Posted on September 18, 2008 - by Venik

The War in Georgia: Who Said What

The difficulties Russia encounters dealing with Saakashvili’s propaganda machine are caused primarily by the West’s desire to believe the Georgian side of the story. Why does the West want to believe Saakashvili? Probably because the alternative to believing Georgian propaganda is to admit that for the past five years the West has been propping up a criminal regime. To admit that the EU’s only hope of diversifying natural gas supplies is the economically-unfeasible and politically-unstable Nabucco project. To admit that NATO countries supplied military hardware and expertise to the Georgian army led by a certifiable psycho. To admit that recognizing Kosovo’s independence was a mistake the immediate results of which in Abkhazia and South Ossetia are just the tip of the iceberg of growing separatism around the world. Most importantly, however, the West would have to admit that Russia was right and the West was wrong. We can’t have that.

Saakashvili is a good orator and its easy to believe him, as long as you don’t dwell too much on facts. When he is not on drugs, Saakashvili can be very convincing, which is impressive, considering that the facts are not on his side. This quick and victorious war for Russia hurt Saakashvili. It hurt Bush even more. For years the US and the rest of NATO have been arming and training Saakashvili’s army just to see it launch a murderous attack against civilians and be easily defeated by some old Russian tanks in just a couple of days. To add insult to injury, the EU’s inept peacemaking efforts produced a ceasefire deal that made it particularly easy for Russia to partition Georgia. And as if this was not enough, the West found itself completely without means of pressuring Russia and totally dependent on its resources. So many setbacks in such a short time are hard to swallow for Brussels and Washington.

And still, unpleasant facts have a tendency of coming out at the most inconvenient time. The White House hoped that the war in Georgia would give a boost to the Republican presidential candidate. And it did. Despite of his ridiculous vice-presidential choice, McCain managed to catch up with his Democratic opponent. Democrats now have to decide who they hate more: Russia or Bush. The war in Georgia made political points for McCain, but the truth is that his reaction to the war was entirely inadequate. He misinterpreted basic facts and could not see through Saakashvili’s propaganda. McCain appeared good in the media because the rest of the Americans – Obama included – know even less about the situation in Georgia than McCain. The war in Georgia presents an opportunity not just for the Republicans, but also for the Democrats, however, to cease this opportunity to discredit the White House – and, by extension, the Republicans – the Democrats must quickly decide on where they stand on the “Russia issue”.

Irakli Okruashvili

Georgia, former Defense Minister

Irakli Okruashvili

Irakli Okruashvili, Georgia’s former Defense Minister (2004-2006) who presided over Georgia’s unprecedented rearmament program. He was an outspoken critic of Russia and supported Saakashvili’s view that South Ossetia and Abkhazia must be retaken using military force. Okruashvili fell out of favor with Saakashvili in 2006, was charged with corruption and moved to France, where he received political asylum. In 2007 Okruashvili created his opposition party The Movement for United Georgia and announced his plans to challenge Saakashvili’s presidency. Nevertheless, at the beginning of the war in early August 2008, Okruashvili issued a statement supporting Georgia and its president.

“Abkhazia was our strategic priority, but we drew up military plans in 2005 for taking both Abkhazia and South Ossetia as well… The original plans called for a two-pronged operation entering South Ossetia, taking Tskhinvali, the Roki Tunnel and Java. Saakashvili’s offensive only aimed at taking Tskhinvali, because he thought the U.S. would block a Russian reaction through diplomatic channels. But when the U.S. reaction turned out to be non-existent, Saakashvili then moved troops toward the Roki tunnel, only to be outmaneuvered by the Russians.“

(Source: Saakashvili “planned S. Ossetia invasion”: ex-minister, Reuters, Sept. 14, 2008)

Mikheil Saakashvili

Georgia, President

Saakashvili and Rice in Tbilisi

On August 15, when Russian troops were less than an hour’s drive away from the Georgian capital, Saakashvili met with Condi Rice in Tbilisi. The topic of the discussion was the French-brokered ceasefire agreement with Russia. Before leaving Washington, Rice announced that the peace deal was not acceptable in its current format. On her way to Georgia, Rice met with Nicolas Sarkozy in Paris. After this meeting the ceasefire agreement was no longer unacceptable. The US was now saying that Saakashvili should sign the deal, which was to send Georgian army back to their barracks, while giving Russia wide-ranging authority to implement security measures in Georgia. At the press conference that followed the difficult five-hour-long marathon meeting between Saakashvili and Rice, Georgian president was near tears when he publicly accused the US of being responsible for the consequences of the war, while Rice was standing next to him.

“Who invited the trouble here? Who invited this arrogance here? Who invited these innocent deaths here? Not only those people who perpetrate them are responsible, but also those people who failed to stop it.“

(Source: Saakashvili Lashes Out at West’s ‘Muted Reaction’, Civil Georgia, Aug. 16, 2008)

Jaap de Hoop Scheffer

NATO, Secretary General

Jaap de Hoop Scheffer in Georgia

Leading a large delegation of NATO representatives on a trip to Tbilisi, de Hoop Scheffer recalled the OSCE May 2008 report criticizing Georgia’s parliamentary elections as having “significant shortcomings”. In its January 2008 report, OSCE observers were also critical of the presidential election in Georgia, citing a long list of “pervasive” violations that were “not conducive to a constructive, issue-based election campaign.” Not only NATO made no promises to accelerate Georgia’s membership plan, as Saakashvili was asking, it appeared that Georgia’s membership may be delayed indefinitely. Before his meeting with Saakashvili, NATO’s Secretary General suggested that Georgia is not acting as a democracy.

“You are a democracy, act like a democracy, strengthen your democracy, strengthen the rule of law.”

(Source: Nato calls EU-Russia pact ‘not acceptable’, by James Blitz, Financial Times, Sept. 15, 2008)

John Beyrly

US Ambassador to Russia

John Beyrly, US Ambassador to Russia

In his August 22 interview to the influential Russian business daily Kommersant, Ambassador Beyrly dropped not one but two bombshells. He acknowledged the fact of Georgia’s attack on Russian peacekeepers and said that Russia’s response was well-founded. He also admitted that the US knew Georgia was planning the attack and, according to Beyrly, the US tried to persuade Saakashvili to stand down. Some 15 Russian peacekeepers and several hundred civilians were killed during the first hours of Georgian attack against South Ossetia. Russian military commanders said that these deaths could have been avoided had the US and its NATO allies shared with Russia their knowledge of imminent Georgian attack. Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia worked in tandem with OSCE observers in the breakaway province. Russia accused OSCE of failing to warn Russian peacekeepers of the planned attack by Georgia.

“We see that the response by the Russian forces to the attack against Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia was well founded… The fact that, to the last moment we urged the Georgian side not to take this step, clearly shows that we did not want for any of this to happen.”

(Source: Мы до последнего убеждали Грузию не делать этого, Kommersant, August 22, 2008)

Kurt Volker

US Ambassador to NATO

Kurt Volker, the US Ambassador to NATO

In hist interview to Norway’s Institute of International Affairs, Kurt Volker, the US Ambassador to NATO and John McCain’s former foreign policy adviser, confirmed advance knowledge by the US and NATO of the Georgian August 8 attack. Ambassador Volker said that less than a day before in the planned invasion the US was still trying to persuade Saakashvili to change his mind. Indeed, with several hundred military instructors and private security contractors from NATO and Israel on the ground in Georgia, it is difficult to imagine that the US and other NATO members were not aware of Georgia’s preparations for a military operation that involved all branches of its Armed Forces and nearly three quarters of its total military manpower. As early as in June 2008, Jane’s Information Group published photos of Georgian heavy armor and artillery being transported to the border with South Ossetia. The significance of Volker’s statement is that it suggests not just general knowledge on the part of the US of Saakashvili’s war plans, but more specific knowledge of the timing and other details of the planned attack.

“Including the day before Georgian troops went into South Ossetia, we said, ‘don’t do it, don’t be drawn into a military conflict, it’s not in your interest.’”

(Source: Syria seeks weapons deal with Russia amid ‘Cold War’ ripples, by Anne Penketh, The Independent, August 22, 2008)

William Burns

US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs

William Burns, the US Under Secretary of State

While critical of what he called “Russia’s disproportionate response” in his September 17 speech before the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, William Burns, the US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, placed the responsibility for starting the war squarely on Saakashvili’s shoulders. The question of who to blame in the five-day war between Russia and Georgia became key on Capitol Hill, as the US and its international partners are struggling to work out a unified response to what was initially perceived in the West as a Russian aggression. Unable to give Russia a strong response, the West is forced to search for the truth. Acknowledging the fact of the Georgian aggression, the US, NATO, and the EU leaders can at least attempt to explain away the obvious and alarming lack of leverage against Russia.

“Georgia’s decision to use force to reassert its sovereignty over South Ossetia, against our strong and repeated warnings, was short-sighted and ill-advised… This is a crisis and a set of tensions that have been building for some time…there were mistakes and miscalculations on all sides. We worked very hard both with the Russians and the Georgian government to urge restraint.”

(Sources: Georgia and Russia: The next step, Talk Radio News Service, September 17, 2008; Russian Economy Hurt by Decision to Invade Georgia, by Meredith Buel, Voice of America, September 17, 2008)

Ron Paul

US, Texas, Republican US Congressman

Ron Paul, Republican US Congressman

The former 2008 presidential contender Ron Paul told the US Senate Committee on Armed Services that the White House’s support for Saakashvili was simply a case of pipeline politics. Two oil pipelines – Baku-Supsa and Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan – and one gas pipeline – Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum – traverse the territory of Georgia, carrying gas and oil from Azerbaijan to Turkey and from there to Europe. The two oil pipelines compete with the larger Baku-Novorossiysk oil pipeline running from Azerbaijan to the Russian port of Novorossiysk. The US and the EU are planning to construct the Nabucco gas pipeline that would connect the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum pipeline directly to Central Europe. However, Azerbaijan cannot produce enough natural gas to supply both Turkey and the European Union. The only way for the Nabucco pipeline project to become economically viable is to build the Trans-Caspian gas pipeline at the bottom of the Caspian Sea, connecting Turkmenistan to the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum pipeline. When EU officials are talking about the need to diversify natural gas imports, the Nabucco project is their only serious option. Even so, the project did not receive a particularly warm welcome from either Azerbaijan or Turkmenistan, making the whole undertaking less of a pipeline and more of a pipe dream.

“We are not for democracy there – we are there to protect a pipeline. And that is tragic for me.“

(Source: Paul: US in Georgia for pipeline, Press TV, Sept. 10, 2008)

Dana Rohrabacher

US, California, Republican US Congressman

Dana Rohrabacher, Republican US Congressman

Also speaking to the US Senate Armed Services Committee, another Congressman – Dana Rohrabacher, R. CA – decided to drop the usual diplomatic overtures and openly blamed Georgia for starting the war. Rohrabacher said that Georgia violated the truce. Following the 1990-1992 war between Georgia and South Ossetia, Georgia accepted the Russian-brokered ceasefire agreement. An international peacekeeping force from Georgia, South Ossetia and Russia was deployed in the breakaway province. Also in 1992 the OSCE set up a mission in Georgia to monitor the peacekeeping operation. In 1996 in Moscow Georgian and South Ossetian representatives signed the Memorandum to improve security and to strengthen mutual trust between Georgia and South Ossetia. Russia acted as the mediator during these diplomatic talks. The signing of the Memorandum led to several meetings between the president of Georgia Shevarnadze and the president of South Ossetia Chibirov. In December of 2000 Russia and Georgia signed an agreement to undertake joint steps aimed at South Ossetia’s economic recovery and to enable the return of refugees.

“The recent fighting in Georgia and its breakaway region was started by Georgia. The Georgians broke the truce, not the Russians! And no talk of provocation can change that fact.“

(Source: U.S. officials split over Caucasus conflict, Russia Today, September 10, 2008)

Hillary Clinton

US, New York, Democratic US Senator

Hillary Clinton, Democratic US Senator

America’s most influential Democratic Senator is wondering if the US encouraged Georgia in any way to take aggressive steps against South Ossetia. The two specific public steps taken by the US that could have been perceived by Saakashvili as approval and encouragement of his planned military action against South Ossetia are the 2008 Bucharest NATO Summit statement and continuing NATO military assistance to Georgia. In Bucharest earlier this year NATO did not offer Georgia the so-called Membership Action Plan, so much anticipated by Saakashvili, but it did promise Georgia membership in the future. NATO cited a variety of technical reasons – everything from Georgia’s Soviet-era military equipment to limited deployability of its forces. However, the primary issue brought up in Bucharest was the unresolved status of Georgia’s breakaway provinces. The US, NATO and the EU knew of Saakashvili’s plan to bring the two provinces under control using military force. NATO members might not have openly encouraged Saakashvili, but they certainly did not discourage him in any way, continuing full-scale military cooperation with Georgia despite Tbilisi’s obvious war preparations. Even when, according to various US Department of State officials, the US was supposedly trying to talk Saakashvili out of war on the eve of the attack, hundreds of US military instructors and private contractors continued their work in Georgia. This fact alone could have been reasonably interpreted by Saakashvili as the West’s tacit approval of his war plan.

“Rather than seeking to isolate them – which I think is not a smart proposal – we should be more strategic. We have to answer for ourselves: Did we embolden the Georgians in any way? Did we send mixed signals to the Russians?“

(Source: U.S. officials split over Caucasus conflict, Russia Today, September 10, 2008)

Dmitry Medvedev

President of Russian Federation

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev

During the yearly meeting of the Valdai Discussion Club in Moscow on September 12, Russian President Medvedev told journalists and academics something that many have been suspecting for a long time: Saakashvili is a drug addict. Over the years, Georgian president gained notoriety for his violent mood swings and inexplicable policy turnabouts. One day Saakashvili would appear in public full of energy, delivering a powerful speech, and the next day he may look pale, sweaty and have trouble combining words into simple sentences. A particularly colorful incident played out during the 2006 meeting between Saakashvili and Putin in St. Petersburg during the International Economic Summit. During the televised part of the meeting Saakashvili constantly interrupted Putin and generally babbled like an excited schoolboy, talking about how happy he was to again meet with Putin, how wonderful St. Petersburg looked, and what a lucky coincident it was that the city was spared the art of Zurab Tsereteli  – a famous Moscow-based Georgian architect of whom neither Saakashvili nor Putin are big fans. Both presidents laughed at the successful joke and it finally looked like the talks were heading in the right direction. However, following the unusually-long for its format meeting, long after midnight, during the joint press conference with Putin, Saakashvili spoke absolute nonsense, almost gibberish, jumping from topic to topic – sometimes sounding aggressive but mostly just confused – and struggling even with simple questions from the reporters.

“The Georgian head of state is not just a man we won’t do business with. He’s an unpredictable pathological and mentally unstable drug abuser. Western journalists, that interviewed him not so long ago, know it! A two-hour-long interview on the high – that’s over the edge for a head of state. If NATO needs such a leader – go ahead.”

(Source: We did everything right, and I’m proud of it – Medvedev, Russia Today, September 13, 2008)

Popularity: 1% [?]

Join the forum discussion on this post - (1) Posts

Related posts:

1. Exploding UAVs in Georgia
2. Photos: Events in Georgia
3. War in Georgia: What’s Coming
4. International Monitors in Georgia
5. War in Georgia: Reviewing EU Findings