When Frozen Wars Heat Up

[thedrifter]

August 11, 2008, 6:00 a.m. <br />
<br />
When Frozen Wars Heat Up <br />
Russia vs. Georgia <br />
<br />
By James S. Robbins <br />
<br />
<br />
The breakup of the Soviet Union left a number of loose ends, border issues located largely on...

[thedrifter]

August 12, 2008
Georgia: The First Shot in a New Cold War
By Lance Fairchok
The more things change, the more they stay the same. In a replay of classic Soviet interventions from the cold war, using the flimsiest of contrived pretexts, Russia came to the rescue of a supposedly beleaguered minority in South Ossetia, a sparsely populated mountainous region and unimportant to Russian national security. Unimportant, but for the fact that Georgia, in which this afflicted minority resides, is a West-leaning democratic nation and US ally with aspirations of joining NATO. It is also a strategic conduit for oil from the surrounding region to the Black Sea and Europe.

In this larger context, we can surmise what Russia actually intends by its actions. This crisis was carefully choreographed by Moscow with Ossetia militia members firing on Georgian forces with weapons provided by Russian "peacekeepers," until they provoked a reaction, providing the excuse for an invasion.

Far from the localized "peace keeping" intervention to stop what the Russian foreign ministry called "genocide" in Ossetia, Russian bombers hit oil installations in Georgia, the main transit pipeline, its largest port and the international airport. A Russian tank division and artillery poured across Georgia's northern border and Russian ships blockaded it harbors while landing ground forces in Abkhazia, another separatist enclave on the Black sea. It now looks like Russia will prosecute a three-pronged attack on Georgia, and will likely continue until it can replace the government of Mikhail Saakashailli, turn around his reforms, and install a leader more pliable to Russian persuasion. Russia will not respond to Georgia's request for a cease-fire until its military objectives have been reached.

It is obvious Putin pulls the strings in Moscow and President Medvedev is his creature. Putin's vision of a resurgent Russia is ambitious and includes renewed support for Cuba, military aid for Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, and arms for Iran. He is a scion of the old KGB, with no qualms about assassinating unflattering journalists or political opponents, or removing an uncooperative head of state in Russia's sphere of influence. A communist at heart and a dictator by nature, Putin plans to rebuild the empire lost when the Soviet Union collapsed.

Russia is now a world oil power and growing economically. Putin understands energy is the weak underbelly of Europe. Controlling a large part of the oil flow gives him enormous leverage. European Union hand wringing was a given, its futile protests brushed aside. The Russians bet on the US being distracted by the upcoming election, its President made a lame duck by a Democrat-controlled Congress. Indeed, President Bush would be hard pressed to aid Georgia however much he wished. Not much of a gamble for Putin.

Apologists for Russia will soon surface. Already left-leaning pundits are blaming Georgia for provoking its own invasion and using the crisis for political ends.

"McCain took an inflexible approach to addressing this issue by focusing heavily on one side, without a pragmatic assessment of the situation," ..."It's both sides' fault - both have been somewhat provocative with each other,"
- Mark Brzezinski, a former Clinton White House National Security Council member and adviser to the Obama Campaign.

In the typically muddled, ill-informed realpolitik we expect from the left, we hear "It's both sides' fault," a justification to do nothing. It is troubling how foreign policy elites can make such nonsensical statements, ignoring all the evidence, just to appear reasoned and measured. That credulous moral equivalence encourages the Putins of the world. Presidential hopeful Barrack Obama condemned the violence in general terms, assigning no blame and predictably calling for UN intervention. When decisive action is called for, dialing the UN does not cut it, not when the stakes are this high.

The New York Times quoted a Georgian officer leaving Ossetia:

A Georgian major who only gave his name as Georgy said, "Over the past few years, I lived in a democratic country, and I was happy. Now America and the European Union spit on us." He was driving an armored truck out of South Ossetia.

It is easy to understand the Major's frustration and anger. Georgia is a small country and its armed forces are fighting insurmountable odds. For him, it is his family that will suffer and his men that will die. He will likely fight to the bitter end to defend the young nation he loves. The Georgian armed forces are not yet defeated, not by a long shot, and they will continue to give good account of themselves. Georgia has successfully resisted Russia's political intimidation in its elections and interference with its internal affairs. Though it is resisting the Russian army now, without help, the results are predictable; the full weight of Russian military power will crush them.

As so many times in the past, from the fall of Hungary and Czechoslovakia to Cambodia, Afghanistan and Kuwait, we know that the price of inaction in the face of aggression is tragedy and suffering for countless innocents, a price far above the sacrifice required to meet aggression head on.

The reaction of the US, NATO and the EU will determine the future of not only Georgia, but also every former Soviet republic that has the temerity to form alliances outside of Russia's control; the Ukraine, the Baltic Republics and other uncooperative nations will experience similar manipulation and intimidation. Most already are. If we let this invasion go unchallenged and end in disaster for Georgia, all our high-minded talk about democracy and freedom will mean nothing. Major Georgy is fighting for the principles we claim to stand for, for the freedom that will allow his people to prosper. Our inaction will be seen as a betrayal, our promises false and our ideals hypocrisy. Vladimir Putin has fired the first shot of a new cold war, the first battle is Georgia and we can be certain there will be many more.

Ellie

[thedrifter]

RUSSIA GOES ROGUE
By RALPH PETERS
August 12, 2008

IT'S impossible to overstate the importance of what's un folding as we watch. Russia's invasion of Georgia - a calculated, unprovoked aggression - is a crisis that may have more
important strategic implications than Iraq and Afghanistan combined.

We're seeing the emergence of a rogue military power with a nuclear arsenal.

The response of our own government has been pathetic - and our media's uncritical acceptance of Moscow's version of events is infuriating.

This is the "new" Russia announcing - in blood - that it won't tolerate freedom and self-determination along its borders. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is putting it bluntly: Today,
Georgia, tomorrow Ukraine (and the Baltic states had better pay attention).

Georgia's affiliation with the European Union, its status as a would-be NATO member, its working democracy - none of it deterred Putin.

Nor does Putin's ambition stop with the former Soviet territories. His air force has been trying (unsuccessfully) to hit the new gas pipeline running from the Caspian Sea to the
Mediterranean. The Kremlin is telling Europe: We not only have the power to turn off Siberian gas, we can turn off every tap in the region, any time we choose.

Let's be clear: For all that US commentators and diplomats are still chattering about Russia's "response" to Georgia's actions, the Kremlin spent months planning and preparing
this operation. Any soldier above the grade of private can tell you that there's absolutely no way Moscow could've launched this huge ground, air and sea offensive in an
instantaneous "response" to alleged Georgian actions.

As I pointed out Saturday, even to get one armored brigade over the Caucasus Mountains required extensive preparations. Since then, Russia has sent in the equivalent of almost
two divisions - not only in South Ossetia, the scene of the original fighting, but also in separatist Abkhazia on the Black Sea coast.

The Russians also managed to arrange the instant appearance of a squadron of warships to blockade Georgia. And they launched hundreds of air strikes against preplanned
targets.

Every one of these things required careful preparations. In the words of one US officer, "Just to line up the airlift sorties would've taken weeks."

Working through their mercenaries in South Ossetia, Russia staged brutal provocations against Georgia from late July onward. Last Thursday, Georgia's president finally had to
act to defend his own people.

But when the mouse stirred, the cat pounced.

The Russians know that we know this was a setup. But Moscow's Big Lie propagandists still blame Georgia - even as Russian aircraft bomb Georgian homes and Russian troops
seize the vital city of Gori in the country's heart. And Russian troops also grabbed the Georgian city of Zugdidi to the west - invading from Abkhazia on a second axis.

Make no mistake: Moscow intends to dismember Georgia.

This is the most cynical military operation by a "European" power since Moscow invaded Afghanistan in 1979. (Sad to say, President Bush seems as bewildered now as
President Jimmy Carter did then.)

This attack's worse, though. Georgia is an independent, functioning democracy tied to the European Union and striving to join NATO. It also has backed our Iraq efforts with 2,000
troops. (We're airlifting them back home.)

This invasion recalls Hitler's march into Czechoslovakia - to protect ethnic Germans, he claimed, just as Putin claims to be protecting Russian citizens - complete BS.

It also resembles Hitler's invasion of Poland - with the difference that, in September '39, European democracies drew the line. (To France's credit, its leaders abandoned their
August vacations to call Putin out - only Sen. Barack Obama remains on the beach.)

Yet our media give Putin the benefit of the doubt. Not one major news outlet even bothers to take issue with Putin's wild claim that the Georgians were engaged in genocide.

I lack sufficiently powerful words to express my outrage over Russia's bloody cynicism in attacking a small, free people, or to castigate our media for their inane coverage - or to
condemn our own government's shameful flight from responsibility.

Just as Moscow has reverted to its old habit of sending in tanks to snuff out freedom, Washington has defaulted to form by abandoning Georgia to the invasion - after encouraging
Georgia to stand up to the Kremlin.

Reminds me of 1956, when we encouraged the Hungarians to defy Moscow - then abandoned them. And of 1991, when we prodded Iraq's Shia to rise up against Saddam - then
abandoned them. We've called Georgia a "friend and ally." Well, honorable men and states stand by their friends and allies. We haven't.

Oh, we sure are giving those Russians a tongue-lashing. I'll bet Putin's just shaking as he faces the awesome verbal rage of Condi Rice. President Bush? He went to a basketball
game.

The only decent thing we've done was to reveal, at the UN, that the Russians tried to cut a deal with us to remove Georgia's president.

Shame on us.

RUSSIA's military is succeeding in its invasion of Georgia, but only because Moscow has applied overwhelming force.

This campaign was supposed to be the big debut for the Kremlin's revitalized armed forces (funded by the country's new petro-wealth). Well, the new Russian military looks a lot
like the old Russian military: slovenly and not ready for prime time.

It can hammer tiny Georgia into submission - but this campaign unintentionally reveals plenty of enduring Russian weaknesses.

The most visible failings are those of the air force. Flying Moscow's latest ground-attack jets armed with the country's newest precision weapons, pilots are missing far more
targets than they're hitting.

All those strikes on civilian apartment buildings and other non-military targets? Some may be intentional (the Russians aren't above terror-bombing), but most are just the result of
ill-trained pilots flying scared.

They're missing pipelines, rail lines and oil-storage facilities - just dumping their bombs as quickly as they can and heading home.

Russia's also losing aircraft. The Kremlin admits two were shot down; the Georgians claimed they'd downed a dozen by Sunday. Split the difference, and you have seven or more
Russian aircraft knocked out of the sky by a tiny enemy. Compare that to US Air Force losses - statistically zero - in combat in all of our wars since Desert Storm.

As one US officer observed to me, the Russian pilots are neither professionally nor emotionally toughened for their missions. Their equipment's pretty good (not as good as ours),
but their training lags - and their pilots log far fewer flight hours than ours do.

Russia has been planning and organizing this invasion for months. And they're pulling it off - but the military's embarrassing blunders must be infuriating Prime Minister Putin.

Ellie

[thedrifter]

The Ashes of Victory

By Stephen Brown
FrontPageMagazine.com | 8/13/2008

A reinvigorated and self-confident Russia flexed its muscles and concluded a decisive victory over America’s ally, Georgia, yesterday after a cruel, six-day war.

America’s Cold War rival had been a simple spectator to events on its borders since the Soviet Union’s collapse in 1991. The independence declarations of former Soviet republics, NATO’s expansion eastwards to its doorstep and the American military presence in Central Asia had left the former superpower with a feeling of powerlessness and loss of pride that the NATO bombing of its historical ally, Serbia, in 1999, only deepened.

With its first military action abroad since the 1979 invasion of Afghanistan, Russia announced that those days of passivity are over and its determination to shape events on its periphery, however bloody, has returned. Georgia, a former Soviet republic located on Russia’s southern border, became the first country to learn the harsh lesson that comes with a Russian revival.


Late last week, Georgia had attacked South Ossetia, a region that had separated from it in the early 1990s, killing ten Russian peacekeepers in the initial onslaught, awakening the Russian bear. Russian forces dashed Georgian hopes of quickly reincorporating South Ossetia and re-establishing its territorial integrity, by driving the Georgian army back, and then following it into Georgia proper.


With a victorious Russian army in hundreds of tanks poised to attack Tiblisi, Georgia’s capital, and under attack from air and sea, Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili accepted a six-point peace plan yesterday evening. It was hammered out in Moscow yesterday between President Dimitri Medvedev and France’s President Sarkozy. Sounding like the head of a colonial power contemptuously dealing with a native uprising, Medevev said Georgia had been “punished."

“The aggressor has … suffered very significant losses,” affirmed the Russian president, who has only been in office 100 days. “Its military has been disorganized.”


According to the peace accord, both sides agreed to withdraw their troops to their pre-war positions and to renounce violence to resolve the status of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, another Georgian region whose secession Georgia has also disputed.


Besides the hundreds of dead and 100,000 refugees the war created, the most important local result is that Georgia has lost South Ossetia and Abkhazia, at least for the foreseeable future. Showing the world who’s calling the shots now in the Caucuses, Medvedev cynically stated that the two regions must be allowed to decide their own futures.


But Russia, observers note, had already been preparing a “silent annexation” of the rebellious regions by issuing Russian citizenship to a reported 90 per cent of their inhabitants and by supporting their weak economies. And some believe Russia’s support for Georgia’s secessionist areas was simply a counter-reaction to western countries’ recent recognition of Kosovo.


“When the West ignored Russia’s wishes by recognizing Kosovo’s independence, the unrecognized territories in the Caucuses seemed like a convenient tool for exacting revenge,” wrote Alexander Golts in the Moscow Times.


However, the recently concluded war had much wider implications than just the fate of two small, relatively unknown pieces of real estate. As with most local wars, there are geopolitical interests involved. And this one was no different.


One of the most important was Georgia’s application for NATO membership. The West had misjudged how strongly Vladimir Putin was against the western alliance’s expansion into the Caucuses. Only last Saturday, he warned NATO against Georgia’s acceptance.


Russia has probably achieved its aim of preventing Georgian inclusion into NATO, which was the recent conflict’s main goal. The war and its violence-prone, secessionist regions have most likely convinced enough NATO members that Georgia is too unstable and not worth the risk of hostilities with a determined Russia. Besides, the candidate member is located in the powder keg Caucuses Mountains where four wars have broken out since the Soviet Union’s demise 17 years ago.


Georgia’s defeat in the war is a loss and a challenge for America. Under President Mikhail Saakashvili, who came to power in the 2003 Rose Revolution, Georgia had turned to the West. It had provided troops, trained by America and Israel, to both the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts and received well over a billion dollars in American aid since 1991. For George Bush, according to one observer, Georgia was “a showpiece of democratization and market economy.”


America was reportedly also enjoying warm relations with the oil-exporting Caucasian country of Azerbaijan next door to Georgia. A closer friendship with this government may have provided America with a desirable presence on the Caspian Sea near resource-rich Kazakhstan.


But all that may now be lost as Russia’s other war aim, to regain control of the Caucuses, is now realizable. George Bush rightly accuses yesterday’s victor of wanting regime change in Georgia, recognizing the Kremlin will now try to overthrow Saakashvili and install a pro-Moscow government. However, the Georgian people may do this themselves the next election, as some hold their president responsible for the disaster that has befallen their country.


“It’s a disgrace,” one Georgian told a German newspaper about the war’s outcome. “We don’t need such a government.”


Because of Georgia’s defeat, the all-important gas and oil pipelines that lessened Europe’s dependency on Russia as an energy supplier are also now less secure. Georgia was an important transit area for one such line and the future site of another. During the war, Russia showed its regard for Georgian oil facilities when its navy reportedly destroyed Poti, Georgia’s oil-exporting port.


Lack of NATO resolve in helping Georgia against Russia negatively affected the alliance as well. Members that were once Soviet republics know that being Russia’s neighbor can be a bad thing, which is why they joined and why they are fully supporting Georgia in the conflict. But after observing NATO’s inaction, they now fear the alliance will not protect them in a confrontation with Russia as well.


And these former Soviet republics are right to fear the aggression and expansion of a resurgent Russia. U.S. diplomat George Kennan wrote in 1944 that the Kremlin sees only “vassals or enemies”, while Eastern European expert Ariel Cohen noted Putin spoke last spring about “dismembering” the Ukraine, a former Soviet republic and, like Georgia, a NATO candidate. In which case, the world can expect the Russian bear hug to begin squeezing another target very soon.
Stephen Brown is a contributing editor at Frontpagemag.com. He has a graduate degree in Russian and Eastern European history. Email him at alsolzh@hotmail.com.

Ellie