The war between Georgia and Russia

[administrator]

The shooting down of Georgian drone and the escalation of tension in the South Caucasus
06.05.2008 DespiteBorders
Predominantly three geopolitical processes affect the current development of the situation in breakaway republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia:
1) The coming together of Georgia and NATO in the period after the so-called Rose Revolution in 2003, which has been going through a period of great expectations in connection with Georgian integration into North-Atlantic structures nowadays;
2) Growing distance between the geopolitical positions of the US and the RF in the aftermath of diverse factors; one of them is the planned extension of US anti-missile shield to the regions of Central and Eastern Europe;
3) Global disregard for the principle of territorial integrity of states caused by the recognition of the unilaterally declared independence of the Serbian province of Kosovo by some countries of the international community.
At the beginning of March 2008, the RF lifted business and economic sanctions imposed on Abkhazia in 1996 in response to the unilateral declaration of Kosovo's independence. In the second half of March 2008, the Russian State Duma adopted unanimously a resolution suggesting to the President and the Government to weigh up the advantages of the recognition of the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. In the middle of April 2008, President Putin issued a series of provisions charging the Government with the development of measure mechanisms leading to the establishment of a universal protection of rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of Russian citizens living in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The Government along with Russian regions was obliged to cooperate with the representatives of factual power in breakaway republics in the realisation of measures aimed at the development of business, social and research area as well as the field of information, culture and education.
http://www.despiteborders.com/index.php?subaction=showfull&id=1210068319&archive=&start_from=&ucat=37,41&

[indigo]

Georgia starts storming South Ossetian capital despite ceasefire
Regnum, 8.8.2008
Firing resumed in the Georgian-Ossetian conflict zone. Georgian troops one-sidedly breached the ceasefire declared by both sides several hours ago. Approximately at 11:30 p.m. Moscow time fire was opened from heavy artillery from the side of the Georgian villages of Ergneti, Nikozi against the city of Tskhinval, the Defense Ministry of South Ossetia announced on Thursday. A REGNUM correspondent reports that Georgian troops have started storming the city. To remind, several hours ago, the Georgian and the Ossetian side agreed on a ceasefire till tomorrow talks, as on Friday an emergent meeting of the Georgian State Secretary for Reintegration Temur Yakobashvili and Ossetian Deputy Prime Minister Boris Chochiyev.
http://regnum.ru/english/1037974.html

[indigo]

Humanitarian intervention: the American model
RIA Novosti 11.08.2008
Sending armed forces into the territory of a sovereign state without the UN's authorization, so-called "humanitarian intervention," is an American invention. Its date of birth is thought to be 1999, Yugoslavia. But that is not quite so. What happened in 1999 was the launching of the term, an attempt to make it part of international practice. But in reality much of the experience of such military actions dates further back. Among the numerous wars and military actions undertaken by the U.S. after the adoption of the UN Charter, one should pay attention to the operations in Grenada and Panama, and look at the attempted intervention in Somalia. The experience acquired then came in handy in Yugoslavia and Iraq. Grenada, 1983. The order to launch a preemptive military operation against the Caribbean island state of Grenada was given by U.S. President Ronald Reagan, although formally the decision to use military force was taken by the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States. The pretext for the military operation was "the taking of American students as hostages." Later it turned out that Grenada authorities had simply decided to provide the students with guards because shortly before armed clashes had broken out in Grenada and the leader of the local Marxists who had just come to power had been murdered by his associates, creating tensions in the country. Reagan declared that a Cuban-Soviet invasion of Grenada was imminent and that weapons were being stockpiled there that would be used by international terrorists. As it turned out, the arms dumps in Grenada were filled with old Soviet weapons and no new consignments had arrived. Next the U.S. declared that there were 1,200 Cuban commandos on the island. Later it turned out that there were no more than 200 Cubans, a third of whom were civilians. After the capture of the island by American troops, many civilian casualties at the hands of the American troops were recorded. Panama, 1989. The decision on the armed invasion and the overthrow of the Panamanian government was taken by George Bush Sr. The declared reason was the involvement of Panama and its head, General Manuel Antonio Noriega, in drug-trafficking (above all, supplies to the U.S.) and the fact that in the 1980s the city of Panama had become a money-laundering center. The American invasion of Panama was marked by two features. The first was an atypical scale of American military atrocities. Reports spoke not only about casualties due to air raids, but of U.S. soldiers opening up machine-gun fire on street crowds and of American vehicles crushing and firing on cars with people. As a result of this action, a whole quarter in Panama, partly consisting of wooden buildings dating back to the 1900s, was gutted by fire. For a week thereafter the Americans left the city at the mercy of the criminals they had released from jails. Almost all the supermarkets, warehouses and businesses were looted. The country suffered damage to the tune of $2 billion. It was in Panama that a group of hand-picked journalists and cameramen was first created and briefed and sent to similarly hand-picked places just before the military action was launched. Most of these media people were at American war bases. The American command did not allow undesirables into the combat zone. The technology of briefings, press conferences, meetings with prominent politicians, businessmen and other local VIPs was worked out. Correspondents of foreign newspapers and TV companies who did not belong to the news team were caught and attempts were made to murder some of them. All the radio and TV stations were instantly captured and then used to disseminate American propaganda. The same scenario has been acted out repeatedly, notably in Yugoslavia in 1999 and in Iraq in 2003, except that news coverage was organized well in advance and was much more professional. Somalia, 1993. That operation, unlike the previous ones, had UN sanction, and can be described as a humanitarian intervention. The soldiers of the U.S. and some other countries were in Somalia as peace-keepers to secure the delivery of the humanitarian care. The pretext for that operation was the murder of four U.S. military police by the militants of the Somali rebel General Aidid in 1992-1993. Washington sent a Delta Force unit to Somalia to arrest or liquidate Aidid. In the meantime an American helicopter was shot down, three Americans died, and the crowd mutilated their bodies and dragged them through the streets. Finally, on October 3-4 Aidid's headquarters in a city neighborhood was raided with disastrous results. Eighteen Americans died in Mogadishu and it was decided to withdraw the American contingent from the country. It was one of the darkest pages in American military history. NATO's air war against Yugoslavia in March-April 1991 was launched under the pretext of the need to prevent a humanitarian disaster, namely, the plight of refugees and also ethnic cleansing in Kosovo (NATO spoke exclusively about the plight of Albanians ignoring similar problems of the Serbian population). It was in 1999 that the thesis on the right of the alliance to launch humanitarian interventions all over the world without UN security sanctions was introduced in the NATO strategy. The U.S. National Security Strategy circa 2002 stipulates the right to launch preemptive strikes as part of the fight against international terror. In 2005 the strategy was enlarged by the provision that victory in the war against terror can only be achieved if there is a change of regime in some countries. Examples cited included Iran, Syria, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Belarus. The talk at the U.S. Congress at the time was about "the UN not helping peoples but governments," about "the problems usually arising in the countries where the governments are in conflict with their own people." Hence, effective humanitarian assistance presupposes the breach of state sovereignty. The best known and the largest military action taken without UN sanctions was, of course, the war waged by the U.S. and Britain against Saddam Hussein's regime in March-April 2003. A special category among such interventions is an intervention that does not involve land forces but relies primarily on air raids. In all these cases the UN did not authorize the actions. They include the bombings of North Vietnam in the 1960s and Cambodia in the 1970s (let it be recalled that U.S. troops did not engage in any other military actions in North Vietnam), Ronald Reagan's decision to bomb Libyan cities in 1983 and many others.
http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20080811/115951466.html

[Marat]

[quote="administrator"]The shooting down of Georgian drone and the escalation of tension in the South Caucasus

1) Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili in Rose Revolution promised that he will reintegrate of country and country will become a NATO and EU memeber. The reintegration of country was condition for integration with European union and NATO. Mikhail Saakashvili had problems with political oposition in last year. In this time he broke up demonstrations and he had to left presidency. He was criticised by oposition and the people that he could not fulfill Rose revolution promises. Ather that he was "again elected by georgian people". In December 2008 summit NATO will take place. He decided to reintegrate country with the use of military. He would like to be invitated to NATO. At fist South Osetia - it was easy task - because capital of South Osetia - Tskhinval is situated nearby Southosetian and Georgian boundary. There was found map of georgian aggression in Republic of Abkhaziya. It is very interesting that Saakashvilli declared amnesty for southosetian and abkhaziyan presidents and authorities. I have read oppinion of expert who claim that Georgia wanted to try russian willingness to protect own citizens who live there.

2) According to Southosetian President Mr. Eduard Kokoyty international comunity is guilty for this situation, because as he said he had warned to this situation and nobody had took him seriously. Is according to you international cominity guilty? Why did it force Georgia to reintegrate the country as condition of NATO joining? Perhaps it would be better if Georgia quitclaimed to breakaway republics and started to integration with EU and NATO. Similar tendency we can see in Moldova in Pridnestrovie case.

3) Georgia breached Dagomish Treaties by invasion to South Osetia.

P.S.: Russia is blamed that it is breaching cease-fire however there was no settled any date of withdrawal from country. It situation is result of weak stance of European Union countries (mainly France) to Russian Federation as supplier of energy. They can withdraw today, tomorow, in week, in 20 years...

[Marat]

Замглавы Генштаба РФ Анатолий Ноговицын ответил отказом на требование США вернуть Грузии захваченное оружие, в том числе американского производства.

Дмитрий Ноговицын, заместитель начальника Генштаба вооруженных сих РФ: «Никуда мы трофеи раздавать не собираемся. Мы посмотрим, что это за трофеи и почему это грузинская сторона их бросила, она их бросила. В основном оружие утилизируем, потому что в России оно — в достаточном количестве, честно говоря, мы не нуждаемся. Просто собирать все, что стреляет, — это не наш стиль. У нас все достаточно серьезно. Мы не собираемся автомат Калашникова менять на эту винтовку».

По словам Ноговицына, два российских самолета в зоне конфликта были сбиты украинскими комплексами ПВО Бук-М1. Всего в ходе боевых действий Россия потеряла четыре машины: один дальний бомбардировщик Ту-22 и три штурмовика Су-25.

Также сегодня был обнародован полный список потерь российской армии в зоне грузино-югоосетинского конфликта. Согласно этим сведениям, 64 человека погибли, 323 — ранены, пропавших без вести нет.

http://news.ntv.ru/138572/

Video: http://217.106.225.7/news/20080820/TV_C ... OV_T68.mp4

Russians "will lend" NATO technology....