Russian attacks over Georgia

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

Really excellent piece, ezodisy! Thank you. The whole thing is a minefield, I know, but you pick your way through it in expert fashion.

Anyway it's all bloody complex. You are right that that area of the world has a huge struggle going on, but it is not simply a black-and-white us vs them type of thing. Humanity will not be growing up any time soon so long as there is oil at stake (I don't know anything about the gas over there but presumably there's a lot of it). And after oil, something else, so don't hold your breath 

I am 47. I would have suffocated from holding my breath many times over if I had at any point harboured any illusions about humanity as a whole...

We'll have to see how the whole thing plays out the coming days, weeks, years. I have a feeling Russia will stay in SO.

[scarpia]

South Ossetia broke away from Georgia (there is a Russian majority there), which Georgia never liked.

This contradicts everything I have read, which indicates that Ossetia is mostly inhabited by "Ossetians" who are ethnically closest to Persians (they speak a language closely related to Farsi).  The Ossetians have a history of siding with Russians rather than Georgians, I suspect because Russia is farther away than Georgia.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

This contradicts everything I have read, which indicates that Ossetia is mostly inhabited by "Ossetians" who are ethnically closest to Persians (they speak a language closely related to Farsi).  The Ossetians have a history of siding with Russians rather than Georgians, I suspect because Russia is farther away than Georgia.

From what I have heard and read, 80% of Ossetians have Russian passports. Ethnically they may be closer to the Persians, but to all intents and purposes their nationality is (half-)Russian. People may correct me...

[ezodisy]

The Ossetians have a history of siding with Russians rather than Georgians, I suspect because Russia is farther away than Georgia.

no, geographical location has less to do with it. To put your mind at ease that there is no such simplicity, please see the following map:



From what I can understand, Ossetia was under Russia's control as far back as 1801. It was during the Russian revolution that the area started to fragment, with the south becoming part of a Menshevik Georgian Republic and the north Terek Soviet. In 1922 and 1924 respectively, the two parts became autonmous oblasts of the Soviet Union, the south part of the Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic, the north Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic. So even as far back as this there is some manner of divide. Fast forward to 1989 and you have the South Ossetia Supreme Soviet ruling in favour of joining south to north, a move which was opposed by the Georgian SSR; and in Dec. 1990, following further South Ossetian political rebellion, Georgian SSR Superme Soviet revoked SO autonomy, and now we are much closer to present day events. There has not been similar unrest in North Ossetia which became and remains a federal subject republic of Russia.

So again it's nothing like as simple as it's made out, and if anything, Ossetians don't "have a history of siding with Russians rather than Georgians" but more likely an inclination to side with themselves, which one day, in spite of all the Russian passports flying around, will probably be a future case for full independence.

[scarpia]

From what I have heard and read, 80% of Ossetians have Russian passports. Ethnically they may be closer to the Persians, but to all intents and purposes their nationality is (half-)Russian. People may correct me...

"Russian" in this context would imply that they speak Russian, at least.  The Russians have been handing out passports to residents of the breakaway regions for the past few years with the apparent purpose of justifying an adventure such as this. 

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

"Russian" in this context would imply that they speak Russian, at least.  The Russians have been handing out passports to residents of the breakaway regions for the past few years with the apparent purpose of justifying an adventure such as this.

Yes, you are right, they have been handing out passports. But you can't force people to accept them. And the 'adventure' is as much Saakashvili's, who seems to have overplayed his hand by attacking SO, as the Russians', who use this unwise (to put it mildly) action by Georgia to make a few things clear not only to it, but also to the West - don't meddle in our backyard.

[vandermolen]

Mike, how does the British media present the conflict? 

This is not Mike, but in response to your question I heard a BBC radio interview with a former Foreign Secretary (Conservative) Malcolm Rifkind in which he accused Russia of hypocricy for supporting separatism in this conflict whilst denouncing and making was against it in Chechnya.

[Philoctetes]

This is not Mike, but in response to your question I heard a BBC radio interview with a former Foreign Secretary (Conservative) Malcolm Rifkind in which he accused Russia of hypocricy for supporting separatism in this conflict whilst denouncing and making was against it in Chechnya.

Political hypocricy? That's nearly unheard of.

[vandermolen]

Political hypocricy? That's nearly unheard of.

You are right, of course. Freedom Fighters/Terrorists etc.

[Philoctetes]

You are right, of course. Freedom Fighters/Terrorists etc.

I think you meant Freedom Fries.

[scarpia]

This is not Mike, but in response to your question I heard a BBC radio interview with a former Foreign Secretary (Conservative) Malcolm Rifkind in which he accused Russia of hypocricy for supporting separatism in this conflict whilst denouncing and making was against it in Chechnya.

You can't define a uniform policy regarding "separatism."  It depends on whether the region in question has a legitimate claim of being oppressed, or whether there are strong cultural or political ties to one country or another.  There is also an issue of proportionality of response.  When Bosnia split from the former Yugoslavia there was a legitimate grievance for Serbians who found themselves on the wrong side of the dividing line.  But it did not justify what took place. 

Ultimately this is evidence of pathological politics in that part of the world.  Can you imagine that Maine would try to split off from the US, and that when the US tried to reassert control, Canada would invade the US? 

[vandermolen]

You can't define a uniform policy regarding "separatism."  It depends on whether the region in question has a legitimate claim of being oppressed, or whether there are strong cultural or political ties to one country or another.  There is also an issue of proportionality of response.  When Bosnia split from the former Yugoslavia there was a legitimate grievance for Serbians who found themselves on the wrong side of the dividing line.  But it did not justify what took place. 

Ultimately this is evidence of pathological politics in that part of the world.  Can you imagine that Maine would try to split off from the US, and that when the US tried to reassert control, Canada would invade the US? 

I agree with you. In response to a question I was just reporting back what I heard on the radio. As with any historical problem, the more you look into it the more complex it becomes.

[ezodisy]

"Russian" in this context would imply that they speak Russian, at least.  The Russians have been handing out passports to residents of the breakaway regions for the past few years with the apparent purpose of justifying an adventure such as this. 

Of course they speak Russian -- at least the old timers and the educated ones do.  Like with most of these one-time Soviet states they have Russian as an official or business language. Just in case you didn't know, Gergiev grew up in North Ossetia, and his Russian isn't too bad. Have you considered that perhaps the majority of Ossetians don't even speak Georgian?

Regarding "justifying an adventure such as this", what is your source for "handing out passports...for the past few years"? Russian passports were granted as far back as the very early '90s, so any adventure that's been coming has been in waiting for over a dozen years.

Before you go on with your insinuations about Russia's strategy--which probably have some element of truth to them--keep in mind that there may not be too many job opportunities in South Ossetia, and that it might not be uncommon for some of the family to go north to Russia, thanks to their passports, and to work there and to send money back home to their underprivileged families. The Russian passport might be a godsend for many.

You can't define a uniform policy regarding "separatism." 

Ultimately this is evidence of pathological politics in that part of the world.  Can you imagine that Maine would try to split off from the US, and that when the US tried to reassert control, Canada would invade the US? 

I agree with your comment about the impossibility of a uniform policy here, but comparing a state breaking away from the US, or Quebec from Canada, for example, is completely and utterly irrelevant to the situation and, quite frankly, I'm sure very insulting to anyone from that region. See my previous post for at least 2 reasons why.

[scarpia]

Of course they speak Russian -- at least the old timers and the educated ones do.  Like with most of these one-time Soviet states they have Russian as an official or business language. Just in case you didn't know, Gergiev grew up in North Ossetia, and his Russian isn't too bad. Have you considered that perhaps the majority of Ossetians don't even speak Georgian?

I am certainly aware that Russian was taught in all schools in the former Soviet Union, and throughout the Soviet Empire.  Even Vietnamese were forced to study Russian in school, does that make them Russians?  When the nationalists talk about "Russia for Russians" I'm not sure they are thinking about Ossetians.

Regarding "justifying an adventure such as this", what is your source for "handing out passports...for the past few years"? Russian passports were granted as far back as the very early '90s, so any adventure that's been coming has been in waiting for over a dozen years.

From the New York Times:

In Georgia and Russia, a Perfect Brew for a Blowup
By C. J. CHIVERS
Published: August 10, 2008

[...]

Under the presidency of Vladimir V. Putin, Russia had already been granting citizenship and distributing passports to virtually all of the adult residents of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, the much larger separatist region where Russia had also massed troops over the weekend. The West had been skeptical of the validity of Russia's handing out passports by the thousands to citizens of another nation.

"Having a document does not make you a Russian citizen," one American diplomat said in 2004, as Russia expanded the program.

But whatever the legal merits, the Kremlin had laid the foundation for one of its public relations arguments for invading: its army was coming to the aid of Russian citizens under foreign attack.

[ezodisy]

does that make them Russians?  When the nationalists talk about "Russia for Russians" I'm not sure they are thinking about Ossetians.

I don't know. Most nationalists are raving lunatics anyway (IMO).

From the New York Times:

Thanks for that. I don't buy into the prejudiced final line: "the Kremlin had laid...". The matter of invasion is open to wide interpretation here even without SO receiving official recognition of independence. As for Putin, his presidency goes back to 2000 so you are still looking at 8 years of planning for this "adventure". I would really like to hear how an experienced person in political law interprets the old autonomous oblast/vote for separation/hopeful annex/russian passport/no official recognition line of events which underlies this complex issue.

[scarpia]

It is arguable that South Ossetians would rather be part of Russia than Georgia.  If the Russian rhetoric can be taken at face value and their goal is to prevent Georgia from taking South Ossetia by force, it could be claimed that they are justified.  The current operations seem to have a wider scope, if the result is to chase out the elected government of Georgia and install a pro Soviet Russian puppet regime, then I think there is a problem.

[M forever]

I am certainly aware that Russian was taught in all schools in the former Soviet Union, and throughout the Soviet Empire.  Even Vietnamese were forced to study Russian in school, does that make them Russians?

Yes, it does. Alternatively, a really tall glass of vodka instantly makes you Russian, too.

[Lethevich]

Mike, how does the British media present the conflict? 

The right wing papers (of which the Guardian is not part of) are loving the drama:


Click for larger size

Although it must be said that the Daily Mail possibly doesn't care too much about Russia, as it is equally hysterical with all of its headlines.

[Sarastro]

Извините если я оскорбил вас .По английски слого "bloody" необязательно имеет плохое значение и я неимел в виду ничего плохого. Неодин тупой англичанин неинтересуется русской культурой больше чем я. Пожалуйста забудь что я сказал и я знаю что вы правы насчет того как это началось

I was just trying to make a point that characterizing the whole nation as "the bloody Russians" is unjustified. Certainly, my grandparents do not long for civilians' blood. Nor do I.

Здравствуйте, я ваша тётя!

Из Бразилии, где много-много диких обезъян?

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

Jeez, I leave this site for a year, and a war breaks out 

I just want to add a few observations from my perch here in Moscow - ezodisy's detailed posts have covered most of the essentials.

First of all, the humanitarian aspect of this operation seems to be uppermost in people's minds here. I'm not taking sides on this, just pointing it out. In the company I work for (which is American BTW, not Russian) we've been collecting medical and other supplies for the Ossetians displaced and wounded. One colleague (an Ossetian herself) described this as "an incredible tragedy for such a small nation." She was referring to Saakashvili's assault, not the Russian response.

Secondly, probably none of this would have happened if not for several years of bad US-NATO-EU diplomacy. Bush and his colleagues, in particular, built up Saakashvili and encouraged him in every way possible, not caring that his unstable, narcissistic behavior marked him not as a "pro-Western democratic leader" but as a petty-minded local megalomaniac. Georgia and its adjoining regions are a nest of antique ethnic hatreds and Mafia-like rivalries; looking for good guys under our definition is pointless. (BTW, Stalin is still considered a great national hero in Georgia.)

The craziest aspect of this is the notion, ceaselessly pushed by both Bush and Saak, that Georgia should join NATO. As an American citizen, I have to wonder - should kids living in Iowa or Texas have to die to help Georgia hold on to a breakaway province? Because that's the logic of a military alliance - an attack on one is an attack on all. Should Georgia in the Caucasus have equal value to US citizens as Georgia in the US? I say no.

Saak played along. He sent his soldiers to Iraq, and even renamed Tbilisi's main avenue "President George W. Bush Street."    And look what it got him.

Anyway, as George Kennan presciently said years ago:

"Expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-cold war era. Such a decision may be expected to inflame the nationalistic, anti-Western and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion; to have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy; to restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations, and to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking."