Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Russia-Georgia Conflict A Two-Sided Descent Into Full-Scale War

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
PatSeg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-17-08 01:43 PM
Original message
Russia-Georgia Conflict A Two-Sided Descent Into Full-Scale War
Source: Washington Post

By Peter Finn
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, August 17, 2008; Page A01

TSKHINVALI, Georgia, Aug. 16 -- Nine days ago, late in the afternoon of Aug. 7, Georgian tanks, artillery and infantry began moving out of bases in Georgia and toward South Ossetia, a zone long held by separatists who are backed by Moscow.

About 800 troops from Georgia's 4th Battalion left a base in Tbilisi, the Georgian capital, that Thursday afternoon, according to Georgian Defense Minister Davit Kezerashvili. Later that day, units armed with the BM-21 Grad, a multiple rocket system whose World War II version was known as Stalin's Rain, moved out of their base in Gori, about 40 miles away.

As the Georgian units approached the contested zone from the south, Russian army forces were massed just to its north, separated from it only by the 4,000-yard-long Roki Tunnel through the Caucasus Mountains. The Russian units were receiving intelligence reports about the Georgian movement. About 8 p.m., Russian military aircraft took off and skirted Georgian airspace, staying just outside it, according to Kezerashvili.

For days, separatists and Georgian troops had skirmished along the border, but this movement of armor was a major new development.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/16/AR2008081600502.html?wpisrc=newsletter&sid=ST2008081700211&s_pos=



I found this a more balanced and informative account of what's going on in Georgia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
whistle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-17-08 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
1. So much for the cease-fire agreement signed by both yesterday
...Is Condi Rice the new Neville Chamberlain?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frankieT Donating Member (375 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-17-08 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
2. It's a surprise ! WP repeated for 10 days the georgian propaganda
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-18-08 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #2
11. NPR is still reporting that any news to the contrary is Russian propoganda
Baghdad Annie Garrells is on her high horse about how the use of obsolete weapons cost lives.

If Baghdad Annie had paid attention, she would have noted that modern weapons cost lives as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trthnd4jstc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-17-08 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
3. The Washington Post often gets it right. n.t.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coalition_unwilling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-17-08 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. Like, for example, the run-up to Iraq-Nam (The Sequel)? -n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trthnd4jstc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-18-08 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. well, not then. n.t.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-17-08 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
4. "a zone long held by separatists"....
Edited on Sun Aug-17-08 03:29 PM by bhikkhu
according to wikipedia, Ossetians settled that region of the caucasus after fleeing from the Mongol expansions of the 13th and 14th centuries. Apparently they are still "separatists" who should rightly submit ownership of the land and their allegiance to their neighboring Georgians...How long do you have to live someplace and maintain self-government before you are no longer a "separatist" in your own home?

In the USSR they were granted local autonomy in 1921, after 120 years of sporadic fighting against their supposed Georgian overlords within the Russian empire. When the USSR broke up, the Ossetians quickly and successfully resisted Georgian attempts to assert control....a bit of history and things are less surprising, and talk of Georgia's "territorial integrity" is dangerously absurd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Ossetia


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Art_from_Ark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-19-08 02:24 AM
Response to Reply #4
13. I wonder how much "local autonomy" South Ossetia really had
Edited on Tue Aug-19-08 02:38 AM by Art_from_Ark
during the Soviet era, especially considering that it was "granted" just one year before Stalin, who was from Georgia, took over. Did Stalin promise Georgia it could have South Ossetia? There is much more to this story.

At any rate, Wikipedia articles are not an authoritative source on political matters, given that anyone can edit articles.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Satyagrahi Donating Member (254 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-17-08 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
5. There is evidence that the timeline given here is not true:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghost Dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-17-08 05:04 PM
Response to Original message
6. Fine, and informative. But this is not LBN this is Editorial/Article, surely. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PatSeg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-17-08 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Perhaps it is
but it was under World News at the Washington Post. I think it is a little of each.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-18-08 12:10 AM
Response to Original message
9. ossetia is georgian terrioritory.
Edited on Mon Aug-18-08 12:12 AM by xchrom
you can wish it wasn't but that doesn't make it so.

rather i think it is more accurate that ossetian separatists were aacting in accord with moscow to bring the result we now have.

unpopular here i realize.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hogwyld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-18-08 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Not anymore it isn't
Georgia lost all claim to those lands by starting it's genocidal war. The Georgians lost all rights and claims to these lands long ago with their ethnic purging. Let them have their independence, or if they wish, go back to being part of Russia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-19-08 02:49 AM
Response to Original message
14. "We are lucky that the 'bear' didn't eat the 'rabbit'".
The Georgia War and the Century of “Real Power”
Anthony H. Cordesman
August 18, 2008

It is easy to view the war in Georgia in Cold War or American ideological terms, just as it is easy to fall into the trap of seeing the world in terms of slogans like “soft power” or “smart power.” In practical terms, however, the fighting in Georgia is not a warning about some new drift into great power confrontation or a new Cold War. It is a reminder that the world is not shaped by democratic values, international law, good intentions, globalism, rational bargains, or the search for dialogue. All of these elements do play an important role, but classic power politics are just as real as ever. Nation states still have the guns and missiles. More powerful states will bend or break the rules when they feel it is in their interest to do so and when there is no opposing power bloc that can pose a convincing threat.

As we consider the foreign and defense policies that the next Administration should follow, it is important to note that pragmatism based on realpolitik is far more likely to serve our interests, those of our friends and allies, and the world, than sustaining a neoconservative American morality play—or replacing it with a neoliberal version. The conflict in Georgia should be as much a reminder of the dangers of overreaching American power and influence as a reminder that Russia, China and many other powers do not share our values and goals.

Russia and China may not be peer powers, but they are becoming increasingly strong regional powers and they will act on their perceptions of their interests. For the foreseeable future, they will do so on the basis of goals and values that differ from ours. They may or may not evolve towards US or “Western” goals and values, but this is more likely to be a matter of decades than years. In the interim, there is no reason for them to be enemies, and they may often be partners, but they will also be competitors and act with a degree of ruthlessness that we will sometimes be able to contain and other times have to accept.

This means we cannot afford to demonize any nation, particularly a major regional power. The sequence of events in Georgia is still unclear, and some reports indicate that the US did counsel restraint on Georgia and did make attempts to keep it from provoking Russia. There are, however, an equal number of indicators that we forgot that Russia has its own interests and they are not ours, and that an expanding US presence in its near abroad, along with the expansion of NATO and the EC, would be seen as a threat.

We pushed too far on the periphery of a re-emergent Russia, and we pushed at least a country, not just a bridge too far. In the process, we almost certainly played an inadvertent role in convincing a “rabbit” that it could provoke a “bear.” If anything, we are lucky that the “bear” did not eat the “rabbit.”

Accordingly, if there is any lesson that can be drawn from the fighting in Georgia, it is a lesson that should have been clear long ago. America’s so-called status as a superpower does not prevent us from living in a multipolar world in which America’s “real power” is sometimes challenged by Russia and China, and is at other times ignored because they see other strategic interests as more important....cont'd


http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/080817_cordesman_georgia.pdf


Anthony H. Cordesman holds the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC