Heavy Fighting in South Ossetia

[CrossLOPER]

How about I punch you in the face? I mean, it's good to be prepared for a situation to occur, right?

Oh dear.

[Ice]

We don't have evidence yet that Russia is trying to topple the Georgian government, but Russia has been, de facto (and I am aware I am using those two words a lot) at war with Georgia ever since Georgia crossed the border, broke a ceasefire, shelled civilians, and fired on Russian peacekeepers (who were originally told to seek cover rather than respond). Russia is breaking the military capacity of the Georgians, who were the aggressors in this round of the fighting.

There are also accounts that the rebels attacked Georgian forces first. You speak like it is a well known fact that Georgia decided to shell the rebels for no apparent reason and Russia was the heroic savior who came to Georgia's aid.

They gave citizenship to Ossetians, and the Ossetians wanted the citizenship and took the citizenship. Like someone else has said in this thread, unless you find evidence that they were forced to take citizenship at gunpoint, this is an invalid point.

I never said they forced to take citizenship. However, just because an area of sovereign country wants to become part of another country, doesn't them the right too. That would be like America absorbing half of Mexico but saying "Hey they wanted it so it's fine".

Because it's good to be prepared for a situation that can occur?

They have had a ceasefire for quite some time now. Why now?

Can I have a link about this "massing of forces" as well?

Sure

Saakashvili said Russia had been massing troops on the border for months.

He said: 'They have been calling it training exercises, but they have not been concealing the fact that they are training these troops for use inside Georgia.

[Devastatin Dave]

The word "Nazi" should be replaced with "person with a different outlook" and all guns should be replaced with walkie-talkies.

Notice the little laughing smilie at the end of my post.

[ICantSpellDawg]

The President said pretty much the same thing he had been saying. Russia needs to back down and return to the status quo. He also said that Russia has seriously harmed its standing in the world and its status in Europe and the U.S.

[Sarmatian]

That is no longer the case. It is now an outright war of aggression against Georgia. Had the Russians stayed within the confines of South Ossetia, your argument would have been true, but that has now changed.

You mean just how NATO air strikes and bombing raids were limited to Kosovo only?

The President said pretty much the same thing he had been saying. Russia needs to back down and return to the status quo. He also said that Russia has seriously harmed its standing in the world and its status in Europe and the U.S.

Judging by Churkin's speech in UN, I don't think that concerns them much.

[rvg]

You mean just how NATO air strikes and bombing raids were limited to Kosovo only?

NATO was wrong to bomb Serbia and to meddle in Kosovo. What Russia is doing right now is just as wrong.

[rvg]

Notice the little laughing smilie at the end of my post.

my post too was meant as a joke...

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

There are also accounts that the rebels attacked Georgian forces first. You speak like it is a well known fact that Georgia decided to shell the rebels for no apparent reason and Russia was the heroic savior who came to Georgia's aid.

Well, the initial BBC article in this thread said that Georgia's government launched an operation "aimed at securing the stability of the region" very shortly after a ceasefire had just been agreed to by Georgia and the rebels. The rebels and Georgia had already been fighting before the ceasefire, but Georgia broke the recent one. The Georgians also didn't shell "rebels" - they levelled a good portion of town, including hospitals and homes, and killed Russian soldiers.

I never said they forced to take citizenship. However, just because an area of sovereign country wants to become part of another country, doesn't them the right too. That would be like America absorbing half of Mexico but saying "Hey they wanted it so it's fine".

Well, for one thing, there is a massive amount of Russian citizens. Secondly, Russia is supporting a breakaway province. Former Yugoslavia, anyone? Thirdly, Russian soldiers were killed in the initial Georgian strike, making that strike a military attack against the Russian Federation as well as an attack against Ossetia.

They have had a ceasefire for quite some time now. Why now?

Well, Georgia broke the ceasefire. Ask them.

Sure

A statement by the Georgian President (obviously an unbiased source) saying that Russians were massing troops and conducting military exercises? Alright...

That article does reveal something very interesting, however. Check this out (it's a map featured in the article): http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/...x293_popup.jpg

And I quote:

1. Georgian force backed by warplanes surround and shell Tshkinvali, the capital of the breakaway province. Many hundreds of civilians reported killed, homes burnt, a hospital destroyed, and 12 Russian peacekeepers dead.

This being the initial attack, carried out by Georgia, which left 12 Russian soldiers dead.

[KarlXII]

You expect the Russians to be fair and balanced?

[Marshal Murat]

You expect the Russians to be fair and balanced?

Like Fox News right?

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

You expect the Russians to be fair and balanced?

Hardly. You expect anyone to be fair and balanced about current events?

[ICantSpellDawg]

EMFM - here is an article that postulates that Russia has been doing a mass build up and military maneuvers over the past month in the Caucasus.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Diplomatic mood darkens in Georgia

By Nik Gowing
BBC News, Tbilisi

European diplomats and foreign ministers have conceded they will struggle to regain the initiative in the conflict between Russia and Georgia.

They talk in the darkest terms of a possible return to tensions the likes of which Europe has not seen since World War II.

Several have even compared events to Nazi Germany's annexation of the Sudetenland.

In more than 25 years covering international diplomacy, I have rarely seen such gloom and head-shaking over the activities of one nation - Russia.

It is not just me saying that. It is those in government almost check-mated in the past few days - both by Georgia's military push into South Ossetia on Thursday night, then Russia's defiant response on Friday, which continues as I sit writing this in the Georgian foreign ministry.

After spending more than a day with several of them at a private gathering in northern Italy, none can answer with precision whether the warning signs of the decisive Russian response against Georgia were there to be read in the middle of last week.

"The Russian capability was obvious," said Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt as we descended in his Swedish air force jet out of Turkish airspace for a quick dash to Tbilisi's almost deserted airport.

"But capability never revealed intent - even after the many weeks of Russian manoeuvres in the Caucasus, just north of the Georgian border."

'Immense challenge'

If any of the capital's airport had been bombed by Russian warplanes, there was no obvious sign.

A handful of military helicopters sat untouched on the grass. As we taxied in, we could see French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner's jet alongside the old Soviet-style VIP terminal.

It is against what Russia signed up to - to settle disputes by peaceful means
Terri Davis
Council of Europe

By the time we arrived, it had gone - for the French EU presidency's next dash to Moscow to broker a ceasefire agreement with Russia.

European diplomacy is not so co-ordinated that the foreign minister currently representing the EU's 27 members could wait a few more minutes to exchange impressions with the current chair of the European body representing the 47 nations in the Council of Europe.

Mr Bildt, a veteran of the diplomatic realities of the wars in Bosnia and Kosovo, could only shrug in the fierce Georgian sun, look across to the French jet waiting to take off, then turn away for his own mission.

He already told me on the plane that the diplomatic challenge to restrain Russian intentions was "immense in every respect".

The widespread diplomatic concern in the EU and Nato is that after South Ossetia and probably Abkhazia, next Moscow will have its eyes set on the Crimea region of Ukraine and then Ukraine itself.

No programme

It is the first time in the Council of Europe's 60-year history that two member nations who have pledged to resolve disputes peacefully have instead resorted to war. Turkey's invasion of northern Cyprus in 1974 does not qualify.

Along with the Council of Europe's Secretary-General, Terri Davis, Mr Bildt is here to make an assessment ahead of an emergency EU meeting in Brussels on Wednesday.

"This is unprecedented," said Mr Davis. "There is no international right to go into a country to protect the right of your citizens." South Ossetia is thought to have 70,000 Russian passport holders.

"It is against what Russia signed up to - to settle disputes by peaceful means."

I asked Mr Bildt whether it was too late before his first meeting with Georgia's foreign minister.

"Evidently, since the war is ongoing," he said, with Swedish understatement.

What should have happened?

"Perhaps to have acted more forcefully earlier and dealt with the activities that we saw," he added.

"There has been escalation over some time, over weeks and over months."

Mr Bildt and Mr Davis will have 36 hours here.

There is no programme, no list of appointments - just a determination to be well informed before difficult decisions have to be taken by the EU and Nato to underscore the warning of US Vice President Dick Cheney that Russian aggression "must not go unanswered".

[KarlXII]

Like Fox News right?

No, they're fake and biased

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

EMFM - here is an article that postulates that Russia has been doing a mass build up and military maneuvers over the past month in the Caucasus.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Diplomatic mood darkens in Georgia

By Nik Gowing
BBC News, Tbilisi

European diplomats and foreign ministers have conceded they will struggle to regain the initiative in the conflict between Russia and Georgia.

They talk in the darkest terms of a possible return to tensions the likes of which Europe has not seen since World War II.

Several have even compared events to Nazi Germany's annexation of the Sudetenland.

In more than 25 years covering international diplomacy, I have rarely seen such gloom and head-shaking over the activities of one nation - Russia.

It is not just me saying that. It is those in government almost check-mated in the past few days - both by Georgia's military push into South Ossetia on Thursday night, then Russia's defiant response on Friday, which continues as I sit writing this in the Georgian foreign ministry.

After spending more than a day with several of them at a private gathering in northern Italy, none can answer with precision whether the warning signs of the decisive Russian response against Georgia were there to be read in the middle of last week.

"The Russian capability was obvious," said Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt as we descended in his Swedish air force jet out of Turkish airspace for a quick dash to Tbilisi's almost deserted airport.

"But capability never revealed intent - even after the many weeks of Russian manoeuvres in the Caucasus, just north of the Georgian border."

'Immense challenge'

If any of the capital's airport had been bombed by Russian warplanes, there was no obvious sign.

A handful of military helicopters sat untouched on the grass. As we taxied in, we could see French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner's jet alongside the old Soviet-style VIP terminal.

It is against what Russia signed up to - to settle disputes by peaceful means
Terri Davis
Council of Europe

By the time we arrived, it had gone - for the French EU presidency's next dash to Moscow to broker a ceasefire agreement with Russia.

European diplomacy is not so co-ordinated that the foreign minister currently representing the EU's 27 members could wait a few more minutes to exchange impressions with the current chair of the European body representing the 47 nations in the Council of Europe.

Mr Bildt, a veteran of the diplomatic realities of the wars in Bosnia and Kosovo, could only shrug in the fierce Georgian sun, look across to the French jet waiting to take off, then turn away for his own mission.

He already told me on the plane that the diplomatic challenge to restrain Russian intentions was "immense in every respect".

The widespread diplomatic concern in the EU and Nato is that after South Ossetia and probably Abkhazia, next Moscow will have its eyes set on the Crimea region of Ukraine and then Ukraine itself.

No programme

It is the first time in the Council of Europe's 60-year history that two member nations who have pledged to resolve disputes peacefully have instead resorted to war. Turkey's invasion of northern Cyprus in 1974 does not qualify.

Along with the Council of Europe's Secretary-General, Terri Davis, Mr Bildt is here to make an assessment ahead of an emergency EU meeting in Brussels on Wednesday.

"This is unprecedented," said Mr Davis. "There is no international right to go into a country to protect the right of your citizens." South Ossetia is thought to have 70,000 Russian passport holders.

"It is against what Russia signed up to - to settle disputes by peaceful means."

I asked Mr Bildt whether it was too late before his first meeting with Georgia's foreign minister.

"Evidently, since the war is ongoing," he said, with Swedish understatement.

What should have happened?

"Perhaps to have acted more forcefully earlier and dealt with the activities that we saw," he added.

"There has been escalation over some time, over weeks and over months."

Mr Bildt and Mr Davis will have 36 hours here.

There is no programme, no list of appointments - just a determination to be well informed before difficult decisions have to be taken by the EU and Nato to underscore the warning of US Vice President Dick Cheney that Russian aggression "must not go unanswered".

That is an interesting article, and I acknowledge that an arms buildup in the region is a good possibility in why Russia's response was so quick, but at the same time, Georgia launched the operation beginning this, and killed twelve Russian soldiers in the process.

[ICantSpellDawg]

That is an interesting article, and I acknowledge that an arms buildup in the region is a good possibility in why Russia's response was so quick, but at the same time, Georgia launched the operation beginning this, and killed twelve Russian soldiers in the process.

Okay - so you admit that Russia was most likely preparing for an invasion. They couldn't have been preparing to defend against an invasion into Russia, so what would the alternative reason be? Now - couple this fact with the idea that Russian forces and South Ossetians were firing at Georgian forces before the eruption of conflict, therefore breaking the conditions of the ceasefire and the entire reason that Russia was in South Ossetia in the first place. This was clearly a planned assault and regime change on a sovereign country rather than some sort of "reaction". I'm suprised that you've bought into that argument.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I think Russia's longer-term plans since positioning peacekeepers have been made clear, if they were ever in any doubt.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I just remembered how terrible Gordon Brown has been through all of this so far. I miss Tony Blair.

[Ice]

Well, the initial BBC article in this thread said that Georgia's government launched an operation "aimed at securing the stability of the region" very shortly after a ceasefire had just been agreed to by Georgia and the rebels. The rebels and Georgia had already been fighting before the ceasefire, but Georgia broke the recent one. The Georgians also didn't shell "rebels" - they levelled a good portion of town, including hospitals and homes, and killed Russian soldiers.

Well, you might want to read up on it. The Georgians are claiming the shelling (yes they shelled), air bombardment, and troop movements were in response to attacks from the rebels upon Georgian citizens. It's not very clear cut who started the fighting.

Well, for one thing, there is a massive amount of Russian citizens.

Actually they are Georgian citizens that Russia calls Russian citizens due to them obtaining Russian passports.s

Secondly, Russia is supporting a breakaway province. Former Yugoslavia, anyone?

Do elaborate. South Ossetia is part of Georgia. It needs to work with the Georgians if it wants independence.

Thirdly, Russian soldiers were killed in the initial Georgian strike, making that strike a military attack against the Russian Federation as well as an attack against Ossetia.

Refer to the above.

Well, Georgia broke the ceasefire. Ask them.

That's disputed.

A statement by the Georgian President (obviously an unbiased source) saying that Russians were massing troops and conducting military exercises? Alright...

Tuff did a good job of reinforcing that argument.

This being the initial attack, carried out by Georgia, which left 12 Russian soldiers dead.

Still doesn't mean it's true.

[Ice]

Okay - so you admit that Russia was most likely preparing for an invasion. They couldn't have been preparing to defend against an invasion into Russia, so what would the alternative reason be? Now - couple this fact with the idea that Russian forces and South Ossetians were firing at Georgian forces before the eruption of conflict, therefore breaking the conditions of the ceasefire and the entire reason that Russia was in South Ossetia in the first place. This was clearly a planned assault and regime change on a sovereign country rather than some sort of "reaction". I'm suprised that you've bought into that argument.

Yeah pretty much. I can't believe how some people seem to the think the only reason Russia is doing this is to save "Russian Citizens". Putin could probably give two ***** about what happens to these people.

Does anyone possibly think this has something to do with Georgia trying to join Nato, Georgia's pro western government, or the massive oil pipeline to the west which avoids Russia?

[KarlXII]

Yeah pretty much. I can't believe how some people seem to the think the only reason Russia is doing this is to save "Russian Citizens". Putin could probably give two ***** about what happens to these people.

Does anyone possibly think this has something to do with Georgia trying to join Nato, Georgia's pro western government, or the massive oil pipeline to the west which avoids Russia?

D. All of the above

[Sarmatian]

Well, the initial BBC article in this thread said that Georgia's government launched an operation "aimed at securing the stability of the region" very shortly after a ceasefire had just been agreed to by Georgia and the rebels. The rebels and Georgia had already been fighting before the ceasefire, but Georgia broke the recent one. The Georgians also didn't shell "rebels" - they levelled a good portion of town, including hospitals and homes, and killed Russian soldiers.

From the reports, it looks like most of Tskhinvali is destroyed. Medvedev used the term "genocide" and already experts are dispatched to collect evidence to be sent to UN according to him.

Okay - so you admit that Russia was most likely preparing for an invasion. They couldn't have been preparing to defend against an invasion into Russia, so what would the alternative reason be? Now - couple this fact with the idea that Russian forces and South Ossetians were firing at Georgian forces before the eruption of conflict, therefore breaking the conditions of the ceasefire and the entire reason that Russia was in South Ossetia in the first place. This was clearly a planned assault and regime change on a sovereign country rather than some sort of "reaction". I'm suprised that you've bought into that argument.

There is no chance that this kind of a Georgian offensive could be mounted without someone in Russia or in South Ossetia noticing that things may be heating up. From the examples in former Yugoslavia you could see that it was generally known when an invasion is being prepared. Not the actual timing or the ferocity of the attack (that was subject to change, because not only military but political issues too had to be addressed, within the country and abroad) but it couldn't go unnoticed that something was cooking up.

And if Georgian troops were under attack there would be no need for Saakashvili to admit that Georgian forces broke the ceasefire. If they were under attack, then the other side broke the ceasefire and they were only responding.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Yeah pretty much. I can't believe how some people seem to the think the only reason Russia is doing this is to save "Russian Citizens". Putin could probably give two ***** about what happens to these people.

I've said already in this thread that Russia is doing this to expand their own interests in the region. So is Georgia. Wonderful. However, Russia responded after twelve peacekeepers (oh, and the Georgian government agreed to have them there along with Georgian and Ossetian forces, which it later withdrew) were killed by Georgian shelling. Preliminary reports quoted the Georgian leadership as saying that it had attacked Ossetia - first. It seems Georgia has now changed its tone.

[Mailman653]

Too much madness

[Devastatin Dave]

my post too was meant as a joke...

Ah, very good, I like you, keep up the good work and welcome to the Backroom.

[Caius]

The question for the million: Who broke the ceasefire? Were there a ceasefire?

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Too much madness

Don't tempt me.

[Marshal Murat]

The question for the million: Who broke the ceasefire? Were there a ceasefire?

Which the million question? There was a ceasefire, that's all I can say for sure.

[Caius]

Who broke the ceasefire?

That one. At a glance, looks like Georgia did. But now turns that Russia did. So, who did it?

Unless I'm mistaken thanks to the bald sickness.

[Spino]

Who fired the first shot is irrelevant. Who broke the ceasefire is irrelevant. What the situation was in South Ossetia prior to the outbreak of hostilities is irrelevant.

What is relevant is that Russia feels threatened by NATO's continual encroachment on what it believes to be its backyard and traditional geopolitical sphere of influence. Most of the nations that once belonged to the Soviet Union bear an incredible amount of hatred, loathing and disgust with all things Russian. Russia's sordid past with these nations led directly to the blazingly fast expansion of NATO's expansion into these regions with its only recourse being diplomatic protests and openly blaming the West and NATO for making a mess of things. Let's also not forget the expansion of the EU to include former Warsaw Pact members. Russia not only lost the security of her traditional satellite states but was also cast as an impotent, toothless dog whose bark is worse than its bite.

Poland, one of Russia's major historical satellite states/vassals became a member of NATO in 1999. Latvia, Lithuania & Estonia, nations which also shared this infamous classification with Poland, just joined NATO in 2004. The old Soviet hardliners in modern Russia who fondly recall their nation's glory days of empire must seething with hatred as they watch these nations run towards the West with open arms.

So how does Georgia come into play? Look no further than April of this year...

The fact is that in April of this very year NATO announced Georgia and the Ukraine would become full fledged members of NATO.

http://www.summitbucharest.ro/en/doc_201.html

23. NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO. Both nations have made valuable contributions to Alliance operations. We welcome the democratic reforms in Ukraine and Georgia and look forward to free and fair parliamentary elections in Georgia in May. MAP is the next step for Ukraine and Georgia on their direct way to membership. Today we make clear that we support these countries’ applications for MAP. Therefore we will now begin a period of intensive engagement with both at a high political level to address the questions still outstanding pertaining to their MAP applications. We have asked Foreign Ministers to make a first assessment of progress at their December 2008 meeting. Foreign Ministers have the authority to decide on the MAP applications of Ukraine and Georgia.

Simple arithmetic will tell you that of the two nations due to join NATO in the near future Georgia is by far the weaker of the two. The variables at play in Georgia bear an eery similarity to those in the late 30s. South Ossetia has turned into a 21st century version of the Sudetenland, both of which were used as a casus belli to open up a larger conflict leading ultimately to acquisition. I firmly believe that beyond South Ossetia and the oil pipeline Russia's modus operandi is to prevent Georgia it from joining NATO by forcibly re-introducing it into its political sphere of influence. Regime change? Possibly. More like Russia will look to force Georgia to sign an iron clad agreement/treaty that will forever deny it entrance into NATO (along with the fringe benefits that only a fat pipeline can bring).

Given the speed and scope of this invasion it is painfully clear that Russia had been planning this for some time. They were supplying South Ossetian rebels with arms and were possibly encouraging them to get a little aggressive in the hopes that Georgia would eventually send in its military to clean things up. Factor in the fact that the US, Britain and token European forces are still tied up in Iraq & Afghanistan and the world's attention is currently being directed at the Olympic games. The timing could not be better, Russia simply had to make a move now while the bulk of the world's attention is elsewhere. The fact that a major oil pipeline that supplies the west runs through Georgia is icing on the cake.

Last but not least keep in mind that after suffering a long line of humiliations from disasters like the Kursk, the terrorist bombings and hostage incidents of the Moscow theater and Beslan as well as the utter mauling Russia received in Chechnya you can understand how they might be looking for a little glory to dull the pain.

So if Russia is so keen on stopping the expansion of NATO then what about the Ukraine? Perhaps the Ukraine is next on the list, who knows? Russia's bullying of Georgia is clearly rubbing the Ukraine the wrong way and as someone already linked, it is threatening to cut off the Russian Navy's access to its ports in the Crimea. Russia may find it easy to bully a small, isolated nation like Georgia with ease but the Ukraine, with the second largest military in Europe and with possible allies in neighbors like Poland and the Baltic states to the north, is an entirely different beast. Afghanistan and Chechnya proved Russia's military is a paper tiger that is easily torn up with a modest sized amount of determination. If Putin and Russia's hardliners are smart they'll limit their actions to Georgia.

[Marshal Murat]

Spino, great post all-around.

However, I think the current invasion of Georgia has some small benefits.
1. We see Russian armored units in action against a 'conventional' foe, whose troops have ostensibly been trained along Western lines. While Georgian troops may be reservists, it is a foe that isn't hiding behind civilians or using terrorist means to achieve political goals. This is the new Russian army, and may not rely so heavily on political troops or rigid doctrine that one saw in the former U.S.S.R. army formations.

Afghanistan and Chechnya proved Russia's military is a paper tiger that is easily torn up with a modest sized amount of determination.

Afghanistan operated with the old Russian army, but what about Chechnya? My 'modern' history isn't so good, so did Russia suppress them with conventional Red Army troops or the new forces?