Crisis: Russia digs in within Georgia, threatens response to Poland “beyond diplomacy”; Update: Russia freezes ties with NATO?
posted at 3:45 pm on August 20, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Consider this an early warning that the conventions might not be the big news story of the next two weeks.
A ranking Russian military official today said Moscow plans to establish 18 long-term checkpoints inside Georgian territory, including at least eight within undisputed Georgian territory outside the pro-Russian enclave of South Ossetia…
“The president ordered us to stop where we were,” he said. “We are not pulling out and pulling back troops behind this administrative border into the territory of South Ossetia.”
The plans appear to violate the terms of a French-endorsed cease-fire deal signed late last week by the presidents of Georgia and Russia. It called for both countries’ troops and allied armed groups to move back to their positions before hostilities between the two countries’ troops led to a Russian military incursion early this month into the staunchly pro-U.S. Caucasus Mountain nation.
Russian officials insist they may keep troops along the South Ossetian-Georgian border as well as within Georgia proper as part of a peacekeeping mission begun in the 1990s.
They’ve already built one checkpoint 30 miles outside Tbilisi, according to the AP, and are working on three more in west-central Georgia. Curiously enough, the sob story (and ultimatum) issued this morning by Russian FM Sergey Lavrov didn’t mention anything about a sustained occupation. As for the screaming red-fonted banner on Drudge warning of a reaction “beyond diplomacy” to the new U.S.-Poland missile deal, the article itself is excruciatingly vague — but Condi Rice’s reply was not. Taunting the bear:
Such comments “border on the bizarre frankly,” Rice said, speaking to reporters traveling with her in Warsaw.
“When you threaten Poland, you perhaps forget that it is not 1988,” Rice said. “It’s 2008 and the United States has a … firm treaty guarantee to defend Poland’s territory as if it was the territory of the United States. So it’s probably not wise to throw these threats around.”…
Speaking to reporters traveling with her, Rice said, “the Russians are losing their credibility.”
For good measure, NATO’s secretary general sneered that the threats are “pathetic rhetoric.” How smart is it to mock a country that’s jonesing on military victory and already proven it’s willing to spit on a ceasefire it agreed to just days ago? The U.S. and EU seem awfully confident that Russia’s not going to escalate this any further, with Bush insisting this afternoon that Ossetia and Abkhazia are part of Georgia and that western powers will work together to ensure the country’s integrity. The only problem: Russia’s already called an emergency meeting of the Duma for Monday to decide whether to formally recognize the provinces as independent, even though, as the Telegraph notes, they’ve agreed to a raft of UN resolutions over the past 10 years recognizing that the two are part of Georgia. What’s the west’s plan if its bluff is called? Notes WaPo, drily, “Bush did not specify what, if anything, the United States and its allies would do to uphold Georgian sovereignty…”
I have no answers, but find myself wondering how long it’ll be before ambassadors start getting recalled and what a week-long “3 a.m. moment” will do to Obama’s message during the Democratic convention. Exit question: How likely is it that the two provinces, occupied and encircled by Russian troops, will “vote” for independence instead of annexation by Moscow?
Update: To recap, then, we’ve got saber-rattling with Poland, hunkering down in Georgia, the emergency Duma meeting, and now this. I hope someone in a position of influence is considering the possibility that they’re not bluffing.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « 1 2 [3]
At the risk of sounding argumentive, I don’t hold the value of the Geneva Conventions as dear as you and others may.
I cannot think of an armed conflict involving US Military forces where the OPFOR abided the “rules of war”. I’ll give credit to the Wermacht (sp?) and Luftwaffe for their treatment of our prisoners, but subtract for the actions of the SS against combatants and non-combatants.
What credibility does the statement “but these standards are as much for our guys as they are for the other guys” have if in fact since the signing of the agreements “our guys” have never benefitted from them, much less the non-combatants in the affected area? Korea, Japan, Vietnam, and Somalia come to mind.
I’m sure you know the conventions address more than treatment of EPWs. More rules exist for non-combatants and neutrals than for the beligerents. Virtually every conflict we’ve been involved in has been as a result of an action that violated the conventions.
Being noble is one thing; being ignorant (and restricting your ability to conduct warfare) is…well…ignorant. Maybe we should march upright, line abreast while wearing red and white uniforms on a flat, open battlefield to show our opponent how noble we are.
When I was in uniform I took an oath which included abiding the Conventions, which I did faithfully. Now that armed conflict is becoming more and more assymetrical, the noble ideas of nearly 100 years ago have more in common with Blue Laws than with modern armed conflict.
BobMbx on August 20, 2008 at 8:48 PM
Coldwarrior, you may be so cold that you’re dead, but you’re certainly not a warrior. The Geneva Conventions are dead dead dead, and the only ones still quoting them are Al-Queda when they get caught doing what they shouldn’t have been doing. Oh, and of course the America-hating Berkeley liberals whom you learned all your silly little nit-picks from.
Run along now and listen to Obama speechify about the UN, and let the *real* warriors of the world deal with the stupid pathetic over-reaching Russians.
NahnCee on August 20, 2008 at 8:55 PM
Recent US policy has been predicted on mocking Russia. As I noted before, in unilaterally canceling the anti-ABM treaty, the US didn’t consult Russia. The US never opened negotiations or discussionsthat offered Russia a way to save face or claim progress based on a mutual agreement to end the treaty. Instead, the US announced to the world that the treaty was null and void- a gesture toward Russia comparable to throwing a 2 bit hooker out of a bar. Keep in mind that to a country like Russia that sees itself as a power, this was incredibly humiliating.
Likewise, the US has refused to seriously discuss with Russia our plans for an anti-missile shield to be deployed in Russia’s back yard. Again, Russians feel that America is treating it with contempt and disregard.
One has to wonder if the actions in Georgia and statements regarding Poland aren’t designed to give Russia some leverage and force the United States to seriously consider Russian concerns regarding the missile shield. The US might be underestimating the severity of the missile policy to Russian security concerns. To Americans, the security shield is obviously intended to protect the West from Iran, but the Russians may not see things in the same light.
bayam on August 20, 2008 at 8:58 PM
Some of you out there have Grandmothers that are Catholic? Ask them about praying the Rosary for the conversion of Russia.. We are there now!!
beachkatie on August 20, 2008 at 9:05 PM
progressoverpeace on August 20, 2008 at 8:10 PM –
The Geneva Conventions do not forbid espionage. But, they do class “spies” as being a different “protected class” than POW’s.
I carried that little bit of Geneva with me for many years.
Guess I am talking past you, in a way. If we do not stand for something better, than what separates us from all the rest of the countries in the world?
No, Geneva is not perfect. But what werethe standards before Geneva and in the absence of Geneva?
The recent (well, several years ago) decision to aford Geneva protections for AQ and Taliban and jihadis was the wrong tack from an operational perspective. According to Geneva, we are only required to offer them a cigarette and a blind fold. Unfortunately, the legal wizards, reacting to polling, decided that we could open that Pandora’s Box. Gitmo was selcted because, under Treaty, non-US military members are subject to Cuban law. For non-US military members US law did not apply. But, again, the legal wizards and Congress, reacting to polling, made changes in our application of Geneva that now serve to imperil US service members across the world. It is entirely feasible for a US servicemember in Europe or any other country in the world, on leave, not in a military capacity, to be arrested, detained, and tried as a war criminal under local law for the same.
I doubt if anyone in Congress, or the current Administration gave that a thought. if we can scarf up “quasi-military types” in another sovereign nation and transport them to Gitma and then put them on trial within the US military and civil court system…who can now say other countries cannot do the same. reciprocity is the root of all our international agreements and Geneva.
Now, just because AQ and the jihadis don’t follow Geneva, or just because an organized crime family in Akhazia or Ossetia does not follow Geneva, should we really follow their example? Under Geneva these AQ-types, the jihadis, the Abkhazian and Ossetian crime families operating at the behest of Russia are classified as bandits, brigands and terrorists…and should be dealt with as such.
If we openly toss out Geneva, or operationally tweak Geneva downward as we have since 9-12, then no US citizen or servicemember is safe anywhere in the world.
It’s a can of worms I’d prefer left unopened.
coldwarrior on August 20, 2008 at 9:23 PM
Russian version of double dog dare ‘ya. Well, what comes next. They obviously feel that they have the upper hand and nobody will do anything about it. Checkmate?
jeanie on August 20, 2008 at 9:31 PM
NahnCee on August 20, 2008 at 8:55 PM –
It has been my experience over 30+ years and in dozens of countries and several war zones, that we do have and should have boundaries in our actions in war.
You invective about me being associated with Berkeley liberals and your admonishment that I “run along now and listen to Obama speechify…” shows that you are not paying attention. it also demonstrates a shallowness of thought.
I’ll stand on my record here and over at CQ.
Let the ” *real* warriors of the world deal with the stupid pathetic over-reaching Russians.”
And from what I have seen thus far, those *real* warriors would love to engage in the lowest common denominator of warfare, with no plan, no strategy save for wanting to kill Russians. No evidence of knowledge of the operational arts, little evidence provided of having even the most rudimentary understanding of military engagement above small unit tactics, and further still, no understanding of the enemy before us and an understanding of that enemy’s weaknesses and vulnerabilities.
Good luck with that.
coldwarrior on August 20, 2008 at 9:32 PM
They know they have us by the stones while we are in the middle of a presidential election. Bush is a lame duck. That is part of a bigger plan to build a false confidence when their adventurism will draw them into the middle east against Israel siding with Iran. It will be their last fling.
wepeople on August 20, 2008 at 9:34 PM
Do they really want war? Beligerent as they may be, even the Russians must know that it will be a devastating thing that will leave them and us broken beyond belief. Even the Russians can’t be that stupid. Can they?
jeanie on August 20, 2008 at 9:42 PM
Sure, the Russians lost their credibility in terms of “words,” but I’d say they are pretty clear in terms of “deeds.” It’s a shame that we’ve lost credibility in both… Godspeed, Georgia and Poland.
Send_Me on August 20, 2008 at 9:42 PM
We have to play for time. Military measures are, I’m sure, being planned. I believe that the Western allies have the strength to be a tad asymmetric, and not play into obvious Russian strengths/traps. Turkey approved a Bosporus transit of 3 US Navy ships today. Ships are how to move lots of supplies.
The immediate response is sure to be economic. The Russian stock market and the ruble are both sinking fast. Russia leaders hold lots of their ill-gotten wealth in the West. How convenient.
Making Putin a lot poorer in his personal trillion $ would be a savvy touch.
The West has spent the last 7 years getting better at using the international banking system to the West’s advantage.
The more bellicose Putin talks now, the better to oppose him. At the moment, Georgia is being raped by Russians and their allied thugs. Russian action are beyond spin of all but the lock-step left. The West is giving the Russians rope. We aren’t selling them rope, but giving them room to make their brutal actions unmistakable. Among the thinking Europeans - the US can be the good guys again.
NaCly dog on August 20, 2008 at 9:45 PM
They’re relying on the idea that no matter what, we won’t fight. Quite honestly, I think they are right. We’re too weak, distracted, and, frankly, too apathetic to act.
Send_Me on August 20, 2008 at 9:46 PM
Found this interesting, from today’s Pravda.
The Russians seem to beleive their world media offensive is totally going their way. Not.
“Even Americans are saying, “Thank you Russia for standing up to the crackpots in control of our government.”
When Pravda is again generating such bold faced lies…well, it means we have struck a nerve on their side. We need to strike more nerves. So much so, that they cannot fashion a response. So much so that we can start setting the timing and tempo of our repsonse.
And, from the Pravda article…quoting an obvious leftard here in America, if they didn’t just make up the wuote out of whole cloth:
“A respondent who considers himself a Republican wrote, “There is no reason that we should be antagonizing them on their border. It scares me that this oilman president will take us into another war with a much more deadly foe over an oil pipeline through Georgia. I am a registered Republican, but enough is enough. Impeach George Bush, if he gets us involved in the Russo-Georgian war.”
coldwarrior on August 20, 2008 at 9:47 PM
And another Pravda piece…Russia is the Saviour of Peace and Life? Do they really believe this tripe?
coldwarrior on August 20, 2008 at 9:51 PM
Yes, it doesn’t forbid spies, but it forbids just about everything that spies actually have to do.
We have the right to live our lives in peace the way we want. That’s good enough for me. I don’t feel any need to prove that I’m better than someone who’s trying to kill me. During war, we fight to win, not to ‘not lose’ - as Truman, unfortunately redirected American war strategy.
The way they are with Geneva - you take your chances when you attack someone. I trust America to make up our own minds as to what is appropriate, not some set of rules laid down in a different world, and never seriously, anyway.
But, the important point is this: Geneva means nothing. It is not self-executing, has no enforcement arm working on it, no judiciary ruling over it, no sense of compliance in any real sense … It is just a piece of paper that is attached to nothing real. It is a fairy tale and nothing else - legally speaking.
I’m in full agreeement, here.
And this is another reason for us to be rid of Geneva in toto. The Euros look at all of these treaties as nothing more than weapons to use against America (as none of the Euros has EVER followed Geneva, in the least). Other ratholes around the world could even try the same. Best to throw the paper out and take care of that problem, right now. Enemy treatment of our soldiers is best handled via force. If they do something we don’t like, their country pays for it. That’s how things worked before Geneva and that’s they still really work.
Congress is devoid of thoughts, period.
They can try. Geneva never stopped them from trying. It was deterence that does that, and Geneva provides negative deterence.
The can was opened by the SCOTUS and Bush and pushed by the idiot media. That’s a done deal. I’m repeating myself, but the safety of US citizens or servicemembers anywhere in the world has never been defended by anything other than US power, as it will be after we toss Geneva in the trash.
progressoverpeace on August 20, 2008 at 9:52 PM
That’s how things worked before Geneva?
Yep. Thousands and thousands of dead non-combatant civilians, thousands and thousands of dying or wounded soldiers precluded from treatment or forced into slavery. Butchery and barbarity beyond description. And that was just in the run up to the first Geneva Convention in 1863.
coldwarrior on August 20, 2008 at 10:00 PM
from Report from Tblisi:
The Russian “military” in Georgia has equipment that is junk waiting for American bombs to take it out. The air defenses they sold to Iraq for jamming GPS was taken out easily by GPS-guided bombs.
If the Russians thought “they have the upper hand and nobody will do anything about it”, they would be in Tbilisi and not seeming to back down from the capital of Georgia.
Right_of_Attila on August 20, 2008 at 10:05 PM
When did all of that stop? When did we ever do any of that - outside of attacking civilians, which has always been understood as part of war, though we have usually let the enemy decide if they wanted to go there, first?
I’m not sure what you’re driving at. The Geneva Conventions have never stopped anything from happening. It’s just paper. Occassionally, countries play with them for one reason or another, but everyone ignores them any time they want. We have never fought an enemy that adhered to the Geneva Conventions, as we have both agreed that we don’t (with respect to nukes), so their efficacy in war is really not even a consideration. Getting rid of Geneva doesn’t mean that we’re going to change much. We have US law and our military law and that’s all we need. We don’t need any open, fuzzy international treaty that has no real meaning, no real enforcement, no real effect, other than to open us up to the interpretations of others who have signed onto it without having many of the real responsibilities of the world, today. That’s how I see it.
progressoverpeace on August 20, 2008 at 10:14 PM
A good deal of the butchery and barbarity, as defined by todays standards, was a result of the state of the art: swords, pointy sticks, arrows, axes, boiling oil; and some more modern weapons: grape shot, dum dums, grenades, mortars, rifles, mustard gas, etc..
As we, the West, advance in our technology we leave the rest of the world behind. Those farthest behind (least able to afford modern tools of the trade) still use what is available: machetes, cheap machine guns (AK-47s), pointy sticks, axes, etc…
And until the time of Korea/Vietnam, nobody had effective battlefield medicine which adds tremendously to the losses.
BobMbx on August 20, 2008 at 10:42 PM
So are you suggesting the Europeans back down and give Russia control of the only oil pipeline that flows from the Caspian Sea to Europe that is not presently under Russian or Iranian control?
Are you suggesting we back out of our NATO commitments to the Europeans if the Europeans declare a flat “No” to Russia?
From HERE the Europeans have no choice about the matter if they wish to remain more or less sovereign.
Since we don’t have any direct interest in what flows through that pipeline it’s not our call to go in and protect other countries with whom we do NOT have treaties. That leaves poor Georgia in a world of hurt. But one step over the line in Poland puts Russia and the United States at war. That would not be a good thing for either country.
{^_^}
herself on August 21, 2008 at 4:12 AM
Excellent article up on your site today about how the
USA spent the last decade retiring our tactical nuclear arsenal at a much faster rate than Russia, and we are
now seriously outgunned. This is just stupid, the kind
of thing Obama would do. This needs fixing - fast.
My theory is that the Georgian invasion is only peripherally
about the Caucasas, I think it is about Iran.
I say Russia wants Iran to get the bomb and become
a suicide proxy warrior against the USA. If Iran only manages
the stealth destruction of five or six major cities before
it ceases to be, from Russia’s perspective it’s all good.
The West in at least two decades of economic hurt and
less oil available to the World.
Trouble is, we’re about to take down Iran’s nuclear
sites.
Enter conflict in Georgia replete with tensions between
the West and the New Soviet Union. Russia has an excuse
to expand it’s nuclear defense posture, non?
Debka is reporting that Russia has a carrier battle group
under way right now for the Syrian port of Tartus with
the intention of establishing a permanent Russian base
inside of Syria. Hopefully, that will scare President
Bush and PM Olmert off from attacking Iran. I think
that’s how the calculation goes.
davem on August 21, 2008 at 6:39 AM
Not at all. Thermite grenades (which are very easy to make) set on top of the engine compartment of an armored vehicle will melt through and destroy the engine in seconds, while not injuring anyone who isn’t stupid enough to stare at it as it burns.
fossten on August 21, 2008 at 9:22 AM
Hopefully it is clear to the powers to be that Iran, Russia, China and Venezuela are all talking to each other and the common denominator is world dominance. The USA acting as sheriff puts us in their cross-hairs.
Someone needs to connect the dots for the rest of the people in this country since a military conflict with Russia will make Iraq look like a minor police action.
Hening on August 21, 2008 at 9:49 AM
update:
Russian forces blocked the only land entrance to Georgia’s main port city on Thursday, a day before Russia promised to complete a troop pullout from its ex-Soviet neighbor.
Armored personnel carriers and troop trucks blocked the bridge to the Black Sea port city of Poti, and Russian forces excavated trenches and set up mortars facing the city. Another group of APCs and trucks were positioned in a nearby wooded area.
Although Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has promised that his forces would pull back by Friday, Russian troops appear to be digging in, raising concern about whether Moscow is aiming for a lengthy occupation of its small, pro-Western neighbor.
Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili told The Associated Press that Russia was thinning out its presence in some occupied towns but was seizing other strategic spots. He called the Russian moves “some kind of deception game.”
“(The Russians) are making fun of the world,” he declared.
pseudonominus on August 21, 2008 at 10:13 AM
Shota Abramidze, a 73-year-old retired engineer, said Gori residents wanted the Russians out.
“They’ve stolen everything. They’ve bombed everything. This is fascism, that’s what this is.”
pseudonominus on August 21, 2008 at 10:38 AM
What’s the point of such cooperation? Is Norway going to help defend Russian from an invasion by Finland?
Akzed on August 21, 2008 at 12:08 PM
Here’s what I don’t get. NATO relies on Russian way stations to supply the forces in Afghanistan. The other way in is through Pakistan, not exactly friendly terrain either. Now we have a change of government in Pak and and an imprending brawl with Russia.
Were tele-transportation beams invented last night while I was asleep?
dhimwit on August 21, 2008 at 12:29 PM
Deafening silence. Hmmmmmm.
Starlink on August 21, 2008 at 1:20 PM
Russia has been planning and contemplating things for a while, it is becoming obvious. They have been listening to the liberals and have determined we are weak. They will allow us to continue to weaken ourselves while picking off the original satellite countries. I don’t think they believe that NATO and the USA will call their bluff and based on France, Condi, NATO, and Bush’s responses, I don’t know that they’re wrong in saying that. Scary but I think Bush is looking at a legacy the way Clinton did, and he doesn’t want to be in a major conflict with Russia while he’s on the way out.
I’m still hopeful, though, that someone will come to their senses. The Bush Administration should have started tightening down on Russia when people we’re ending up poisoned.
Sultry Beauty on August 21, 2008 at 2:04 PM
Moving stuff across Russia to supply US forces in Afghanistan.
freevillage on August 22, 2008 at 12:49 AM
Comment pages: « 1 2 [3]