Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Inside A Misunderstood Conflict Zone: Scott Taylor In The Caucasus

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Inside A Misunderstood Conflict Zone: Scott Taylor In The Caucasus

    INSIDE A MISUNDERSTOOD CONFLICT ZONE: SCOTT TAYLOR IN THE CAUCASUS
    by Christopher Deliso

    Antiwar.com
    http://www.antiwar.com/deliso/ ?articleid=13733
    Nov 7 2008
    CA

    In this eye-opening interview, Canadian war reporter Scott Taylor
    reflects on his recent visit to the Caucasus, where he got an inside
    look at the scene of this summer's Georgian-Russian conflict from its
    very epicenter - the breakaway Georgian province of South Ossetia -
    while also visiting Nagorno-Karabakh, an Armenian-populated enclave
    and 1990's hotspot claimed by Azerbaijan.

    On his two-week trip, Taylor, editor of Canadian military magazine
    Esprit de Corps, discovered that the real situation on the ground
    is hardly as simple or straightforward as the US and other Western
    governments have claimed it to be.

    Getting In

    Christopher Deliso: Scott, you have reported over the years multiple
    times from rough spots in the Balkans, Iraq and Afghanistan. How did
    this trip compare to previous ones in terms of access?

    Scott Taylor: The complexity of the current situation made even basic
    travel planning much more challenging than is usually the case. Even
    though the places I wanted to see are all relatively close, political
    frictions mean they have to be accessed indirectly. For example, I
    started my trip in Ankara, Turkey, but to reach Yerevan, the Armenian
    capital, I had to fly via Germany, because the Turkish-Armenian border
    has been closed for years.

    >From Armenia, I set out for the self-declared, but unrecognized state
    of Nagorno-Karabakh; since this Armenian enclave is claimed by the
    Azeris, simply having their visa in my passport caused problems for me
    when I later got to Baku, Azerbaijan. From there, I flew to Stavropol
    in Russia and then drove 12 hours to reach South Ossetia. Because
    of the closed Russian-Georgian border, I had to retrace my steps to
    Yerevan in order to get to Tbilisi, Georgia, via bus.

    CD: What was the toughest place to reach? Tskhinvali?

    ST: Correct. Tskhinvali, the capital of South Ossetia, was no doubt
    one of the toughest places I've ever tried to get to. The city is just
    over the internal border of Georgia proper, but access routes from the
    latter remain blocked by the security services. And on the northern
    (Russian Federation) side, South Ossetia is linked to North Ossetia
    by one winding mountain pass.

    Before setting out from Stavropol, I had been assured by the Russian
    authorities that we would have no problems getting there - though
    they apparently forgot to tell the border guards at the South Ossetia
    crossing, who stated that foreign journalists weren't allowed into
    the recent conflict zone. Figuring I had come this far already, I
    waited it out for three days there at the Russian military mountain
    checkpoint. Fortunately, we were finally allowed to go - though it
    took a personal phone call from Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's
    press secretary to convince the police commander that we were harmless.

    CD: Really! How did you manage to get their interest?

    ST: The Russian Embassy in Ottawa had been very supportive of my
    trip from the outset. They had basically called in a few favors,
    and convinced Moscow that I would at least be objective in my
    reporting. Once we were stuck at the border, there was a flurry of
    frantic phone calls well into the wee hours to try and broker my entry.

    CD: That said, given the problems with physical access, did you
    encounter any problems making contact with sources? Were you prevented
    from speaking with any people you wanted to interview?

    ST: Not at all. I had a guide/translator supplied from the news agency
    RIA Novosti, but it was his first visit into the area as well. We
    were allowed to go everywhere on our own, and we spent hours eating,
    and drinking, with the locals.

    Background: Little-known Ossetia

    CD: As we all know, the Caucasus is both a complex and strategic
    region, though one relatively ignored and misunderstood by the
    Western media. When the Georgian offensive in South Ossetia began on
    August 7, just as the Beijing Olympics were beginning, it seemed to
    me that there was this momentary confusion or inability to pinpoint
    this conflict, as reflected in the ambivalence of early reports -
    though the official State Department line about Russian aggression
    and Georgian victimhood soon settled down comfortably enough in the
    media. So do you think there was some lack of a precedent or prototype
    for packaging this conflict, and that this accounted for this media
    ambivalence to some extent?

    ST: Indeed. The Western media doesn't have much of an "institutional
    memory" when it comes to these obscure conflict regions in the
    Caucasus. Nevertheless, since 1989, ethnic Ossetians and Georgians have
    fought on four separate occasions for control of this tiny region,
    only about 75 kilometers in length. Ossetians are, like Russians
    and Georgians, Orthodox Christians, though they ultimately descend
    from the now-vanished nation of the Alans, prominent in the medieval
    period. They consider themselves closer to the Russian side than the
    Georgian. There are about 25,000 ethnic Ossetians in South Ossetia now,
    down from a total of 70,000 in 1989.

    When the USSR was falling apart and Moscow's control over
    its hinterlands dissipated, between 1989 and 1991, the three
    Caucasus republics of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia all sought
    independence. Yet as with Tito's Yugoslavia, the Soviet administrative
    boundaries did not correspond precisely with the ethnic ones. Ossetia
    ended up divided between the newly independent Georgia and the Russian
    Federation. And this led to a violent dispute over territory, with
    widespread atrocities and ethnic cleansing resulting.

    CD: This is the story that's been told selectively about the former
    Yugoslavia, of course.

    ST: Well, yes, but for the Western media, the recent wars in the
    Caucasus hardly register. From 1992-1994, the entire region became
    engulfed in near-simultaneous local conflicts that made the Balkan
    wars then going on seem almost simplistic in comparison. Nevertheless,
    the latter held the attention of the West - despite that the casualties
    and sheer destruction in the Caucasus were relatively greater.

    Saakashvili's Fateful Gambit

    CD: The Georgian offensive was unleashed in August, but must have
    been planned in advance. Is there any evidence in your view for this
    offensive being somewhat of a flamboyant reaction to the April NATO
    Summit, on the part of Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili?

    ST: America has steadily been increasing its influence over the past
    few years in the Caucasus. There's no question that American-educated
    Georgian President Saakashvili, installed following the 2004 "Rose
    Revolution," has been keen on maximizing the benefits of that
    relationship.

    At last April's NATO summit in Bucharest, the US and Canada forwarded
    a motion by which Georgia and Ukraine, both bordering on Russia,
    would be invited to join the alliance as full members. European
    nations killed the initiative, however, prudently realizing it would
    antagonize the Russians.

    Since Saakashvili seemed assured of US support, he apparently felt
    he could count on American backing when he sought to reconquer South
    Ossetia; if it worked, the other Russian-leaning breakaway region,
    Abkhazia, would possibly be next. Both were administratively autonomous
    in Soviet times, and have violently resisted Georgian control since
    1992. However, this gamble proved to be incorrect - even the hawkish
    Bush administration was not willing to risk a world war with Russia
    for the sake of a tiny patch of contested Georgian territory.

    CD: Did you get any sense from any of your interviews as to whether
    Saakashvili's misjudgment owed to either his own incapability, or
    rather being misinformed by outside parties? If the latter, are there
    any opinions as to who and why being floated?

    ST: Everybody on both sides of the conflict line - in fact in the
    entire region - questioned the sanity of Saakashvili. However there is
    a general consensus that he was essentially a puppet of the US State
    Department, and that his military offensive was a test of Russian
    resolve. It is now clear to everybody that the Russian Federation
    has drawn a line in the sand, and they are prepared to forcefully
    respond to any challenge.

    CD: I have been following the US-Georgian military training issue
    for the last 7 years. There's no question that the Georgian army
    has benefited tremendously from that troops training and especially
    American military hardware. Did you find any hard evidence of how
    the American training and provisions affected the Georgian fighting
    strategies, capacities or execution?

    ST: Given the fact that the Georgians collapsed into a panicked mob
    almost as soon as the Russians appeared, I would say that the US
    training was woefully inept. The equipment used by both the Russians
    and Georgians is essentially from the same arsenal, so the difference
    in this battle was the leadership and experience of the troops. In
    fact, even though they possessed a tremendous numerical superiority
    over the South Ossetians, the Georgian tanks were taking a pounding in
    the militia's hit-and-run attacks in the narrow streets of Tskhinvali.

    Combat damage and arson in the center of Tskhinvali

    The Invasion Revisited

    CD: During your trip, were you able to reconstruct anything about
    the early days of the Georgian offensive, and what really happened?

    ST: Very little has been reported about the initial Georgian attack;
    investigating this was the primary focus of my research. When the
    Georgian tanks rolled in, there were no independent monitors in South
    Ossetia. Initial media reports were sketchy and confused. Ossetian
    officials told me that they knew an attack was feared around August 1,
    when the Georgian military began massing armored formations along the
    border. The small South Ossetian militia was mobilized, and Tskhinvali
    hospital added supplies.

    However, President Saakashvili went on the radio on the evening of
    August 7, assuring citizens that no attack was coming. Nevertheless,
    only a few hours later, the Georgians unleashed a sneak attack -
    a barrage of Grom missiles that destroyed the Russian peacekeeping
    force's building, killing 150 personnel.

    CD: Certainly the Georgians would have known that Russia would
    understand this as a declaration of war? How did they follow on this
    act of genius?

    ST: The Georgian military entered the city with T-72 tanks, in the
    process putting down token resistance by the Ossetians. More troops
    were deployed to sweep up the outlying villages, and then they took
    the ridgeline north of the city. From this vantage point the Georgians
    targeted fleeing Ossetian civilians, and were able to provide fire
    support for their troops in Tskhinvali. Soon after, ethnic Georgian
    villagers north of the city, along the road into Russia, attacked
    these Ossetians trying to escape.

    However, the Georgian military did fail to blow up a key bridge on the
    main road, and did not even try to block the vital seven-kilometer
    tunnel linking South Ossetia to Russia. Ossetian commanders told me
    that if the Georgians had sealed the tunnel, it would have prevented
    Russian reinforcements from arriving and guaranteed a Georgian
    victory. And they were never able to completely secure Tskhinvali
    itself, as the local militia used its superior knowledge of urban
    surroundings to confuse the Georgians.

    CD: That's a strange detail, about the tunnel. Did anyone give
    you an explanation as to why the Georgians did not try to bomb or
    close it? Could this be one of the "mistakes" President Saakashvili
    was referring to when he announced the firing of the country's top
    military commander recently?

    ST: Everyone I spoke to, from top commanders to the waitress in
    the café was puzzled by the failure of the Georgians to target the
    tunnel. And every Ossetian knew that if they had sealed that entry
    port, Georgian victory would have been inevitable.

    Russian Barracks hit by Grom missiles on the night of August 7

    Victims of War

    CD: During the fighting, what were the conditions like in the
    city? What kind of civilian casualties were incurred?

    ST: Numbers are not exact, though it is clear that casualties mounted
    quickly - not helped by the fact that the Georgian army kept shelling
    the city hospital. I spoke with the head Ossetian surgeon there,
    Dr. Nikolai Zagoyev, who told me how he and his staff had to move
    the operating room into the basement, where they performed hundreds
    of operations, by candlelight, during the first 72 hours.

    The basement shelter in the hospital where surgeons performed 700
    operations by candlelight

    In fact, some 25 of these medics fell victim to the attack. The very
    poor conditions and lack of blood supplies meant that doctors had to
    donate their own blood to patients before performing surgery. Since
    they lacked time even to test for blood types, Dr. Zagoyev told me
    it was "a miracle" that so many of his patients actually survived.

    CD: Incredible. We also heard reports of civilians attacking other
    civilians, is this correct?

    ST: Yes, first the ethnic Georgian villagers in South Ossetia targeted
    their Ossetian neighbors, after the Georgian army had entered - but
    later, after the Russians arrived, many local Georgians fled along
    with their army, as the furious Ossetians targeted their erstwhile
    persecutors. It was all too typical of such a situation.

    CD: Tell us more about the Russian involvement - when it began,
    and whether they were in fact the "aggressors" in this instance,
    as the Bush administration would have us believe?

    ST: On the morning of August 10, Russian armored units, supported
    by helicopter gunships, poured in through the tunnel connecting
    Tskhinvali with North Ossetia. Simultaneously, Russian troops also
    entered Abkhazia, on the Black Sea coast, to forestall any similar
    Georgian military adventures. The Georgian soldiers put up only a
    minimal fight against the Russians, and quickly withdrew. It was a
    moment of total humiliation for Saakashvili, though the result was
    not hard to predict.

    All in all, the Russian forces drove the Georgian army more than 20
    kilometers back into Georgia proper, an alarming turn of events for
    the West. And then the State Department and its allies began voicing
    support for President Saakashvili, and criticizing the so-called
    "Russian aggression."

    CD: What does the near future hold for civilians in the affected
    parts of Georgia and South Ossetia, in your view?

    ST: Well, a massive Russian-sponsored reconstruction program has begun,
    but it has a long way to go. Winter is coming, utilities have yet to
    be restored, infrastructure is devastated and outside of Tskhinvali
    there are very few habitable buildings remaining. Despite the Russian
    government's hopes for the Ossetians to remain in their homes, it
    was clear that people were seeking to relocate north to Russia as
    soon as they could do so.

    Georgian tanks destroyed during their retreat out of South Ossetia

    CD: Following the August crisis, Russia recognized the independence of
    South Ossetia and Abkhazia - clear retaliation for the Western-backed
    independence of Kosovo, which Russia had opposed. Did people you
    spoke with articulate this relationship?

    ST: It certainly came up in conversation. However it is one of those
    conundrums wherein traditional allies find themselves on opposite sides
    of this equation. For instance, Russia is one of Serbia's strongest
    supporters in denying Kosovo independent status. However much Serbia
    would want to recognize South Ossetia's declaration of independence,
    they cannot do so without undermining their own claim over Kosovo. It
    is the same for the Azeris, who one would think would be supportive
    of their fellow Muslims in Kosovo, but they refuse to recognize it
    as independent for fear of weakening their own claim to the region
    of Nagorno-Karabakh.

    CD: Scott, speaking of the Azeris, you reported last year from
    Azerbaijan, and noted that booming oil wealth there has been reflected
    in major increases in military spending - with possible room for
    application in attempting to retake Nagorno-Karabakh. What is the story
    now? Did you get any information on whether a new conflict is looming?

    ST: What was very interesting is that I was told Russian military
    intelligence actually expected the Azeris to attack Nagorno-Karabakh,
    before any move by Georgia against South Ossetia. However once Russia
    demonstrated their willingness to intervene militarily, the Azeris
    realized that retaking Nagorno Karabakh by force is no longer a
    viable option.

    CD: On the other hand, Russia has now come forward with an initiative
    to help broker peace between the Armenians and Azeris. Obviously such a
    move, if it succeeded, would help the Russians refute the 'aggressors'
    image cast on them by the West. Did you hear anything about this?

    ST: This was something I found out about while I was still in
    Turkey. Of course Ankara has a strong position in all of this as well,
    and the first movements were made when President Abdullah Gul visited
    Yerevan last September. This was ostensibly to watch a football match,
    but it clearly marked a dramatic shift in relations between Armenia
    and Turkey. I was advised by a senior diplomatic source that President
    Medvedev would be holding a summit meeting shortly after Ilham Aliyev
    got reelected in Azerbaijan.

    Those South Ossetians who remain, live among the battle damage

    CD: What is the situation in Nagorno-Karabakh, from an on the ground
    point of view? Do people believe a conflict is coming, or do they
    generally go about their daily lives and have normal services?

    ST: Many Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh are real hard-liners. You
    do not refer to the captured regions as 'occupied,' they insist
    on calling them 'liberated,' even though that liberation involved
    the expulsion of more than one million Azeris from their homes. In
    the seven occupied provinces, the abandoned villages are completely
    destroyed, and this entire territory is like a giant, empty, military
    buffer zone around Nagorno-Karabakh proper.

    This is referred to as the Security Zone by the locals, and they have
    vowed to never return it to the Azeris. For the Armenians living in
    Nagorno-Karabakh, it is indeed business as usual. There has been
    a tremendous amount of money pumped in through donations from the
    Diaspora, which has created a sort of false economy. However, they
    offer cash incentives for couples to marry, and even larger cash
    bonuses for these newlyweds to create offspring. So basically there
    is a major effort underway to create babies.

    CD: Armenia represents Nagorno-Karabakh's interests at the diplomatic
    discussion tables. Are the interests of Yerevan always in lockstep
    with Stepanakert's?

    ST: That is a great question, and of course the answer is no. Yerevan
    has its own interests, and is anxious to begin normalizing relations
    with both Ankara and Baku. At present, landlocked Armenia has only
    two unclosed borders - with Georgia and Iran.

    After the crisis between Russia and Georgia last August, Armenia's
    close ties and dependency on Russia served to illustrate just how
    isolated they are in the region. It is estimated that financially
    Armenia suffered the biggest setback in the wake of that five-day
    war. All in all, this is a very complex and dangerous powder keg. The
    Caucasus is like ten gangsters in an elevator each holding a gun to
    someone else's head. All it will take is for one to sneeze to set off
    a violent chain reaction. On August 7th President Saakashvili started
    to sneeze, but the Russians quickly put a finger under his nose.

    CD: Scott, many thanks for your time, and hope to hear more from
    exclusive info from you again soon on the Caucasus.

    ST: Thank you, Chris.

    --Boundary_(ID_5jhh7ptSVYoXKlSceArcwQ)--
Working...
X