大象传媒

"But I have been struck by the refusal of Western leaders to acknowledge that there is any comparison between their decision to insist that Kosovo had to become independent - in other words their refusal to respect the territorial integrity of Serbia - and Russia's decision to recognise the two Georgian breakaway regions - Moscow's refusal to respect the territorial integrity of Georgia."

I think you might be missing a preposition in this rather convoluted sentence. I'm concerned that because we aren't getting the story straight at the outset of this conflict, that there will be a lot of shoulder-shrugging. And if the conflict drags on, one suspects a lot of channel flipping or the internet equivalent of 'turning the page' will result in a 'new media' version of the story being 'buried in the back pages'.

Couldn't you recruit Eddie Mair to do a 'New readers start here..' summary of what has happened to date, and how we got here ?

I'm completely in the dark on this, since didn't Georgia provoke some of the initial Russian response ? And why is the US insisting on throwing money at a ridiculous 'star wars' programme that didn't make any sense even when the cold war was on ??

Ronnie Reagan is dead and buried - about time this SDI nonsense was buried as well.

Yes, propaganda war escalates - "western" spin masters have clearly won the first round and are going strong into the second one. 大象传媒 goes full steam with an article By William Horsley, European affairs analyst. Here is what he has to say:
"The Russians' strongest argument in defence of its armed intervention is that blame for the outbreak of a shooting war is shared."
Ooops - I apparently have missed something? So far as I have heard, each and every time, each and every russian official was putting the blame squarely on Mr. Saakashvili, who ordered his army to attack a batallion of russian "peacekeepers" stationed in SO i n accordance with UN Security Council resolution. As a result of this attack about a dousen of russian soldiers were killed and about 100 wounded. And, of course, the town of Tskhinvali was severely destroyed.
The above point was in fact reiteated by Putin in his yesterday's interview with CNN.
So, why does Mr. Horsley tells us that russians accept they share the blame? Perhaps, so we don't have any doubts?

On the sideline, I wonder, whether this interview s available in its entirety. Perhaps, from RussiaToday. I doubt CNN or other "western" propaganda outfits would let you listen to what Putin had to say in its entirety. What if you think about it?

It is more difficult, but keep it up!

Eventually, you will get facts from the Russians that no one else will be offered

and the West will have to be more truthful about its motives and actions.

That will result in a net gain for the World and help move us all toward international cooperation instead of confrontation.

Your question "why they believe Kosovo did not deserve recognition, but Abkhazia and South Ossetia do?" is loaded against any Russian to answer reasonably well for the simple fact that Russians are a minority of one (excluding the positions of direct belligerents in the 3 territorial disputes).

Let us leave aside the direct belligerents' grandfathers' stories of they did this and they did that, as per the Economist's article. The article, by the way, is a good example of uncreative thinking but we cannot expect too much from dismal scientists.

Looking at Kosovo first. To recognize a country鈥檚 independence, it requires many parties not necessary a majority. Kosovo is recognized by UK, USA and France ( 3/5 of UN Security Council) plus many other countries including wanna-be secessionist Taiwan.
Next, can the supporters of Kosovo 鈥済uarantee鈥� her independence both militarily and economically? Yes on both counts, USA and friends have soldiers there. Economically, no problem as there is the Muslim-Arab petrodollars which is probably made available on condition that the Muslim Kosovo is free from Christian domination. All these are predicated that Serbia will never integrate the Muslim Kosovans as equal and non-discriminated citizens. Today, happy Kosovo means happy Muslims world-wide. Geopolitical kinship among Slavic races is so 19th Century argument.

Serbia鈥檚 territorial integrity is sacrificed for supposedly 鈥渟afer and better鈥� world. Serbia鈥檚 territorial integrity is sacrificed to make the 鈥渉ave oil鈥� happy and 鈥渉ave no oil鈥� sleep better.
It does not matter that Serbia repented their ethnic cleansing past or historically it has suzeranity overt Kosovo.

In Abkhazia and South Ossetia, complete opposites of Kosovo. Recognition by one country, Russia. Militarily and economically supported by one country, Russia.
Muslims world-wide are indifferent to a more happier independent Abkhazia and South Ossetia. There is no evidence to suggest that Georgia will discriminate against the 2 group of peoples.

But what really counts is that Abkhazia and South Ossetia are neighbours to both Russia and Georgia. Proximity alone validates their choice of who they want to be closer with. Neigbours do know each other better. Those other people from far away are simply busybodies and up to no good.

BTW, Putin in his interview to CNN responded the question about non-recognition of Kosovo and recognition of S.Ossetia and Abhazia. If you are interested in the question you may search the interview (not very simple task though).

Soviet Union had a great idea of 'communism' and a big enemy 'capitalism'. And it tried to build the communism in other country. US does the same thing with idea of 'democracy'. I regret that Europe is too weak to be self-dependent. US designs images of enemies and Europeans pay theirs lives in Iraq and Afghanistan, only for US expansion. Oh no, that's of course for protection from fictitious enemies.

BTW, Georgia was planned to be a base to bomb Iran. Now Iran is still a bomb-sight, though the attack is postponed. Sorry, Kurdistan is not ready yet. Wait a bit.

Europe participates in US war crimes and so Europe can not be unbiased.

1. Another interesting observation. When UNOSAT satellite surveys of the damage in the town of Tskhinvali became public a week ago, confirming russian claims of severe damage to residential areas caused by georgian bombardment, I was almost the only person who noticed them. However, when several days later UNOSAT posted follow-up surveys of damage in the areas containing georgian villages, almost immediately they became commonplace in the "western" media with HRW beating the drums and even 大象传媒 just showed them.
I wonder, do journalists, editors and other people engaging in such reporting bias and selectivity sleep well? I mean don't have bad dreams hesitating whether they are doing right thing?

2. Alistair Burnett's piece above is somewhat reassuring. It shows that there are people on the 大象传媒 who try to stay as impartial as they can. My hat's off.
To me the situation on 大象传媒 seems similar to that in Soviet media of 30 years ago. Most reporters/editors were complicently and obediently pursuing "party line", informing people of the USSR of the "homeless on the streets of NY" and other "excesses of the rotten capitalism". And making careers and wealth in the process. However, there were few who tried as best they can to beat the system and deliver unbiased news and information to their compatriots. By doing so they were jeoprdizing their careers and well-being. They were punished by the system when caught. I am really concerned that this might also be true for courageous reporters working for 大象传媒. The way 大象传媒 coverage is structured indeed looks like those "glimpses of real" smuggled in here and there by honest journalis(s) beating the mainstream "systemic" media coverage. My great respect to these people.

Once again the canard of "international law" raises its ugly head. Funny how people use words to obfuscate facts, that's what Noam Chomsky is a champion at. There is no such thing as international law. There is no law when it is enforced or cited selectively. In fact there is no enforcement because the only mechanism to enforce it can be vetoed by any of the large powers who are usually involved one way or another with those accused by someone of violating it. Time to end the charade and go back to calling a spade a spade.

The propaganda should not matter. At the very root of this are people - the populations of South Ossetia and Abkhazia who have voted overwhelmingly, albeit for differing reasons, to be independent of Georgia AND Russia.

The UN needs to be questioned about its partisan approach to democracy, hardly a position it should occupy if it really is the representative of oppressed people.

The west have no grounds to criticise Russia unless it really is war mongering posturing - why? Perhaps if there was a seriously sincere embrace between the US and the Russians the world would be ten fold more secure. Is the truth really the US dependency on arms for a healthy economy? Russia has most of the oil what reason has it to go around capturing rogue states?

The real question is whether Georgia is totally innocent or the real instigator in this conflict! Of course the West will castigate Russia and one will have to analyse the whole situation dispassionately to get real clues. The situation is getting totally out of hand with Russia and America flexing their military muscle! Are we on the brink of a new Cold War or even worse a nuclear
conflagraton? Are world leaders wise enough to avert this dangerous confrontation? Time will tell.

All this proves is that Europe and America have been deluding themselves about the true nature of Russia since the end of the cold war. Now they are forced by events to wake up to the facts of life in our modern world.

We knew a lot more about Kosovo, Serbia, and the Balkans than we do about Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The facts are not clear. Which side is right? Maybe both, maybe neither, we just don't know. Most who speak about it are not subject matter experts. What we do know is that we are in no position to wage a military campaign against Russia over them even if Russia is dead wrong an lied throght its teeth (hardly a novel thought) unless we want to risk a nuclear war. I don't think we want to. Other actions could have economic consequences for Europe. Frankly, I don't care about that and at the moment Europe seems oblivious to it except maybe for Germany which has been quiet. I say, "tweak the bear's nose." Let's see what happens if we continue to provoke him with barbs. The most effective tool the west has is to somehow find a way to humiliate the Russian government in the eyes of the Russian people. That's the only way to make it fall. So far there is no effort let alone result in this direction. Any other actions will likely be ineffective at obtaining change.

2MarcusAurelius

While your posts seem to aim at being analytic, it does appear that bias in your assessment negates the analytic value. Here are few considerations, which may help you to clear the picture.
1. You say: The facts are not clear. Well, there are scholarly studies on the issue dating to 1990-s, one of which I have just cited in another post and which describe the situation pretty well, supplying full basket of unbiased facts. They are all pretty consistent. I emphasize - these studies are old enough to be free of propagana bias. So, you might educate yourself in order to make an informed judgement or at least to work out an informed opinion.
2. You speak of "... the true nature of Russia ". If you think that the true nature of modern Russia is something else than making as much money as they can from what they have available, you are deluding yourself. Russia has embraced capitalist approach and everybody there, people and elites inclus, is in for "raking the green". How in your opinion annexing e.g. Poland or Baltic states would help here? Wake up and smell the coffee - in such a scenario those states would have to be supported by russians instead of EU. For example, getting russian resources (gas, etc.) at a fraction of the price, like in old times. Well, in the USSR those morons in our gerontogovernment believed that this is a price for the eventual triumph of their communist faith. This was justification for supporting "socialist camp". But they were big time morons. What, in your opinion, would be payoff for modern, ideology-free Russia? Frankly, I do not see any.
3. And here is the most important point. The above applies, of course, if you do not think that "Europe's security = full control of how Russia exploits its resources". I.e., if you believe that russians, for example, are not entitled to impose economic sanctions - such as, say, gas/oil embargo - on unfriendly governments. For example, governments that restrict human rights of ethnic russians based on their ethnicity. (BTW, do you not think that governments engaging in such behavior and/or building ethicity-based "aparthaid" systems have to be sanctioned not only by russians, but also by EU and US?). In such case, but only in such case, russians would really need another "cordon sanitaire" to protect what they have.

Ah man there seems to be quite alot of anti russian sentiment on here at the moment. Dont they realise that the majority of this is just fueled by xenophobia? When will the world grow up?

If the current focus upon spoken and written words--seemingly, based on past interpretations of historical elements--could be reinterpreted above the cultural representations producing the present awarenesses of strife...perhaps, a different kind of communication could be produced which would not, inherently, rely on understandings based solely on the past. Definitions of words used could be fully understood and explained thoroughly--not in any propagandistic sense--but in a more "non-culturally exact" sense...and the inner and outer languages then created could be used and spoken...not only intellectually understood but emotionally orientated toward those whose understandings are, whether justifiably or not, somewhat colored by past, less appropriately meaningful, usages of words and meanings which have not been fully examined except under, perhaps, the "lens" of a kind of "microscope-of-awareness" pertaining to that which could--depending on the "power" of the "lens" being used: be capable of yet producing a less cultural but more acutely vast awareness (even within one's own mind--almost, geometrical in its structural aspects) with an evolving
understanding in accord with the words produced in a more diplomatically "pointed" way connected by "lines" of that kind of communication which rests beyond mere human language and attempts to understand the motions of the subconcious behind the concious ramifications of the causes of the ongoing visible events.
To sum up: What is the underlying Cause, beyond the cultural aspects of the Circumstance, which is producing these Effects? What, in fact: is the Subconcious Cause...producing these Concious Effects?

#11

"Europe and America deluding themselves.."

I think you will find that Europe has been deluded by the US for a very long time, and the propaganda machine that continues its scratchy and not very convincing diatribe about Russia is getting a bit boring.

The people of South Ossetia voted twice in independently monitored referenda to be separate from Georgia and Abkhazia has continuously shown its mistrust of Georgia since the break up of the Soviet Union. They are indisputable facts. Russia has clearly stated that it will protect the autonomy of both regions and, being on their doorstep, they have every reason to do so.

The only politicians who are in the wrong are those who are pointing fingers at Russia when the finger pointing should be at the USA. Since when did the USA use the UN as a sounding ground for its attacks on sovereign states, not to keep the peace, but to overthrow regimes they do not like? Russia has not done that although it could have done. Russia has simply ensured a fragile peace and in so doing have demonstrated to Georgia the cost of threatening these autonomous states. So why are the US even concerned?

The real issue is oil that is independent of Russia or Iran and the BP pipeline that cuts through Georgia only 50km from the borders of South Ossetia. It carries about one percent of global oil but it remains a symbol of independence from Russia. It is that symbol that is causing the unrest in the USA, an over reaction that may have disastrous consequences for the west if they continue to antagonise Russia. If there is a full scale war do you think this pipeline will escape unscathed? I think not.

Perhaps if the USA were more even handed in its regard of democracy it would settle this matter by agreement with Russia - of course that would be a climb down but isn't it time the USA got real?

pngabit, #9, I think that you're right on
target with this... Perhaps once in a while
we should consider what people who
live in an area really want, instead of
what some leader in Washington or Moscow
wants.

Greetings from Boise, Idaho. USA.

--

"I may not agree with what you have to say Sir; but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

-Voltaire

Thanks for covering this event as you have.

I'm in my 7th decade, and, I've never been more disenchanted with our (U.S.) media than I have in recent years, not just on this story, but, others as well, and am glad to have stumbled upon your website.

It is hard to find many folks at all where I live, who have not completely swallowed the western version of events. They also have no interest in hearing anything else, either, it seems.

This whole thing smells a bit, and, it doesn't take much effort to find lots of questions that need answering, starting with that charcter Saakashvili.

May I suggest his value to the nation might be better served as a used Trabant salesman than President.

Much like George Bush.

The last thing we need in a sensitive area like this is one more loose cowboy like this guy.

Does George Bush have a training school somewhere for BoneHeaded Military Moves or something?

I don't know the answers, but, I can see the whole story hasn't been told, and, until it is, it needs to be scrutinized deeply without prejudice or nationalistic feelings guiding the story line.

It looks to me like those who were most surprised were the media, who, at the beginning were obviously in disarray, and, not aware of much at all.

Thanks again.

An very trivial, but, nonetheless, demonstratively biased report went out on FiveLive this evening at about 5.40 when Peter Allan and Johnny Diamond in conversation stated "we must stop Russia doing IT again...." The "IT" was not elaborated upon and yet was stated as fact. This whole conversation was accepting of the western account of events which is neither confirmed nor based on hard evidence.

I really do wish that the 大象传媒 would ensure that its presenters do not express opinion as fact.

In my younger days the world's leaders armed their followers and set them to kill one another.
They succeeded to a total of 50 million deaths give or take a few millions. Additionally there were millions of wounded, maimed and mentally damaged: some of them still alive but living in hospitals.
Do our present leaders ever contemplate sitting around a table, planning a better world for us all, and avoiding nuclear Armageddon. I doubt it. Once more, they are not of the right calibre.

Unfortunately it shows just what a toothless tiger NATO and the West has become. The only thing that holds a bully in check is the fear of reprisals. The old Warsaw Pact were held in check, in the main, by a strong determination to resist. Now that capability has been mainly thrown away so there is no deterant.

This is not directed at Russia by the way but at every country that tries to impose its agenda on another. Be it USA, USE (United States of Europe), the Arab world or China.

Now about all that is left is some intense and directed hand-wringing, loads of self interest and political appeasment.

Didnt this type of situation lead to a war about 70 years ago??

"This is what a propaganda war creates.."

The cruelty belongs to a mortally wounded man, but it is a unthinking man. Not one that has developed. One unthinking being among many, cultivated to be a creature, a beast. Civilization, no it doesn't exist but in short moments and for them, pitifully incomplete. Savages of one type, and other types. Hate creates thoughts that are not reasoned. They exist because the mental capacity has lacked the completion of ones thoughts. Undeveloped they can not see that they are incomplete. They are heralded on as if they had complete thought. They are exploited and praised for something they never acquired.

The conflict in Georgia is ultimately one part of a wider plan to turn Russia once again into a super power. In order for this to happen partly Russia must gain control of Georgia again but the wider game plan in to re gain control of Ukraine. When I was working as an electoral observer in Ukraine during the Orange revolution which was effectively a rejection of Russian backed politicians and their politics I was posted to a town called Reni on the south west tip of Ukraine bordering Romania and Moldova. This town was literally unchanged from the soviet era and in the train station where the polling booth was there was an old soviet map of the world still up from the soviet days, unmoved from the soviet days with the original communist printing and writing on it. This map had the USSR at the centre naturally but that was not what was striking about it. What was striking was the roads marked on it. From looking at the map one could see where the power of the Soviet Union lay. All roads in the USSR led to the two places, Kiev and Moscow. Just like the Roman empire the USSR had two capitals as well.

And here lies the true game. If Russia is to once again be a super power it must regain its empire, and most importantly of all Ukraine. Lets not mice our words here, the USSR in reality was nothing more than the extension of the Russian empire with Russian oppression of non Russian cultures and languages occurring through out the period of the Union and all political power coming from Moscow and even ethnic cleansing in the form of the Holodomor, a genocide where between 8-12 million Ukrainians died in an artificial famine now recognised by many international governments as a genocide including the US, Canadian, Australian and Argentinean governments to name just a few. Russia鈥檚 game plan is to regain its glory and power and as usual it is doing this at the expense of the countries and peoples around it.

Quite frankly how you cannot use the word invasion is something I cannot understand. I understand you have to be impartial but either Russia invaded or it did not. If they sent their military into Georgia disregarding the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia and in the process firing on and killing Georgians and then occupying land this constitutes by definition invasion and occupation. By saying invasion you are not being impartial you are merely describing events.

The failure to use the term invasion is like describing a man who shot another man in the head in a fight as having stopped the other man from being able to live instead of saying he killed the man. The factors surrounding the shooting such as the fact that he may have killed the other man in self defence is where the impartial reporting comes in. In the same way that you would say kill in that circumstance you have to say invade for the Russia Georgia conflict. Where the impartiality comes in is how you report he circumstances surrounding the invasion.

And finally the reason I am making such a point is that the unwillingness to use the word invasion is actually in itself implying a bias towards the Russian propaganda. Surly it is the job of a journalist to cut through the bull from both sides and describe the facts. In this case surly at its simplest the facts are that Russia invaded Georgia and now occupies two territories in Georgia.

Ciapryna: sure it was an invasion, georgia invaded s ossetia! All russ did was move to protect its citizens like uk did in the fauklands.

When a state or region has a perfectly legal mandate for autonomy or independence then who should be the arbiter of that mandate?

Both South Ossetia an Abkhazia have such legal mandates and it seems strange that no one has complained about Russian presence in both regions for almost a decade. That changed when Georgia decided to get tough. And so to be fair and impartial and just we all need to know WHY Georgia decided to get tough. It will not do to simply cast up the propaganda that has been used to justify the incident from either side - what is needed is evidence of why the situation has changed from that observed for almost a decade. In November 2007 Georgia attempted a similar incursion but it failed.

The presence of the pipeline is the key to why the USA wish to manipulate the "motives" of Russia and claim that it is a "wounded" superpower in wait. That IS propaganda not honest truth.

US broke into Pakistan September 3, 15-20 civilians were killed. Could somebody please give me a link on bbc where I could find details. Sorry for the OFF. Thank you.

Oh, found it. I'm waiting for the UN reaction upon US invasion... Also I'm interesting what will be the response of UK, France, Poland, Ukraine etc. What will Europe say to USA? Can anybody predict it?

#27

Your comments make two equally important challenges to the west. Firstly the failure of our "free" press to report actions even handedly and secondly its failure to criticise the hypocrisy of western politicians.

The UN Charter clearly states that it "will reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained".

One wonders what the treaties between South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Russia actually mean to the UN, and how such an august body can hold to the justification for US presence in Iraq and Afghanistan whilst criticising Russian presence in autonomous regions in Georgia.

The world can do without a UN that has no heart or soul of its own.

@28

Also there was no UN and Europe reaction on Georgia bombing S.Ossetia August 7-8. US was silent as well then.

I think the democratic West could stop the war at the very beginning, August 8. It might condemn Georgian GRAD and tanks against Ossetian Tskhinvally.

With all the troubles in the world today. I can't help but wonder? If a certain group of people of a different group move into anothers country. Can they in fact secede from this country and infact form their own. So if the Muslim population of say France or England decide to form their own breakaway republic like Kosovo did is it legal? Or if the Hispanic population did this in the US? Or if Mexico had become Communist during the Cold War would the US have tolerated it??? Stay tuned? It happened in history all the time, so where does one draw the line??

Speaking of propaganda - as ew know, it has two components (i) what media tells to a broad audienceand (ii) what it doesn't. Very amusing that they miss to report HRW confession:
Clarification Regarding Use of Cluster Munitions in Georgia
(New York, September 3, 2008) 鈥� On August 21, 2008, Human Rights Watch reported a series of attacks with cluster munitions around four towns and villages in Georgia鈥檚 Gori district. Human Rights Watch attributed all the strikes to Russian forces, but upon further investigation has concluded that the origin of the cluster munitions found on August 20 in two of the villages 鈥� Shindisi and Pkhvenisi 鈥� cannot yet be determined.

Human Rights Watch researchers in Shindisi on August 20 found unexploded cluster submunitions, commonly known as Dual-Purpose Improved Conventional Munitions (DPICMs), and initially identified them as Russian. However, those submunitions were later identified by the Norwegian Defense Research Establishment (NDRE), based on Human Rights Watch鈥檚 photographs, as M85 DPICMs, which have not been reported to be part of Russia鈥檚 arsenal. NDRE is a government-sponsored institution that does research and development for the Norwegian Armed Forces and is recognized for its expertise in cluster munitions.

On August 31, the government of Georgia informed Human Rights Watch that it had a stockpile of ground rocket-launched cluster munitions that have M85 submunitions. The Georgian government described them as being a different type of M85 submunition than those found by Human Rights Watch and stated that these were the only cluster munitions in the Georgian arsenal.

Neither Georgia nor Russia has claimed use of the M85s found in Shindisi. Russia denies any use of cluster munitions in Georgia. Georgia states that it used cluster munitions in the August 2008 conflict only during an attack on Russian military forces near the Roki tunnel.

You speak of links between the situations in Georgia and Kosovo, but how about the similarity (one dare not say 'links') in the mentalities and objectives of today's Russian leaders and those of Germany in 1939? Remember how the Germans sought to justify their dismemberment of Czechoslovakia, marching into Sudetenland to 'rescue' their kith and kin? And how they annexed that territory and gave the German citizenship to their blood relatives there? Sound familiar?

AmericanGrizzly #30

To be more accurate, Ossetians did not moved into Georgia, they were minorities since S.Ossetia had been included into Georgia. So your examples with Muslims in France etc. do not correspond to S.Ossetia case.

You gave an example with Hispanic in US but there is more interesting thing in US. On December 20, 2007, American Indian Lakota declared itself "a sovereign nation with property rights over thousands of square miles in South Dakota, North Dakota, Nebraska, Wyoming and Montana." (wikipedia)

UN passed a Resolution on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. US refused to sign.

jonmetes #32
Do you remember 1983, the Invasion of Grenada. US provided an excuse for the bloody invasion: a threat to American students. Later the threat was recognized false.

What about Russian invasion of Georgia, now Georgian films about attack on Ossetian Tshinvally (Aug.8) are available on www, but western mass media refuse to show the films as these films are already 'irrelevant'.

In contrast to German in Czechoslovakia and US in Grenada, Russia had true reason to introduce its forces into Georgia. Russian peacekeepers killed by Georgians were in S.Ossetia legally. You might study the question.

The day after 9/11... our glorious (sic) leader, George W. Bush, got on the Amerikan boobtube and encouraged Amerikans to keep $hopping. The same media today says that Amerika's glorious (sic) invasions and occupations in Iraq-nam (and other places) is righteous... but when others do it (for whatever reason) it's evil. Orwell was way ahead of his time.

#32 hmmm, please tell me - why is always someone trying to pick an analogy of current events and only pick Czechoslovakia? There is no analogy of current events in Caucasus with what happened in Czechoslovakia in 1939, nor in 1968. In 1939 Hitler was after world dominance and the native Germans were welcomed pretext so his army did not need to fight its way through fortified border regions. But those Germans he wanted to protect needed no protection, Czech had not attack or supressed them, in contrary they were so militarized that it was Czech who needed protection from those.
In 1968 it was act of overthrowing government to keep preffered political system, there was no military action taken by Czechoslovakia against part of USSR that would require any military response.

I have seen some coverage from the conflict in South Ossetia. The most striking was a video shot by a Georgian soldier during the attack on Tskhinvali. The guy was driving on armored vehicle and shooting from heavy calibre machine gun on houses his vehicle was passing by. It was a point-of-view video, so it shown the gun and its targets, recording also voice, shouting something like this:"Yuhooo, I'm mad, I'm crazy, I'll shoot all of those...."

It felt like the guy thinks he's playing 'Doom' and he thought of shooting at real targets was fun. After seeing this I totally understand why Russians went in and if their presence would prevent repetition of such war-crazed individuals having free run with their guns, so I would leave all of Russian soldiers there and make sure that Georgians never get guns into their hands again.

There is no parallel I know that could describe this Georgian action agains civilian objects. maybe this was how nazi felt when conquering Europe.

In face of this I think Russians did only moral thing when they took weapons from hands of such people.

This is very interesting discussion. There are at least these layers to the situation:

0) The West gaining some perspective with regards to Russia: Yes, they have a right to security along their borders. Yes they have endured horrible terrorist attacks. Yes they did something harsh here, moving their military into another country, displacing people. Yes they have done some armtwisting in the Caspian Oil regions to gain some control. Yes they are not angels and possibly devils in some cases-- is that so different from everyone else? So we deal with each other to make things better. There is a difference between appeasement and rapproachment: nuanced, yes, but different.

1) What all the nations are saying with respect to international law. What appears to be the case at this point is that S. Ossetians and Georgians have been feuding, this activity heats up during the summer, it seemed to be particularly heated this go 'round and the Georgian president decided to escalate it beyond it's usual bounds. It is shocking to me that someone supposedly democratically elected could order their military against people within their own borders, and puzzling to me why this isn't being decried more loudly in the West. It seems to me that by just being on the receiving end of this attack, S. Ossetia is de facto excluded from the protection of the Georgian government, and as a result was "cast off".

The parallel alla_moscow draws between Grenada and this is not far off the mark. It should be noted that the US was not on the right side of this in terms of international law, either. They claimed to be responding to a Grenadian government invitiation, when then invitation was in fact from a non-Grenadian government official.


2) What is Russia really trying to gain?Clearly this was a well prepared attack, and the question remains whether they were provoking Georgia. But what is Russia really trying to gain? There seems to be this assumption that Russia 'wants to be a superpower' but I think at very least Russia wants a significant level of control in its region, Russia doesn't really gain much from being a global superpower, they've got a huge chunk of the globe to start with. There is this undertone of 'well, these guys and those guys owe us because we used to be all the Soviet Union' which is kind of weird-- I don't know if that is for real, or if that is something that is being 'spun up'.

If they are trying to gain a quicker route to controlling the oil pipeline, then they have done that. It seems like any move against that would have very bad consequences, however.

3) The conduct of the Georgian armed forces. Given the generous benefit of a doubt, if the Georgian military was somehow quelling a violent uprising in one of the country's territories, similar to 'sending in the National Guard', then it was clearly both ruthless and incompetent.

4) The actual will of the S. Ossetian and Abkhazian people. I realize that there is concern about 'borders unravelling' where strange new micro-countries are created, where these countries end up as failed states or mere puppets. The larger part of the 'prize' of this particular situation is the Abkhazian coastline. yet not a lot is being said about this.

5) What happens when you lose a war. Regardless of who actually started what in the 'detailed view', the Georgian president deployed his military, which was answered by the Russians, the Georgians lost and, in retrospect wisely, ran away. But they did lose, and when you lose a war you have to make concessions.

So what would seem best, and in fact what does seem to be happening, is that the Georgians concede the territories their 'independence', that the new Georgian borders be reinforced as inviolable.

Some examples of the propaganda war.

Domain ru is being blocked in Georgia since the very beginning of the war. It was unblocked once for a short while. Now it is blocked again.

Spanish RTVE showed a video from utube about September 7. The video presents Georgian tanks shelling houses in Tshinvally August 8. You can hear accompanying 'yohoho!' and something like that. Offscreen voice of a RTVE announcer told the video showed Russian troups coming into Tshinvally. RTVE recognized the comment as false, as 'slip of the tongue', September 9.

A device popular with the Nazis

"One of the best tactics of totalitarian propaganda is the preference for concentration in attacks on leaders of a "hostile" nation rather on the nation itself. Pars pro toto-to hit apposing forces by singling out their representatives had always been a device popular with the Nazis. Hitler and Goebbels therefore deliberately heaped abuse on the head of the President of Czechoslovakia, Dr. Benes, picturing him as half sinister and half ridiculous figure.鈥�

GOEBBELS AND NATIONAL SOCIALIST PROPAGANDA 1925-1945. Ernest Bramsted, Michigan State University Press, 1965

Thank you, Alistair. It's comforting to see that there is at least *someone* left at the 大象传媒 who does not immediately presume that "whoever is on America's side is the good guy and telling the truth", whereas "the commies are always lying".

I have been staggered at the reporting I have seen of this story, and the way in which the truth was bent out of all recognition to support the remarks made by the Foreign Secretary and his allies in Washington.

Listen to the testimony of this 12-year-old girl who was caught-up in the Georgian bombardment of civilian targets in her city. Then watch how the story is handled:



I am personally grateful to Alistair Burnett for having the COURAGE to report this incident FAIRLY and OBJECTIVELY - in the standards we *used* to expect from the 大象传媒. Regrettably this cannot be said of many at the 大象传媒 currently.

ISRAEL IS GOING TO LISTEN, WHEN I SPEAK. HERE ME O PEOPLE OF ISRAEL. ISRAEL WILL, BEGIN TO MAKE PEACE WITH THE ARAB WORLD. ISRAEL SHALL, EXTEND AN OLIVE BRANCH TO ALL THE ARAB COUNTRIES. ISRAEL MUST, BECOME THE HUMBLE MEDIATOR FOR THE SAKE OF ALL MANKIND. ISRAEL SHOULD, MAKE PEACE WITH THE PALISTINIAN PEOPLE AND GIVE THEM "RESERVE STATUS" LIKE CANADIAN INDIANS. Godspeed Swift [Personal details removed by Moderator]

To #40:
What is your point here? Do you refer to the usual reference in much of "free press" to Putin as (ex-)KGB villain and tyrant and Medvedev as his puppet?

Sorry, my comment #42 referred to #39, not #40.

For a casual reader about Georgian-Ossetian relations. The link contains the same text on Russian and English: [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]

大象传媒 Russia:

Alastair:

Propaganda war escalates; always during breaking news stories and during the wars...

No surprise, during the war in Georgia....

~Dennis Junior~