Posted by Damozel | Here’s The New York Times:
Even as Russia pledged to begin withdrawing its forces from neighboring Georgia on Monday, American officials said the Russian military had been moving launchers for short-range ballistic missiles into South Ossetia, a step that appeared intended to tighten its hold on the breakaway territory.
The Russian military deployed several SS-21 missile launchers and supply vehicles to South Ossetia on Friday, according to American officials familiar with intelligence reports. From the new launching positions north of Tskhinvali, the South Ossetian capital, the missiles can reach much of Georgia, including Tbilisi, the capital…. (NYT)
The Russian military deployed several SS-21 missile launchers and supply vehicles to South Ossetia on Friday, according to American officials familiar with intelligence reports. From the new launching positions north of Tskhinvali, the South Ossetian capital, the missiles can reach much of Georgia, including Tbilisi, the capital…. (NYT)
As predicted:
Such moves appear to buttress assertions last week by Russia’s foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, that South Ossetia and Abkhazia are to be separated from Georgia. (NYT)
I’m guessing their next move will be to recognize officially the independence of the two separatist enclaves. In fact, they’ve more or less made their position clear already (TMV).
Earlier this week, Russia told Georgia to forget its territorial sovereignty with respect to the separatist enclaves and “drove home the message by meeting with the separatist leaders of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. (The Independent)
Clifford Levy at The New York Times reported on the televised meeting with the Georgians:
Russia’s president, Dmitri A. Medvedev…pledged that Russia would provide whatever they needed to secede lawfully from Georgia.
The Russian foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, said separately in a radio interview that Georgia “can forget about” its territorial integrity because the Georgian government under President Mikheil Saakashvili had committed so many atrocities that the two breakaway regions could never live under Georgian rule. (NYT; emphasis added)
Now BBC News says:
Announcing a “pull-back” from Georgia proper into South Ossetia, a Russian general made clear he did not regard the province as Georgian territory.
At The Huffington Post, Joe Lauria wonders if McCain—who, as we all know, burbled away about talking on the phone every day to his dear friend Mikheil Saakashvili and sent envoys over to Georgia—helped to enable this whole crisis. He’s taking stick for it from the right, but in light of McCain’s own boasts, it’s not an unreasonable question. If it’s discovered that he did, he should be well and truly disqualified from foreign policy vauntings ever again. No, scratch that. In fact, he should already be well and truly disqualified from foreign policy experience vauntings ever again.
And if you’re not anxious enough, the Ukrainians worry that they are next on Russia’s list.
Tensions between Russia and Ukraine have been high for years. Mr. Yushchenko, like Mr. Saakashvili in Georgia, has sought stronger ties with the West, including membership in NATO, which Russia has said would threaten its security. In early 2006, Russia cut off natural gas supplies to Ukraine, in a bold maneuver to weaken Mr. Yushchenko’s government….
Yet despite fears of a Russian resurgence, Ukraine remains deeply tied to Russia by culture and history. Its ethnic Russian minority, largely in the south and east of the country, is roughly 17 percent of a total population of 46 million….
Though he supports membership in both NATO and the European Union, Anatoliy Grytsenko, the head of the national security and defense committee in Parliament and a former defense minister, said Russia could not be ignored. “Russia will not disappear tomorrow, as well as in a century or two,” he said. “We will always wake up and it will be there, not Canada.”(NYT)
At FDL, Iain Walsh says:
Isn't Russia supposed to be Condoleezza "no one could have anticipated" Rice's area of academic specialization? Would it be too much to ask that she provide some of that so-called adult supervision for once in her pathetic, boot-licking life?
It’s a good question. I usually can’t stand Maureen Dowd, but she made a couple of good points in a recent column regarding US treatment of Russia.
President Bush and his Russian “expert” Condi have played it completely wrong with Russia from the start. W. saw a “trustworthy” soul in a razor-eyed K.G.B. agent who has never been a good guy for a single hour. Now the Bush crowd, which can do nothing about it, is blustering about how Russian aggression “must not go unanswered,” as Cheney put it. (W.’s other Russian expert, Bob Gates, was, as always, the only voice of realism, noting, “I don’t see any prospect for the use of military force by the United States in this situation.”)….
As Michael Specter, the New Yorker writer who has written extensively about Russia, observed: “There was a brief five-year period when we could get away with treating Russia like Jamaica — that’s over. Now we have to deal with them like grown-ups who have more nuclear weapons than anybody except us.” (NYT; emphasis added)
To quote Sean-Paul Kelley at The Agonist, the odds of grown up treatment in future aren’t too high if McCain gets elected. “Like grown ups? Fat chance with McCain’s chief foreign policy advisor being the former registered former agent of Georgia. Fat chance with [McCain]…echoing the Bush foreign policy line.”
He also asks when we are going to get past the “evil, we’re fighting evil” meme. (The Agonist) That’s about half the problem right there. If you break things down into “good” and “evil,” it’s impossible to deal objectively with an antagonist or do effective diplomacy (which is one reason the Bush administration is so bad at it).
Besides, as Dowd (!!!!) remarks:
As Russian troops continued to manhandle parts of Georgia on Friday, President Bush chastised Russian leaders that “bullying and intimidation are not acceptable ways to conduct foreign policy in the 21st century” — and then flew off to Crawford.
His words might have carried more weight if he, Cheney and Rummy had not kicked off the 21st century with a ham-fisted display of global bullying and intimidation modeled after Sherman’s march through the other Georgia. (NYT)
As for Georgia’s NATO aspirations, here’s an update.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel said Sunday in the Georgian capital that the ex-Soviet republic, currently mired in conflict with Russia, will join NATO.
“Georgia will become a member of NATO if it wants to — and it does want to,” she said before talks with President Mikheil Saakashvili in Tbilisi….
Moscow is furious at Georgia’s attempt to join NATO. The Western military alliance is divided over how fast to accept Georgia, but has indicated that membership is a matter of when, not if. (The Raw Story)
And the Ukraine, Poland, and the US seem to be following Georgia’s lead in poking the Big Bear in the tail with sharp sticks, according to this report.
Ukraine has agreed to take part in a missile defence system designed by the United States to protect Western countries. The government in Kiev defended its decision for military co-operation with the West, saying Russia cancelled a bilateral treaty with Ukraine earlier this year.
A few days ago, Poland and the United States reached agreement on the siting of missiles on Polish territory. These, together with radar installations in the Czech republic, make up the missile shield. Russia is fiercely opposed to the defence system and has threatened retaliatory measures. (Radio Netherlands)
Yikes?
Bush has favored NATO membership for any European democracies that seek it and “are ready to share the responsibilities that NATO brings”. (NATO review) I’m sure that those who know better will correct me if I’m wrong, but I had thought that one requirement was that “states invited to join NATO should be in a position to…contribute to the security of the Euro-Atlantic area.”(NATO review)
Is Georgia really in a position to do this? (See pdf. file of Baltic state qualifications) It seems like a questionable precedent, particularly given President Saakashvili’s apparent role in provoking this dangerous stand-off.
And there are other concerns, surely? In The Washington Post yesterday, Paul J. Saunders (executive director of the Nixon Center; senior adviser to the undersecretary of state for democracy and global affairs from 2003 to 2005) wrote:
[T]he situation inside Georgia belies Saakashvili’s rhetorical commitment to freedom. Most glaring was his handling of opposition protests last fall. The State Department’s 2007 Human Rights Report, released just a few months ago, found “serious problems” with Georgia’s human rights record and notes “excessive use of force to disperse demonstrations”; “impunity of police officers”; and declining respect for freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly and political participation. Ana Dolidze, a democracy advocate and former chair of Georgia’s Young Lawyers Association, has described in detail how Saakashvili acted quickly after entering office to empower the executive branch at the expense of parliament and to strengthen the government by “stifling political expression, pressuring influential media and targeting vocal critics and opposition leaders” — including by using law enforcement agencies. Saakashvili is far from the morally pure democrat he would have the West believe he is.
But for my own peace of mind, I shall assume that the people who make these decisions are making the right one about Georgia. Saakashvili has been bucking for NATO membership. Maybe getting it will calm him down.
But I wonder what’s going to happen with the separatist enclaves and Georgia’s “territorial integrity.”
Dowd chastises Bush for going on vacation during what his bud McCain recently called “the first serious international crisis since the Cold War.”
He has spent 469 days of his presidency kicking back at his ranch, and 450 days cavorting at Camp David. And there’s still time to mountain-bike through another historic disaster. (NYT)
But The Swamp explains:
As for Bush, the president will monitor events from his ranch. He plans to receive Rice there on Saturday. “I’m looking forward to hearing firsthand what she has seen, what she has heard,” he said, calling for “the territorial integrity of Georgia to be respected and the cease-fire agreement to be honored. And we will be working this issue throughout the coming weeks.” (The Swamp)
In any case, I have to disagree with Dowd. I wish he’d go on vacation more often. The more the Bush administration meddles in the world, the more dangerous it gets.
CROSS-POSTED AT BUCK NAKED POLITICS
Memeorandum has more discussion here.
RECENT POSTINGS [BACKGROUNDS]
Russia-Georgia Conflict: Cease Fire Agreement Reached (Update: and Key Bridge is Blown up)
Georgian Conflict: Leaders Show Increasing Anger, Russia Digs in, Civilians Suffer (A News Round-Up)
Conflict Over Separatist Enclaves Continues Amid Claims of Atrocities Against Ethnic Georgians
A "Turning Point" in the Georgian Conflict?
"The Idea that There is a Ceasefire is Ridiculous" (Updated)
Russians Continuing to Push Into Georgia?
Do our Media Understand the Russia-Georgia Conflict?
More on the Russo-Georgian Conflict (Opinion Round-Up)
Georgia Declares Itself to be in a State of War Against Russia; Conflict Expands
Comments