Tweet
Dissident Voice, California
May 7 2008
Georgia, NATO, and Russia
The Mouse That Roared
by Eric Walberg / May 7th, 2008
While Georgians see themselves as part of Europe, `the whole history
of Georgia is of Georgian kings writing to Western kings for help, or
for understanding. And sometimes not even getting a response,' said
its thoroughly Westernised president, Mikheil Saakashvili, in a recent
interview. `Not just being an isolated, faraway country, but part of
something bigger.'
With a population of 4.7 million, this beautiful land, noted for its
dozen or so hot-blooded independent-minded peoples, is surrounded by
at best indifferent neighbours Armenia, Turkey, Azerbaijan, and of
course Russia. Its fiery 40-year-old president does not disappoint,
with his penchant for thumbing his nose at Russia and lavishly
admiring US President George W Bush.
In his short first term (he called early elections last year and won a
disputed second term, though his popularity even officially dropped
from 97 to 52 per cent), he combined scorning bluster at Russia with
oily praise for Bush and now presidential hopeful Senator John McCain,
who even brought him a bullet-proof vest, all the time loudly
demanding membership in NATO.
This may just look like pre-election posturing, with less than a month
to go before the country's parliamentary elections, but there's just
too much at stake to think so. It's as if he is determined to prove to
the world that NATO is indeed primarily an alliance to confront
Russia.
In fact, Georgia cannot by any stretch of the imagination become a
legitimate member of the `Atlantic' alliance, which according to its
charter is a North American-European alliance. Georgia, unlike Turkey,
has not even a fraction of its territory in Europe. So Saakashvili
seems determined to show the world that not only is NATO primarily an
anti-Russian alliance, but it is not even a European one. But then we
know what often comes out of the mouth of babes. Petulant children are
always revealing embarrassing truths which adults try to keep hidden.
While Europe's `kings' demurred at Saakashvili's noisy whining at the
last NATO meeting in April in Bucharest, the matter is far from
settled. Not a day goes by now without claims of the Russians shooting
down Georgian spy planes and counter-claims of Georgian troop build-up
on the border of the breakaway Georgian province of Abkhazia.
This is all according to plan for Saakashvili. Georgia was the main
topic at an emergency 30 April NATO meeting in Brussels, following
Russia's deployment of extra peacekeeping troops and setting up of
observation border posts in Abkhazia, in turn in response to Georgia's
deployment of 1,500 troops in the mountainous Upper Kodori valley ' a
small but strategic enclave inside the separatist territory. It was
`possible to conclude that Georgia is preparing a base for a military
operation against Abkhazia', the Russian Foreign Ministry reported. At
the NATO meeting, it was announced that `NATO ambassadors' would be
coming to Tbilisi soon as a show of support for this non-European
country that just happens to be a vital alternative energy transit
route to Russia. Negotiations on Georgia's eventual membership to NATO
are intended to begin in December.
Under a key Soviet-era arms pact, Moscow should notify NATO nations of
any troop movements, as it has continued to do despite freezing the
Conventional Forces in Europe treaty last December. Despite the claims
and denials, the UN mission monitoring Georgia and Abkhazia, UNOMIG,
said on 21 April that its monitors `did not observe anything to
substantiate reports of a build-up of forces on either side.'
Whatever the details, the Russians are clearly reinforcing the current
status quo in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, where citizens have Russian
citizenship for the asking, while the Georgians ' at least the
president ' are determined to reincorporate the rebel
territories. Russian President Vladimir Putin recognised Abkhazia and
South Ossetia, another breakaway region of Georgia, as legal entities
this month, prompting Tbilisi to accuse Russia of `de facto
annexation'. Georgia denied that it was planning to recapture
Abkhazia, but then Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has said
many times that Russia is duty-bound to protect Russian-speakers in
the breakaway regions and would use military force if Georgia attacked
either Abkhazia or South Ossetia.
Abkhazia's Foreign Ministry said last week that the threat of a
Georgian attack was real. `We have a very distinct feeling that
Georgia is preparing something,' Maxim Gunjia, Abkhazia's vice foreign
minister said. `We expect an attack from Georgia at any time.'
Russia's government recently upgraded its trade relations with the
breakaway republics, while diplomatic relations with Georgia have
chilled and Georgian wines been banned, much to Saakashvili's
chagrin. Or is this precisely what he wants? To provoke the giant and
turn Georgian against Russian, while alternately charming and shouting
`wolf!' to his new Western friends, drawing them into Georgia's long,
if obscure, history of swashbuckling warfare? As if to make the point,
on 29 April, Georgia confirmed that it plans to block Moscow's
accession to the World Trade Organisation.
Saakashvili attempted to smooth things over with the Abkhaz and South
Ossetian people during a televised address on 29 April in which he
offered to make the vice-president of Georgia an Abkhazian, and
described Russia as an `outrageous and irresponsible force' attempting
to `involve us in confrontation. The more we speak about peace, the
more this third force speaks about war. It is the force that leaves
you no right of choice and speaks on your behalf with us and with the
rest of the world that needs confrontation.'
The leaders of both unrecognised republics rejected Saakashvili's
offer of peace and friendship out of hand. De facto Abkhaz President
Sergei Bagapsh said, `the existence of Abkhazia and Georgia in a
unified state is impossible,' while his South Ossetian counterpart,
Eduard Kokoity, accused Georgia of conducting a policy of genocide
against the Ossetians and stressed that, `the Ossetian people have
made their choice in favour of an independent state.'
There is little likelihood that this brash youngster will revert to
realpolitik in the near future. He seems to thrive on controversy. He
has even invited the Israeli army to train Georgian commandos. His
rash and impetuous style is increasingly alienating not only Russians,
but his own Georgians as well. Last November, opposition protests
prompted him to impose a state of emergency that included a blackout
on all non-state media.
Is NATO the key to a return to glory for this beleaguered nation, or a
ticket to further misery and insecurity? As history has shown
Georgians time and again, Europe ' let alone the US ' is far
away. Saakashvili, seemingly looking for a doting parent across the
Atlantic, might pause to ponder an Arabic proverb: `A close neighbour
is better than a far distant mother.' He would also be wise to take a
lesson from his country's often tragic history: while Georgia
flourished briefly as an empire in the 13th century, it has fared best
when it made peace with its neighbours and made the best use of its
rich endowments, both natural and human. This is precisely what it did
during its Soviet period, when its film directors, composers, artists,
writers, and athletes ' not to mention politicians ' wowed the world,
when its mountains yielded world class wines and served as a
playground for countless tourists.
While Eastern Europe and the Baltics managed to jump into NATO's
embrace with little protest from Russia, the attempt to suck Ukraine
and Georgia into what is clearly a US military alliance intended to
police the world will not be tolerated by Russia. Instead of making
peace with its increasingly robust neighbour, Saakashvili is doing
everything to provoke it into full scale confrontation, with the
intention of drawing the EU and US in to save its bacon.
So far only a few sane voices have been heard from Europe, notably
German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier. None from the
US. Whether NATO dresses up the need to leave Ukraine and Georgia out
as a sensible compromise with Russia or lets this squeaky mouse draw
it further into a very dangerous confrontation is increasingly an
issue that concerns the entire world. It is time for sensible NATO
members and non-NATO countries to speak out before shots are fired at
more than unmanned drones.
But even if an acceptable comedown is achieved, the damage to NATO's
peace-loving image will have been done. Saakashvili, by pushing the
boundaries of this bogus alliance into the realm of the surreal, may
just be the catalyst for its well-earned demise.
Eric Walberg is a journalist who worked in Uzbekistan and is now
writing for Al-Ahram Weekly in Cairo. You can reach him at his site:
www.geocities.com/walberg2002/ Read other articles by Eric, or visit
Eric's website.
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/05/ge orgia-nato-and-russia/
From: Baghdasarian
May 7 2008
Georgia, NATO, and Russia
The Mouse That Roared
by Eric Walberg / May 7th, 2008
While Georgians see themselves as part of Europe, `the whole history
of Georgia is of Georgian kings writing to Western kings for help, or
for understanding. And sometimes not even getting a response,' said
its thoroughly Westernised president, Mikheil Saakashvili, in a recent
interview. `Not just being an isolated, faraway country, but part of
something bigger.'
With a population of 4.7 million, this beautiful land, noted for its
dozen or so hot-blooded independent-minded peoples, is surrounded by
at best indifferent neighbours Armenia, Turkey, Azerbaijan, and of
course Russia. Its fiery 40-year-old president does not disappoint,
with his penchant for thumbing his nose at Russia and lavishly
admiring US President George W Bush.
In his short first term (he called early elections last year and won a
disputed second term, though his popularity even officially dropped
from 97 to 52 per cent), he combined scorning bluster at Russia with
oily praise for Bush and now presidential hopeful Senator John McCain,
who even brought him a bullet-proof vest, all the time loudly
demanding membership in NATO.
This may just look like pre-election posturing, with less than a month
to go before the country's parliamentary elections, but there's just
too much at stake to think so. It's as if he is determined to prove to
the world that NATO is indeed primarily an alliance to confront
Russia.
In fact, Georgia cannot by any stretch of the imagination become a
legitimate member of the `Atlantic' alliance, which according to its
charter is a North American-European alliance. Georgia, unlike Turkey,
has not even a fraction of its territory in Europe. So Saakashvili
seems determined to show the world that not only is NATO primarily an
anti-Russian alliance, but it is not even a European one. But then we
know what often comes out of the mouth of babes. Petulant children are
always revealing embarrassing truths which adults try to keep hidden.
While Europe's `kings' demurred at Saakashvili's noisy whining at the
last NATO meeting in April in Bucharest, the matter is far from
settled. Not a day goes by now without claims of the Russians shooting
down Georgian spy planes and counter-claims of Georgian troop build-up
on the border of the breakaway Georgian province of Abkhazia.
This is all according to plan for Saakashvili. Georgia was the main
topic at an emergency 30 April NATO meeting in Brussels, following
Russia's deployment of extra peacekeeping troops and setting up of
observation border posts in Abkhazia, in turn in response to Georgia's
deployment of 1,500 troops in the mountainous Upper Kodori valley ' a
small but strategic enclave inside the separatist territory. It was
`possible to conclude that Georgia is preparing a base for a military
operation against Abkhazia', the Russian Foreign Ministry reported. At
the NATO meeting, it was announced that `NATO ambassadors' would be
coming to Tbilisi soon as a show of support for this non-European
country that just happens to be a vital alternative energy transit
route to Russia. Negotiations on Georgia's eventual membership to NATO
are intended to begin in December.
Under a key Soviet-era arms pact, Moscow should notify NATO nations of
any troop movements, as it has continued to do despite freezing the
Conventional Forces in Europe treaty last December. Despite the claims
and denials, the UN mission monitoring Georgia and Abkhazia, UNOMIG,
said on 21 April that its monitors `did not observe anything to
substantiate reports of a build-up of forces on either side.'
Whatever the details, the Russians are clearly reinforcing the current
status quo in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, where citizens have Russian
citizenship for the asking, while the Georgians ' at least the
president ' are determined to reincorporate the rebel
territories. Russian President Vladimir Putin recognised Abkhazia and
South Ossetia, another breakaway region of Georgia, as legal entities
this month, prompting Tbilisi to accuse Russia of `de facto
annexation'. Georgia denied that it was planning to recapture
Abkhazia, but then Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has said
many times that Russia is duty-bound to protect Russian-speakers in
the breakaway regions and would use military force if Georgia attacked
either Abkhazia or South Ossetia.
Abkhazia's Foreign Ministry said last week that the threat of a
Georgian attack was real. `We have a very distinct feeling that
Georgia is preparing something,' Maxim Gunjia, Abkhazia's vice foreign
minister said. `We expect an attack from Georgia at any time.'
Russia's government recently upgraded its trade relations with the
breakaway republics, while diplomatic relations with Georgia have
chilled and Georgian wines been banned, much to Saakashvili's
chagrin. Or is this precisely what he wants? To provoke the giant and
turn Georgian against Russian, while alternately charming and shouting
`wolf!' to his new Western friends, drawing them into Georgia's long,
if obscure, history of swashbuckling warfare? As if to make the point,
on 29 April, Georgia confirmed that it plans to block Moscow's
accession to the World Trade Organisation.
Saakashvili attempted to smooth things over with the Abkhaz and South
Ossetian people during a televised address on 29 April in which he
offered to make the vice-president of Georgia an Abkhazian, and
described Russia as an `outrageous and irresponsible force' attempting
to `involve us in confrontation. The more we speak about peace, the
more this third force speaks about war. It is the force that leaves
you no right of choice and speaks on your behalf with us and with the
rest of the world that needs confrontation.'
The leaders of both unrecognised republics rejected Saakashvili's
offer of peace and friendship out of hand. De facto Abkhaz President
Sergei Bagapsh said, `the existence of Abkhazia and Georgia in a
unified state is impossible,' while his South Ossetian counterpart,
Eduard Kokoity, accused Georgia of conducting a policy of genocide
against the Ossetians and stressed that, `the Ossetian people have
made their choice in favour of an independent state.'
There is little likelihood that this brash youngster will revert to
realpolitik in the near future. He seems to thrive on controversy. He
has even invited the Israeli army to train Georgian commandos. His
rash and impetuous style is increasingly alienating not only Russians,
but his own Georgians as well. Last November, opposition protests
prompted him to impose a state of emergency that included a blackout
on all non-state media.
Is NATO the key to a return to glory for this beleaguered nation, or a
ticket to further misery and insecurity? As history has shown
Georgians time and again, Europe ' let alone the US ' is far
away. Saakashvili, seemingly looking for a doting parent across the
Atlantic, might pause to ponder an Arabic proverb: `A close neighbour
is better than a far distant mother.' He would also be wise to take a
lesson from his country's often tragic history: while Georgia
flourished briefly as an empire in the 13th century, it has fared best
when it made peace with its neighbours and made the best use of its
rich endowments, both natural and human. This is precisely what it did
during its Soviet period, when its film directors, composers, artists,
writers, and athletes ' not to mention politicians ' wowed the world,
when its mountains yielded world class wines and served as a
playground for countless tourists.
While Eastern Europe and the Baltics managed to jump into NATO's
embrace with little protest from Russia, the attempt to suck Ukraine
and Georgia into what is clearly a US military alliance intended to
police the world will not be tolerated by Russia. Instead of making
peace with its increasingly robust neighbour, Saakashvili is doing
everything to provoke it into full scale confrontation, with the
intention of drawing the EU and US in to save its bacon.
So far only a few sane voices have been heard from Europe, notably
German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier. None from the
US. Whether NATO dresses up the need to leave Ukraine and Georgia out
as a sensible compromise with Russia or lets this squeaky mouse draw
it further into a very dangerous confrontation is increasingly an
issue that concerns the entire world. It is time for sensible NATO
members and non-NATO countries to speak out before shots are fired at
more than unmanned drones.
But even if an acceptable comedown is achieved, the damage to NATO's
peace-loving image will have been done. Saakashvili, by pushing the
boundaries of this bogus alliance into the realm of the surreal, may
just be the catalyst for its well-earned demise.
Eric Walberg is a journalist who worked in Uzbekistan and is now
writing for Al-Ahram Weekly in Cairo. You can reach him at his site:
www.geocities.com/walberg2002/ Read other articles by Eric, or visit
Eric's website.
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/05/ge orgia-nato-and-russia/
From: Baghdasarian