How can a "republic" be created out of nothing? Only with the help of the Russian secret service. Like Abkhazia and the Dnestr republic, South Ossetia is a soviet creation with a totalitarian regime. It is completely under control of the Russian defence and secret service. These "republics" have a president and parliament on a mono-ethnic basis, despite the fact that other (larger) ethnic groups exist in the area. None of them are represented. The governement is extremely anti-Western and percecute people with pro-Western thoughts. Now and then so-called elections are held, fully financed from Moscow and are falsified. For example in november 99% supposedly voted for president Kokoiti. Tens of thousands of Georgians were prevented from taking part in these elections.
The region is in fact called Samachablo. In the 1930's only 4 Ossetian families lived in there. The present number has been artificially created by the soviets. In South Ossetia as well as Abkhazia the population is handed Russian passports. There thereby become Russian citizens and Russia has to "protect" them from "agression" - a pretext for invading Georgia.
There is no import/export, no respect for human rights. Hundreds of thousands of Georgian refugees are not being allowed into their homes by the so-called Russian peacekeepers. The leadership of the peacekeeping mission uses agressive language towards Georgia and takes its own measures, for example the removal of Georgian houses, taking the (building) materials for themselves. The peacekeepers (under UN mandate) are involved in smuggling of cigarettes and weapons.
The solution would be to return the refugees and then to organize democratic elections. Guarantees for human rights and equality.
- 1
- 2
War in the Caucasus?
Email To A Friend
Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.
On other fronts, the Russian government was infuriated by the Bush administration's earlier moves to bring Ukraine into NATO. Publicly, it muted its criticism. In private, Russian officials threatened severe retaliation, including the possibility of ending Russian participation in the Iran nuclear talks and lifting Moscow's freeze on weaponry sold to Tehran. The issue is currently moot--Ukraine itself has decided not to seek NATO membership--but a legacy of bitterness remains.
Other grievances have also festered. Moscow strongly resents the fact that America is the last major country blocking Russian membership in the WTO. Moscow's response has been to threaten to exclude U.S. energy companies from the development of the immense Shtokman gas field in the Barents Sea. In Europe, Russia watches Chinese companies invest with minimal trouble. Yet when Russian entities seek to buy stakes in Airbus, Arcelor or other European corporations, there has been a panicky and hostile reaction. Putin put it bluntly: "If the Europeans want us to let them into the very heart of our economy today, energy production and transport infrastructure, then we want to know what we would get in return." The Russian president clearly remains committed to cooperation with the West and to Russia's integration into world markets. (His harsh warning on Georgia stood out precisely because his other remarks were so studiedly mild.) But a senior aide pointedly warned that whoever replaces him in 2008 may be less well disposed to the West.
The special danger with Georgia is that it's so laden with emotion. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, Russians have been infuriated by the way Georgia has swallowed billions of dollars in Russian gas subsidies and remittances from Georgian workers in Russia, yet allies itself with a West that has provided only a fraction of this help. The way Georgian leaders paint Russia--accusing it of past repression and human-rights abuses, among other things--angers many Russians, especially considering that the greatest tyrant in their own history, Joseph Stalin, came from Georgia. Putin is immensely disciplined, not given to speaking loosely or acting rashly. His foreign and domestic policies reflect his essential pragmatism and caution. Yet I worry that when he looks at Georgia, anger may take over. Add in Georgia's determination to regain its lost provinces and Russia's determination to resist this, coupled with U.S. support and the specter of Georgia's joining NATO, and we have all the elements of a tragic conflict.
Lieven is a senior fellow at the New America Foundation and author with John Hulsman of "Ethical Realism: A Vision for America's Role in the World."
© 2006
- 1
- 2









Discuss