Kurds. OK, so they set up a "no-fly zone" but Saddam used tanks, and the flies were still buzzing around the dead bodies in Kurdistan.

The US went to war again in 2003 for spurious and blatantly false reasons, however beautifully Colin Powell articulated the lies with satellite photos from 1989-90 in the UN.

I am glad you think Iraq has "territorial integrity" today, though over 1.8 million of its citizens including nearly a miillion children have met early deaths due to violence or malnutrition. But Halliburton and Blackwater stocks are doing great, thank you!

ShyamSP · Post by **ShyamSP** » 13 Aug 2008 00:16

Good thing about this attack of Russia on Georgia is that International institutions lost relevance.
NATO as security bogeyman of the west is also shown to be toothless tiger.

This is good for India as it doesn't have strong position in those Intl institutions. In any newly
constructed institutions India can aspire to have stronger position as India is at a stronger
negotiating position than before.

Hope to see some Patel guy buying UN building in NY and converting into Motel Manhattan.

Vick · Post by **Vick** » 13 Aug 2008 00:23

narayanan wrote:Also, the US never did anything meaningful to protect the Kurds. Not when the Kurds were being massacred in the 1980s, and not even after the 1991 war when Saddam went back to murdering the Kurds. OK, so they set up a "no-fly zone" but Saddam used tanks, and the flies were still buzzing around the dead bodies in Kurdistan.

So, what's your point? Russia stopping the killing of Ossetians is good but US invasion of Iraq and stopping the Kurdish genocide is bad?

narayanan wrote:The US went to war again in 2003 for spurious and blatantly false reasons, however beautifully Colin Powell articulated the lies with satellite photos from 1989-90 in the UN.

Genocide of the Kurds stopped, didn't it?

narayanan wrote:I am glad you think Iraq has "territorial integrity" today, though over 1.8 million of its citizens including nearly a miillion children have met early deaths due to violence or malnutrition. But Halliburton and Blackwater stocks are doing great, thank you!

Isn't that a bit like saying sure, Russia might have save the lives of Ossetians but what about the Georgians it killed, including Georgian children?

Vick · Post by **Vick** » 13 Aug 2008 00:28

ShyamSP wrote:Good thing about this attack of Russia on Georgia is that International institutions lost relevance.
NATO as security bogeyman of the west is also shown to be toothless tiger.

This is good for India as it doesn't have strong position in those Intl institutions. In any newly
constructed institutions India can aspire to have stronger position as India is at a stronger
negotiating position than before.

Hope to see some Patel guy buying UN building in NY and converting into Motel Manhattan.

Can't the exact same thing be said about US invasion of Iraq where the UN was shown to have little to relevance? Actually, part of the neocon agenda is to weaken the UN's capability and credibility. Interesting, no?

satya · Post by **satya** » 13 Aug 2008 00:52

Another battle in the 1,000 year Russia-Georgia grudge match

The Russian tank columns rumbling into Georgia reveal the anger of a tiger finally swatting the mouse that has teased it for years. South Ossetia may seem as distant, trivial and complicated as the 19th-century Schleswig-Holstein question but Russia's fury is about much more than the Ossetians. The Caucasus matters greatly to the Russians for all sorts of reasons, none greater than the fact that it now also matters to us.

The troubles in Georgia are not the equivalent of an assassinated archduke in Sarajevo. But historians may well point to this little war, beside the spectacular Olympic launch of resurgent China, as the start of the twilight of America's sole world hegemony. If the new Great Game is for the oil of the Caucasus and Central Asia, the West may be in the process of losing it.
I've been visiting Georgia since the fall of the Soviet Empire in 1991. I've known all three Georgian presidents since independence, and witnessed the wars and revolutions of the Caucasian tinderbox. In 1991 the chief of the Georgian partisans in the first Ossetian war, a dentist turned warlord, drove me up to villages around Tskhinvali, highlands of lusciously green beauty, where a vicious war between Georgian and Ossetian farmers was being waged with the ferocity of intimate neighbours, using comically armoured tractors instead of tanks.

My Georgian hosts leant their guns against a tree and took me to an open-air feast at a table stacked with delicacies in honour of a local boy killed that day. During the long drunken banquet I asked where the boy was buried. “He hasn't been buried,” replied my host, “he's under your feet.” Paling, I looked and there he lay, stretched out under the table, cradled with bouquets of flowers. To understand this week's events, we must travel back a thousand years: long before Russia existed, Georgia was a Christian-warrior kingdom. The Caucasus was the natural borderland of the three great empires of the Near East: the battlefield between Orthodox Russia, the Islamic Ottomans and Persians. In 1783 the embattled King Eralke II was forced to claim the protection of Prince Potemkin, Catherine the Great's partner-in-power. Between 1801 and 1810 Russia swallowed the last Georgian principalities. In 1918 Georgia enjoyed independence for three years before Stalin seized it back for Moscow.
No one understood its ethnic complexity and strategic significance like Stalin, that Georgian romantic turned Russian imperialist, who had been born in Gori, the town that has been overrun by Russian forces and where a marble temple now stands over the hut where he was born. The Ossetians who straddled the border had early sought Russian alliance, earning Georgian disdain. Hence Stalin was accused by his enemies of being an Ossetian: his father was of Ossetian descent, though long since Georgianised. Stalin drew the borders of the Soviet republics to ensure Georgia contained autonomous ethnic entities, South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Adzharia, through which Moscow could keep Georgia in order.

When that proud, cocky bantam, Georgia, became independent in 1991, the Russian double-headed eagle was humiliated. Ever since, Russian interference and skulduggery has bedevilled Georgia. Russia encouraged southern Ossetia to establish a statelet within Georgia, whose inept, insane first President, Zviad Gamsakhurdia, had inflamed ethnic tensions. As Ossetians fought Georgians who themselves rebelled against Gamsakhurdia, I sat in his office: he was a Shakespearean scholar and quoted King Lear to me.

Gamsakhurdia was either murdered or committed suicide. In 1993, his successor Eduard Shevardnadze, the former Soviet Foreign Minister and Politburo member, lost Abkhazia in another bloody Russian-orchestrated war. But Shevardnadze won the peace. Georgia, which had longed to be part of Europe, embraced Western democracy and US friendship. Yet Shevardnadze recognised the limits of Georgian defiance, once telling me as we flew in 1993 in his plane to make peace with the Kremlin: “The destiny of Russia is reflected in the Caucasus like the rays of the sun are reflected in a drop of water.”
Old, autocratic Shevardnadze was toppled in the Rose Revolution of 2003 by an energetic and decent if impulsive US-educated lawyer, Mikhail Saakashvili, who hoped to escape Moscow for ever by joining the EU and Nato - as did Russia's huge neighbour, Ukraine. This prospect of encirclement by triumphant America infuriated Russia. Imagine if newly independent Wales cockily joined the Warsaw Pact.
Russia is no longer the spineless giant of the Nineties: Vladimir Putin's musclebound, oil-fuelled authoritarian regime has aggressively reinvigorated Russia. He had already shown his ruthless determination to master the Caucasus by crushing Chechnya. Nato in Georgia would have made that meaningless. The Kremlin has used its clients, Abkhazia and Ossetia, as Trojan Horses to ruin Tbilisi's independence - recently raising the tension by offering Russian passports to all Ossetians and testing Georgian resolve with cross-border skirmishing: the trap of a practised imperial power.

Georgia is not guiltless: most Georgians I know care little about Ossetia even though it is part of sovereign Georgia. But in order to join Nato, President Saakashvili wanted to settle Georgia's instability by reclaiming Ossetia and Abkhazia. By seizing Tskhinvali, he took one hell of a gamble that Russia wouldn't intervene. Georgia is paying a high price for this. To finish this vicious circle, Russian attacks show how badly Georgia needs EU/Nato protection, yet Georgia will never get it while embroiled in fighting.
The retaking of Ossetia is a minor part of the Russian campaign. More significant is the attack on Georgia proper, which reasserts Russia's hegemony over the Caucasus, assuages the humiliations of the past 20 years, subverts Georgian democracy - and defies and defangs American superpowerdom. The swaggering arrival of Vladimir Putin, now the Prime Minister, across the border, macho in his tight jeans and white leather jacket, shows he, not President Medvedev, remains Russia's paramount leader.

This war is really a celebration of ferocious force in the realm of international power, a dangerous precedent. The West must protest with unified resolve; Russia both despises Western hypocrisy and craves Western approval. Georgian democracy and sovereignty matter. So do our oil supplies: the West built a pipeline to bring oil from Azerbaijan and Central Asian across Georgia to Turkey, free of Russian interference.

Russia's clumsy ferocity could ignite a Caucasian tinderbox that even Moscow cannot extinguish. But faced with Western outrage, the Kremlin might toss Stalin's words back at President Bush: “How many divisions has the Pope?” None: Washington and London are not sending the 101st Airborne or the SAS.
Russia, which appears to be pushing its tanks into Georgia to overthrow its democratically elected president, has demonstrated gleefully the limits of US power and Moscow's historic destiny as regional hegemon and restored 21st-century superpower. The Empire has struck back and shaken the order of the world.
Simon Sebag Montefiore is the author of Young Stalin. His latest book is a novel, Sashenka