Russia, move out your troops!

We all know what Russia does to states which seek independence. Chechnya has tried so for years; it is clear that Russia is not afraid of applying harsh measures to crush those who oppose the Russian rule. Russia has always claimed that they have the right to crush down the rebellions and told other countries not to meddle. And now they are supporting rebellions in Georgia?


After the fall of the Soviet Union, Georgia had been governed by Eduard Shevardnadze. He and his family became increasingly associated with corruption that greatly damaged Georgia's economy. The country remained very poor by European standards. Eduard Shevardnadze served under Gorbachev as the Minister of Foreign Affairs. After the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia and its puppet states were troubled by corruption (and still are).

Just before the elections in 2003, Georgia was on the verge of a major political and economic crisis. On the 2nd of November, 2003, Georgia held parliamentary elections, which were denounced by local and international observers ''as being grossly rigged in favor of Shevardnadze''. Mikheil Saakashvilli claimed that he had won the elections, which was confirmed by independent exit polls.

Saakashvili then urged the Georgians to demonstrate peacefully against Shevardnadze government. Massive anti-government demonstrations took place for weeks until Saakashvili and opposition supporters, with roses in their hands, seized the parliament building, forcing Shevardnadze to escape with his bodyguards. He then declared a state of emergency and began to mobilize troops and police near his residence in Tblisi. However, the elite military units refused to support the government.

New elections were held in 2004, and Saakashvili won with a large majority of the votes.

Most among us know that Russia cannot stand that former Soviet satellite states turn to the West. The former president of Ukraine, Yanukovych had close ties to Russia, but after the orange revolution took place in 2004, Russia started to threaten Ukraine in multiple ways.

Czech Republic has recently agreed upon a deal with the US for a missile shield on its territory. A Russian general went as far as saying that Russia would aim missiles on Europe, and particular the Czech Republic, if such a deal would see the green light.

The US and the European Union, on the other hand, stimulate former Soviet satellite states to turn to west. After years of harsh Soviet suppression, they want nothing else than living normally and peacefully and enjoy good life standards. They know the European Union is the key to that (particularly former Soviet States which have obtained EU membership, receive billions in European Union funding).

However, to get back to Georgian/Russian relations:

in 2006 Russia banned the import of Georgian and Moldovan wines. Georgia has been greatly dependent on the export of wines to Russia. Why did they do this?

Both Moldova and Georgia turned to the West and both want to join the European Union - the motive for Russia to blackmail them with gas supplies and other measures as a retaliation for turning towards the west

Moldova:

Relationships between Moldova and Russia deteriorated in November 2003 over a Russian proposal for the solution of the Transnistrian conflict, which Moldovan authorities refused to accept. In the following election, held in 2005, the Communist party made a formal 180 degree turn and was re-elected on a pro-Western platform,[citation needed] with Voronin being re-elected to a second term as a president. Since 1999, Moldova has constantly affirmed its desire to join the European Union,[36][37] and implement its first three-year Action Plan within the framework of the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) of the EU.


Source

Various incidents have happened in years after the Russian puppet was no longer president of Georgia. Here I will state a couple of remarkable incidents:

Georgian-Russian relations deteriorated seriously during the September-October 2006 Georgia-Russia spying row when Georgia detained four Russian officers on spying charges. Russia responded by imposing economic sanctions on Georgia and withdrawing its embassy from Tbilisi.

Source

Deportation of Georgians

During the spying row, the Russian authorities started to deport Georgian citizens from Russia on charges of visa violations. The government of Georgia as well as the influential human rights organizations such as Freedom House and Human Rights Watch accused the Russian authorities of "tolerating and encouraging the mistreatments of immigrants from Georgia and other Caucasus countries."[7] and of "a deliberate campaign to detain and expel thousands of Georgians living in Russia."[8] On 27 March 2007, Georgia filed an interstate lawsuit with the European Court of Human Rights over the cases of violations of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in the course of the deportation of Georgian citizens from Russia in autumn of 2006. Russia described this as a "new unfriendly step taken against Russia"

Source

September 2007 controversy over the Russian ambassador's statement

On September 24, 2007, the Russian ambassador to Georgia, Vyacheslav Kovalenko, became embroiled in a controversy over his statement at a televised informal meeting with Georgian intellectuals organized by the Tbilisi-based Russian-Georgian Friendship Union in which he referred to the Georgian people as a "dying-out nation", and announced to the Georgians that they will soon became extinct in the face of globalization while Russia is "a large country, a huge country. It can digest this. You, the Georgians, will fail to digest this."

The statements sparked a public outrage in Georgia and Kovalenko was summoned by Georgia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs for explanations while the opposition factions in the Parliament of Georgia demanded the withdrawal of Kovalenko from Georgia. Georgian Parliamentary Chairperson, Nino Burjanadze, responded to the ambassador’s prediction: "Maybe, certain forces in Russia really want to see the extinction of Georgian nation, but this will not happen… I would advice Mr. Kovalenko to think about Russia and its demographic problems and we will ourselves take care of Georgian problems, including the demographic ones.

Source

It is obvious that Russia does not want to lose power and particularly doesn't want to have bordering countries that are more in favor of the West than of Russia. Mostly, Russia imposes political and/or economical sanctions on these countries by for instance cutting off gas/oil supplies, but now... now it has chosen to support rebels.

Imagine that France would start supporting Spanish seperatists. Georgia is a sovereign country and Russia has no right at all to send military units into Georgia.

Russia of course invaded other country, no doubt about it. Also Russian politics are very cynical and remind of a bully tactics. But there is a background that should not be forgotten - Russia feels (justified or not - i cannot say) that it is a continuance of USSR - a superpower. So it should be treated like one - with fear, and it is not. I am worried that they will try to use Georgia as an example of Russia's regained capabilities.
Also do not forget US radars, NATO rapidly expanding in former Warsaw pact countries and generally relatively low Russian influence on even not that major political decisions - like Kosovo. So it is probably - "they should fear/respect us but treat us like dirt so we will show them" behavior. Oil/gas/other raw materials and nukes are after all not to be dismissed.
And in current conflict Russia did a lot to destabilize the region , on purpose. Not to mention that its marionettes rule South Osetia that Russians are defending as a peace mediators.
But! South Osetian majority does not want to be in Georgia. As in Abkhazia. And Georgians made a huge mistake and attacked first, on their own territory but still attacked first and shelled city with civilians.
Huge mistake that will be used by Russians and i doubt that they will stop only in annexing S. Osetia/Abkhazia but they will go and put their own marionette in Georgia. To stop NATO/US, to stop oil pipe that could damage its interests and to show that Russia is a superpower to be reckoned with once again (wink to Ukraine in NATO possibility and Crimea hot spot).

reply to post by ZeroKnowledge



Thanks for the refreshing insight.
I do agree with you that Russia is of impression that is a superpower and wants to reflect this in its foreign policy. I am of opinion that Russia is no superpower, but definitely has the potential to become once again a superpower.

Russia is greatly annoyed that it loses influence on neighboring countries that it formerly controlled while, on the other hand, Western powers gain influence in these countries. Russia feels its positioned is threatened, meaning that the cold war is far from over.

It should be said, however, that Georgia is a sovereign country, giving Russia no right to meddle with its domestic policy, let alone sending in military units.

It will be interesting to see how the West will respond to this. Georgia is not of such importance that it will be reason to wage war with Russia.

However, should the west interfere, the conflict could rapidly develop into a much bigger war, which could easily spread to other parts of the world.

Russia has strong ties with Iran and I found it interesting that Israel agreed to Russia's request to stop sending military supplies to Georgia, while Israel warned Russia it would neutralize its most advanced anti-air system should it be sold to Iran. Could this be some deal between Israel and Russia?

reply to post by Mdv2


I do not know about a possible deal with Russia, but Israel has several times asked Russia to stop selling its military hardware to Surya (they give it to Hizballah) and to Iran. I had never heard anything close to S-300 countermeasures threat - made this week by Israeli source, so the situation could actually be the opposite.
Also in a weird coincidence i read this week that Israel joined in the Turkey oil and gas pipe project, and now i read that it goes to Turkey through Georgia! And Russian leaders ask Israel to stop selling arms to Georgia - also this week.
This is all a very weird coincidence, all these news involve Russia , Israel and Georgia just before this thing broke out. I am yet to think of any possible explanation why it is all happening. Georgia surely could not hope to win war with Russia with Israeli weapons support, and Israel is trying very hard to keep a descent relationship with Russia due to economical and political considerations. So i do not understand this sudden development, maybe this pipe line somehow is involved - but it exists now in Turkey. Why should its extension to Israel cause all this? And why Georgians choose to attack?

A friend mailed me a very interesting article:

...snip...

One critical issue to watch as the crisis develops: Who is really in charge in Moscow, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin or newly installed President Dmitry Medvedev? For the moment, it seems to be Putin who is calling the shots and speaking out most forcefully on the crisis with Georgia. Putin, of course, believes deeply in restoring the glory of Mother Russia. He certainly does not want to lose Russian territory and is determined to expand the Russian empire.

As I have written about previously, he knows he cannot expand Russia westward because NATO is expanding eastward. Putin also knows he cannot expand Russia eastward because of China. He has claimed ownership of the North Pole, but the real opportunity
for Russia is to expand southward, and that is where Putin has been focusing all of his attention in recent years. He is determined to control the Caucuses region, and South Ossetia -- though not a name or place most Westerners have ever heard of much less cared about -- is a key piece in Putin’s southward strategy. Interestingly, a
new poll finds that four times more Russians think Putin is the most powerful man in Moscow than Medvedev, and tensions between the two men have been growing all summer.

The Russian bombs allegedly fell on Gori and Kareli, two towns near South Ossetia, a volatile region smaller than the size of Rhode Island with a population of less than 70,000. South Ossetia broke away from the Republic of Georgia in the early 1990s and has been controlled ever since by Moscow-backed separatists. To effectively hold the territory for themselves -- or at least keep the territory of South Ossetia from being reclaimed by Georgia, Russia sent military troops designated as “peacekeepers”
into the area several years ago and provides economic support to the rebels. Now Georgian military forces have just launched a major attack on those rebels in a bid to regain control of the territory.

Putin warned Georgia that her attack on South Ossetia would trigger a retaliation. Putin did not say precisely what form that retaliation would take, and as of this writing, Russia is denying that it has bombed Georgian
towns.

...snip...

The Republic of Georgia is a democratic country that wants to join NATO, remove Russian troops and military bases from its soil, allow the U.S. to build a missile defense system on its territory, and become a full-fledged ally of the West. For those very reasons, tensions between Georgia and Russia have been growing steadily.
In April of this year, under intense pressure from Moscow, NATO decided not to invite Georgia and Ukraine join its 26-member alliance immediately,
but promised to revisit the issue soon. This may prove to have been a serious mistake, inviting Russian provocation. Days later, Putin ordered
the establishment of semi-official ties with the rebel “government” in South Ossetia, which Georgia charged was a violation of international law. A few weeks later, Russia began sending more troops to the border of South Ossetia, which NATO said was a provocation of Georgia. In July, Russian fighter jets penetrated Georgian airspace and flew a reconnaissance
mission over South Ossetia in a show of force -- a warning, really -- designed to “cool hot heads in Tbilisi [the capital of Georgia],” the Kremlin said. The President of Georgia immediately recalled his ambassador from Moscow, all but cutting off diplomatic ties, to protest the aggressive Russian
move.
Back in September 2006, as I wrote about at the time, Russia warned of dire consequences if NATO provided arms and continued building strong ties to Georgia. In October 2006, Russian forces blockaded Georgia from air, rail and ground transportation and Putin sent the Russian navy to maneuver
off Georgia’s Black Sea coast.
In January 2006, two explosions ripped through pipelines carrying Russian
oil to the former Soviet Republic of Georgia. The blasts effectively cut off Georgia’s main supply of energy amidst a brutally cold winter. The Kremlin called the sabotage acts of terrorism, but Georgian President President Saakashvili, top Georgian officials, and even a number of Western
analysts were not convinced. They accused Russian intelligence of triggering the explosions to send Georgia a chilling message: don’t join NATO, don’t insist that Russia give up its military bases in Georgia, don’t keep criticizing Putin as he re-centralizes power and rebuilds the Russian military, don’t oppose Russia’s application to join the World Trade Organization,
stop calling for UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to “internationalize”
peacekeeping operations in the troubled southern Russian regions

Abkhazia and Ossetia, and stop promoting pro-democracy movements throughout the former Soviet Union.
The pipelines were eventually fixed, and oil began flowing again, but tensions
were never defused. “Russian-Georgian relations have deteriorated to the point that some Kremlin officials are seriously weighing a military operation, which they hope will hand Georgia a military defeat and topple
President Saakashivili,” wrote Heritage Foundation Russia expert Dr. Ariel Cohen in March. Cohen quoted one veteran Russian foreign policy as saying, “It’s springtime -- a time to start a war with Georgia.” Cohen noted that Kremlin political strategist Gleb Pavlovsky actually called for Saakashvili to be assassinated, and that Vladimir Zhirinovsky’s Liberal Democratic Party issued a statement in February statement saying the call for assassination should be seen as a warning to the Georgian leader. “Saakashvili is out of control, and needs to be brought to heel,” said one Kremlin insider, quoted by Cohen. “If Georgians keep quiet and behave, we may even tolerate their joining NATO, but if they are loud, we’ll take measures.”

[edit on 9-8-2008 by Mdv2]

How about Russia moves out its troops only after U.S. grants Kosovo back to Serbia?

Parallels can be found throughout history. The parallel here is that Russian troops are doing the same thing in S. Ossetia as NATO was doing in Kosovo in 1998.

Originally posted by maloy
How about Russia moves out its troops only after U.S. grants Kosovo back to Serbia?

Parallels can be found throughout history. The parallel here is that Russian troops are doing the same thing in S. Ossetia as NATO was doing in Kosovo in 1998.

I do agree that Kosovo should be granted back to Serbia, but then again I don't see the relevance to the current situation in which Russia as no right whatsoever to do what it currently is doing.

There is no parallel. Russia sends in troops, which they define to be peacekeepers. In reality they are just there to secure the area and remove Georgian presence. NATO sent in peacekeepers to obtain and maintain peace in a region troubled by civil war in which thousands of people had died already. If Russia would feel so much sympathy they could have sent peacekeepers to Kosovo instead. That's unfortunately not the real reason.

Do you think Kosovo is of such great strategic importance to NATO?



[edit on 10-8-2008 by Mdv2]

Originally posted by Mdv2
I do agree that Kosovo should be granted back to Serbia, but then again I don't see the relevance to the current situation in which Russia as no right whatsoever to do what it currently is doing.

NATO had no right whatsoever to intervene in Serbia's internal conflict.

NATO accussed Serbia of ethnical cleansing and moved in to occupy Kosovo, and bomb Belgrade. Russia accuses Georgia of ethnical cleansing and genocide, moved in to occupy S. Ossetia, and bombed military targets in Georgia.

If you can't see the parallel I have little to talk with you about.

Originally posted by Mdv2
Russia sends in troops, which they define to be peacekeepers.

NATO send in troops to Kosovo which they defined as peacekeepers.

Originally posted by Mdv2
In reality they are just there to secure the area and remove Georgian presence.

In reality NATO troops were just there to secure the area and remove Serbian presence.

Originally posted by Mdv2
NATO sent in peacekeepers to obtain and maintain peace in a region troubled by civil war in which thousands of people had died already.

Russia sent in peacekeepers to obtain and maintain peace in a region troubled by war in which thousands of innocent people had died already. Read the news - it is confirmed that thousands are dead in S. Ossetia.

Originally posted by Mdv2
If Russia would feel so much sympathy they could have sent peacekeepers to Kosovo instead.

It did send peacekeepers to Kosovo.

Originally posted by Mdv2
That's unfortunately not the real reason.

Nor was the stop of ethnical cleansing the real reason NATO bombed Serbia.

Originally posted by Mdv2
Do you think Kosovo is of such great strategic importance to NATO?

Yes. To NATO and to EU.

Originally posted by maloy

Originally posted by Mdv2
I do agree that Kosovo should be granted back to Serbia, but then again I don't see the relevance to the current situation in which Russia as no right whatsoever to do what it currently is doing.

NATO accussed Serbia of ethnical cleansing and moved in to occupy Kosovo, and bomb Belgrade. Russia accuses Georgia of ethnical cleansing and genocide, moved in to occupy S. Ossetia, and bombed military targets in Georgia.

NATO had no right whatsoever to intervene in Serbia's internal conflict.

Serbia brought disaster to the region, not just domestically, but also regionally, so NATO did have a right and reason to interfere. Serbia had recently committed a genocide, that's what you find no reason to interfere.

Please don't come up with Russia's official statement that a genocide has taken or is taking place. There's real evidence available of the genocide Serbia committed, please show me that of Georgia, I am afraid you cannot provide so.

Originally posted by maloy
If you can't see the parallel I have little to talk with you about.

I do see the parallel, but you are mirroring. Because the US used the a-bomb on two Japanese cities, you would find it understandable if Russia would do so too, just because someone else did so? That's kindergarten behaviour.

Originally posted by maloy

Originally posted by Mdv2
Russia sends in troops, which they define to be peacekeepers.

NATO send in troops to Kosovo which they defined as peacekeepers.

Please Maloy, you do know that NATO's mission in the Balkans whereas Russia uses it as excuse. Please don't deny ignorance.

If mirroring is the only tactic you can use to explain away Russia's wrongdoings in Georgia, than I'm afraid we have little to talk about indeed.

I think I know the answer you would have if I would ask you about the Serbian concentration camps. You would simply answer: ''The Germans did so too''.

Originally posted by maloy
How about Russia moves out its troops only after U.S. grants Kosovo back to Serbia?

Parallels can be found throughout history. The parallel here is that Russian troops are doing the same thing in S. Ossetia as NATO was doing in Kosovo in 1998.

These are totally different things. EU would not want take Kosovo, not even US. But Russia want S Ossetia according to what they have done during last 300 years

KIEV, Ukraine (AP) -- Ukraine warned Russia on Sunday it could bar Russian navy ships from returning to their base in the Crimea because of their deployment to Georgia's coast. Ukraine's Foreign Ministry said the deployment of a Russian naval squadron to Georgia's Black sea coast has the potential


en.wasalive.com...


If Russia invade Ukraine, it will be WW3

There are facts that excuse Russia for their military reply:
1) You may say about provocations etc, etc... But there were daily provocations for the last 16 years in the Regions, from both sides. In this case, Georgia ATTACKED FIRST and there can be no excuses to it.
2) Georgia RAZED the whole city, capital of Osetia killing thousands of civilians. Georgian troops were noticed killing civilians, even 1-year children.
3) Georgian troops attacked Russian peacekeepers (you may say what you want, juristically the were peacekeepers and they did never participate provocations Georgia-Osetia provocations) , 15 dead and 150 wounded.

If that's not enough for you, just imagine what would happen if 15 american peacekeepers were killed in direct attack
Anyone who ignores 3 above points just denies ignorance and should be ignored in response =)

Originally posted by emile

Originally posted by maloy
How about Russia moves out its troops only after U.S. grants Kosovo back to Serbia?

Parallels can be found throughout history. The parallel here is that Russian troops are doing the same thing in S. Ossetia as NATO was doing in Kosovo in 1998.

These are totally different things. EU would not want take Kosovo, not even US. But Russia want S Ossetia according to what they have done during last 300 years

You are very right. Russia has been granting Russian passports to Georgian citizens in South Ossetia for years now.

Additionally (from the article I posted above):

As I have written about previously, he knows he cannot expand Russia westward because NATO is expanding eastward. Putin also knows he cannot expand Russia eastward because of China. He has claimed ownership of the North Pole, but the real opportunity
for Russia is to expand southward, and that is where Putin has been focusing all of his attention in recent years. He is determined to control the Caucuses region, and South Ossetia -- though not a name or place most Westerners have ever heard of much less cared about -- is a key piece in Putin’s southward strategy. Interestingly, a
new poll finds that four times more Russians think Putin is the most powerful man in Moscow than Medvedev, and tensions between the two men have been growing all summer.

Apart from these motives, the Russians are also suspected of willing to control Georgia for the only pipeline (Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline) that the Russians don't control, supplying the west with oil.

S&F to OP.. what a great post. And several followup-s also. Please ignore the people who try to derail the subject and move into different topics.. You are completely on the right track here.

long life russia! huraaa!