Tag Archive 'Saakashvili'

Sarkozy The Georgian Hero?

Not sure how true this is, but here’s what the London Times says about how close Putin came to over throwing the Georgian government.

With Russian tanks only 30 miles from Tbilisi on August 12, Mr Sarkozy told Mr Putin that the world would not accept the overthrow of Georgia’s Government. According to Mr Levitte, the Russian seemed unconcerned by international reaction. “I am going to hang Saakashvili by the balls,” Mr Putin declared.

Mr Sarkozy thought he had misheard. “Hang him?” – he asked. “Why not?” Mr Putin replied. “The Americans hanged Saddam Hussein.” Mr Sarkozy, using the familiar tu, tried to reason with him: “Yes but do you want to end up like [President] Bush?” Mr Putin was briefly lost for words, then said: “Ah – you have scored a point there.”

This would seem to settle whether or not Russia aimed to actually overthrow Georgia’s government that some in the blogosphere were debating.

Also is it just me or have a lot of my titles been ending in question marks lately? Who knows?

(HT: Reason Online)

Sphere: Related Content

Four Hours to Tbilisi

Well, well. Mr. Putin held a press conference and there’s much to condemn as usual. Not the least of which is Putin’s continued delusion that Russia was invaded by Georgia. But foremost perhaps, is an education for those who argued that the investiture of Tbilisi was not very much in the cards until the very last moment:

Mr Putin said that Russia had been four hours away from invading the Georgian capital Tblisi and deposing its pro-American leader, Mikheil Saakashvili. It refrained from doing so but now, Mr Putin said, it was up to the Georgian people.
(The Times)

A mitigating faction is still at work in Russian policy however, as today the South Ossetian leader Eduard Kokoity again pledged to be annexed by Russia…and was forced to withdraw his statement. Simultaneously, Sergei Bagpash, leader of Abkhazia, pledged not to join Russia, but instead the CIS.

Sphere: Related Content

Georgia Cuts Loose

Saakashvili has finally severed all Georgian diplomatic ties with Russia. A bit overdue, I must say.

Meanwhile, Putin, in his ongoing effort to legitimize the Russian invasion of Georgia, again compared his country’s actions to the NATO intervention against Serbia –which Russia and Putin himself still opposes in principle as illegitimate, but nevermind. Putin argued that NATO intervened because the “White House gave the order and everyone carried it out,” in a rather pathetically ahistorical appeal to transatlantic discord.

Sphere: Related Content

Georgian Wine Solidarity and Other Things

Estonians and Latvians are apparently buying up all available Georgian wine in a demonstration of national solidarity with the beleaguered republic. Particularly popular is the consumer label Old Tbilisi (order here).

Sandra Saakashvili, First Lady of Georgia, is weathering the storm with her children in Ukraine, as the guest of Kateryna Yushchenko. Foreign Notes wonders what effect the Georgian experience at the hands of Russia is having on public attitudes toward NATO membership there. Public sentiment was opposed to Ukrainian entrance prior to the war. An essential question for a number of countries really.

Why wait on the West BTW, why not establish an Eastern European NATO? Get everyone on board, you might even have a more formidable fighting force against Russia.

Meanwhile, Estonians have arrived to put their lives on the line in Georgia. Their outfits will hopefully stand out in identifying them as humanitarian workers at distance. Perhaps it will dissuade a Russian (or worse, separatist) sniper.

Sphere: Related Content

Hey, Remember that One Time Some of You Made Fun of Me for Saying that Georgia Wouldn’t Be Occupied?

Exactly.

Now, as for Lee’s latest… Let’s just say I’ll be shocked if Saakashvili lasts the year.

Sphere: Related Content

Saakashvili has a Future

Last night Joshua argued that Saakashvili, having quite obviously failed to recapture his renegade territories, is certain to be finished one way or the other. Either overthrown by the Russian army, or by the Georgian people at the ballot box. This is a bit of an analyst consensus as you look around the web. Not so fast, says me.

It should be said that the mere fact of the Russian demand to remove him has supplied a method for his political redemption — which is why it was so important for the United States to leak the Russian foreign minister’s views on this. If Russia fails to bring him down, he can easily emerge as a defiant patriot who defeated the one Russian objective they most desired, through force of personal will.

The trouble with pressing your advantages and changing your objectives to increasingly ambitious goals, is if you get to a point where you cannot (or will not) actualize the final measure, you can create the circumstances for a political defeat. With the world aware that the Russian goal is to remove Saakashvili, if they don’t do it now, that can (and probably will) rescue him as a political leader.

Sphere: Related Content

When There’s Nothing Left to Burn You Have to Set Yourself on Fire

Sorry for my absenteeism on this, guys, but I’ve barely had the time to write on Registan.net about the war in Georgia (seriously, go there for some really in-depth discussions about what is going on), and have simply neglected copying posts over here. I’m sorry. Since I don’t have the time to follow the play-by-play very closely thanks to work, and since in my experience that doesn’t indicate much of use anyway, I’ll summarize my writing on the conflict so far.

For starters, this was a surprise to no one. Weeks before Saakashvili struck Tskhinvali, the South Ossetians were simultaneously shelling Georgian positions while using Russian transports to evacuate thousands of women and children for “summer camp” in North Ossetia right when Russia was massing troops across the border. Coupled with the years of Russian provocations in Abkhazia, including downing of Georgian drones by Russian aircraft, and the repeated military strikes by Russian helicopters on Georgian territory, it should surprise no one that Saakashvili finally reacted.

That being said, Saakashvili obviously miscalculated the extent to which he was being baited by Russia, and his normal brinksmanship sort of telegraphed that he would take decisive action at some point.

At the same time, the ultimate result of this fight will not be the annexation of Georgia by Russia, nor will it be an immediately dramatic reordering of the energy policies of the region. Russia will not touch the BTC pipeline, nor will it occupy Tblisi. They just want Saakashvili gone—the equivalent is how we used to view Fidel Castro… and if the opportunity presented itself we would have tried (and did several times) to kick him out of office without formally occupying the territory.

It is also important to note that Russia’s financial markets are not doing well right now. They have been steadily sinking since outright hostilities broke out, and they can be expected to sink further the longer conflict continues. So don’t expect anything long term from the Russian military—war is not as profitable for them as it is for us. If they do drag this war out much longer, they lose big time—financially, militarily, and internationally. Which they might do, because one should never underestimate Russian hubris.

Believe it or not, Russia actually is responsive to global opinion. Just not in the way we like to think. A key part of Russia’s geopolitical strategy is to breed European dependence on Russia energy, a goal they have largely achieved. At the same time, that isn’t permanent, and if Russia pushes too far Europe could panic, actually bother to come up with a unified energy policy, and diversify its supplies. Russia does not want that. But they do want to dictate terms along their southern flank.

Russia also has a compelling interest in preventing Georgian ascension into NATO. It has been interesting to see how much diplomatic activity has been in Brussels, rather than Tblisi, Tskhinvali, or Moscow. They are keenly aware of their audience here, and given the fact that they’ve made their point—NATO’s stipulation that Georgia solve its “frozen conflicts” is clearly still valid—they have little reason to occupy the capital and provoke a global response.

Questions remain. Did NATO’s stipulation, along with years of American support, funding, and supply, create the conditions for this war? Right now, it looks like it did (so what culpability does the West have?). Does this war conclusively prove that Russia is politically rotten, and that Medvedev is worse than a paper tiger since it’s all been about Putin? Quite possibly. Does this mean that Caspian energy will no longer flow according to Western interests? Almost definitely. Can this mean, since Russia stands a serious chance of overstepping its bounds and provoking a counter-movement from the international community, that the U.S. might in all of this emerge the actual winner? A remote possibility.

More ominously, what happens to Georgia? Saakashvili is finished, but there is no one to replace him. As the electoral crisis last year demonstrated, even when he voluntarily resigns and holds fair and open elections, he remains the only real leader the Georgians have. Alas, he is finished now. What, or more importantly who, comes next? It will almost certainly be one of the many opposition leaders, all of whom share varying degrees of warmth toward Russia. The winner of that political fight—which will be metaphorically if not physically bloody—will determine the ultimate result of this war. So in that sense, Russia is taking just as big a gamble here as Saakashvili did.

But basically, it is all very fluid, and there are too many variables to conclusively discuss what the war will really mean. Which is a cop-out in a way, but it is all one should feel comfortable saying.

Sphere: Related Content

So Ends the Kouchner Adventure

Russia wants Saakashvili gone and then categorically rejects the French ceasefire agreement Saakashvili signed. Even while the increasingly uncomfortable Medvedev says they’re all but finished with military operations. The humiliating exposure of Medvedev’s “presidency” is one of the more comical aspects of this episode.

Putin, the master of I’m-not-you-are school of geopolitical disputation, accuses the US of a “Cold War mentality.” I would agree, of course it does tend to happen when you start acting like the Soviet Union.

He’s also rather upset that the United States flew the Georgian contingent home from Iraq. Quite literally, the absolute least we could do. One gets the feeling that an IBM sales office in Tbilisi would constitute unwarranted American influence in Georgia for Putin.

And…Estonia “the other plucky”, speaks:

‘Russia’s military strikes in Georgia toll a knell for many of Europe’s hopes, such as the possibility of sharing common fundamental values with Russia,’ Toomas Sildam said Ilves told the European Union’s foreign policy chief Javier Solana on Sunday.
(Forbes)

Enough to turn you green.

Sphere: Related Content

Found Him

Joshua hasn’t disappeared, he just isn’t gracing us with his opinions on the conflict in the Caucasus, but you can find them at Registan.net, here and here.

Heh, Insty links to him, but describes it as peevish (Josh? Peevish? Also, by linking to him kind of undercuts Josh’s complaint.) Great surprise, but Joshua makes a few good points about Russia having pushed the action using mischief in Ossetia to set off Georgia.

Outside of being unfairly peevish about people searching for information, and providing some links of use (as has Lee) I would caution Josh on this:

the plain old wrong (Russia wants to annex Georgia)

Maybe not, but I am not so sure given the behavior of Russia since Josh wrote his last post on this.

Sphere: Related Content

The “Serbian” Claim to South Ossetia

The point has been made more than once that the Russian incursion into South Ossetia is ideologically motivated as a retaliatory gesture for Kosovo independence. Wu Wei makes a fine point about why this is not plausible if so:

The Kosovo Albanians had had 10 years of oppression by Slobodan Milosovic in Yugoslavia before it broke up, and there had been wars provoked by him in Croatia and Bosnia, with charges of genocide generally accepted now. So people knew exactly what he was planning when he started driving Albanians out of Kosovo. And there were something like 2 million Albanians driven out of Kosovo across the border into Albania and Macedonia. Without the bombing he would not have stopped.

Bigger is not better, and war is never right. But Saakashvili, with all his faults is not Milosovic.
(Wu Wei)

True in the immediate, but there’s an underlying historical dissonance to the Russian claim as well. Kosovo is after all, the Serbian ethnic homeland. The churches of the old Serbian kings are still the dominant architectural element of the ancient towns in that country and Serbia has hereditary claims to these southern lands which predate written records. The loss of them is just as ancient a grievance, given that their uprising against the Ottomans in 1690s is what sent them north.

The key difference here is that any South Ossetian claim to Russian identification is as young as 1801 at the earliest. As for the ethnically Russian emigrees, that mostly goes back to the 20th century. These are not comparable claims for Russian territorial identity upon the land.

Sphere: Related Content

Achieving International Opposition

James Traub has written a magnificent survey of the events leading up to the current war in Georgia, and the personal contest between Mikheil Saakashvili and Putin.

(more…)

Sphere: Related Content

Northwestern Front Opens for Georgia

Abkhazia attacks Georgia at the Kodori Gorge, opening a second front. Saakashvili says attack repelled.

Sphere: Related Content

Some Anonymous South Ossetia Endgame Analysis

Daniel Nexon gets an email from an anonymous Russia hand speculating on the grim possible outcomes for Georgia:

This is not going to end well for Georgia. Russia has expanded its targets beyond the vicinity of South Ossetia, hitting not only military but also economic and communications targets throughout Georgia. It is unlikely, though, that Russia intends to set up a puppet government as they did in Chechnya–the local population is far too hostile, and I doubt that they have any reliable local elites that they can turn to. More likely, we will see a clear demand for independence for both Abkhazia and South Ossetia (though I suspect that shortly after obtaining independence, S. Ossetia would petition to rejoin the motherland, which Russia would, of course, graciously grant.

Rough agreement from me. Although I don’t know if we could consider the population of Chechnya friendly to Russian ownership, nor after extended warfare consider the Russophile local elites mostly living.

And suppose for a moment that Georgia doesn’t stop fighting? Russia’s supply lines –excuse me, supply line– to South Ossetia is precarious to put it mildly. Saakashvili wants a ceasefire, but Russia always has a problem with pressing advantages.

With winter ahead, a fighting defense will necessitate expansion of the geographic corridor of occupation. And in pushing back Georgian attacks, it’s very easy to escalate into conquering the entire country (even without the possible coastal attack). If the Russians do that, they certainly aren’t going to leave a hostile government in power (which is the only kind that could get elected at this point). The “puppet state” scenario seems very much in the cards as things stand (if this plays out militarily).

Sphere: Related Content