It's all rather confusing but at least I now understand what exactly was happening there before it caught my interest. Some interesting bits from the piece follow:
All in all, a very illuminating piece."Take South Ossetia, which like Abkhazia had autonomous status within Soviet Georgia. Although many South Ossetians live in Tbilisi and elsewhere in Georgia, its people are really connected in terms of family, kin and language with North Ossetia, which is now in Russia, across the mountains to which it is connected through the Roki tunnel.
"Ossetians speak a language related to Persian and believe (truly) that the King Arthur of British myth was actually an Ossetian. I found billboards in Tskhinvali emblazoned with pictures of men dressed as knights in armour celebrating the 17th anniversary of South Ossetia's declaration of independence.
"The Abkhaz, like the South Ossetians, have all been given Russian passports and vote in Russian elections, even though their unrecognised statelets are legally part of Georgia. They use the rouble, their people work and study in Russia and they speak Russian at least as much as Abkhaz or Ossetian. Their elderly receive their pensions from Russia. And, as the last few days have helped demonstrate, without Russian military support, it is doubtful whether the breakaways would still exist.
"Of course, Russia is interested in its territorial integrity, not Georgia's. By supporting Abkhazia and South Ossetia, it has the means to keep Georgia at its mercy and prevent it from following the pro-western path chosen by its electorate. But beyond that, it has little real interest in the breakaway states.
[via Guardian]
Posts
I believe Russia bestowed the Russian passports to all in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, enmasse, as recently as in 2004. Now, if I had territorial ambitions, that would be a smooth and peaceful way to start the process of annexing another nation's territory. I talk about this precisely for the same reason that you mention, that is ..... now I don't know where I stand on this one.
ReplyDeleteanonymous,
ReplyDeleteyou're right about the russian passport distribution. but, from the article (on which i base most of my knowledge about the region/situation), the russians don't seem too interested in actually taking south ossetia or abkhazia. that confuses me even more... and that bothers me, because it implies (to me) that russia is playing it fast and loose and not really thinking about ramifications for itself, georgia, europe, etc.
The passport issue really stems from Soviet times: Anyone who was a resident of the old Soviet Union has a right to a Russian passport. And it just so happens that a lot of the Abkhaz and South Ossetians applied for one... and therefore HAD to be given one.
ReplyDeleteWhy did up to 90% of them apply for Russian citizenship and thus passports? Because the only internationally-recognized alternative would be a citizenship and a passport from Georgia.
And obviously, they fought a war with Georgia in 1992-93 precisely to prove that they are NOT Georgians and that they don't want to be part of Georgia or ruled by Georgia.
So it is not as if they had a lot of choice. I don't personally think that there is anything wrong with the fact that they opted for Russian passports. For them, it is the lesser of two evils.
anonymous,
ReplyDeletei read that the passports were offered to them and they, willingly, accepted them. i suppose the only distinction between what you describe and what i describe is the active/passive nature of russia's involvement with the rebellions in south ossetia and abkhazia.
i definitely do agree that the two groups were simply choosing the lesser of the two evils. i only wish to point out that i don't understand what russia's next steps will be, with regard to s. ossetian and abkhazian self-determination/unification with russia/etc. thanks for your comments, by the way, they do bring out some very interesting points.
I believe these peoples have the right to break away from Georgia. Since the break up of the soviet union countries are still trying to define themselves and find there true borders as in the balkins.
ReplyDeleteWhy does the USA always think its doing right by sailing battle ships into the black sea region and throwing its weight around. The USA could do better if it used its resources to maybe help its own people who are facing huricanes in New Orleans and the state is almost bankrupt anyway as we saw in IOUSA. I think it won't be long before the USA goes the same way as the Soviet Union in the 80's and go bankrupt. Fight your own battles and leave the rest of us alone.
I think this conflict must be understood in a much larger context. It is not about South Ossetia and Georgia. It is about Russia and NATO.
ReplyDeleteUnderstandably, Russia feels uncomfortable with the expansion of NATO into its "near abroad". For Russia, Georgia represents the parts of the old USSR that are looking West for security. South Ossetia represents the parts of the old USSR that still look to Russia. What better way to demonstrate the comparison than to invade South Ossetia? Thus sending a message that Russia is the right choice, and that other former USSR states must choose their loyalties accordingly.
This was clearly planned well in advance. Georgia's foolish decision to get violent in S.O. provided the excuse Russia had been waiting for. That was Georgia's fault, and the international community can do nothing about it due to Russia's peacekeeping assignment there. Russia's advance deep into Georgian territory, occupation of cities and travel routes, and targeting of civilians, however, were not excusable.
While the Western world has been incapable of responding, Russia has learned of the consequences of such belligerency. Yesterday the Financial Times reported that the invasion has led to $21 billion in capital flight out of Russia, forcing the central bank to prop up the currency. Russia has simply added more evidence that rule of law does not apply to the Russian government, thus delaying their full entry into the modern world.
What we should be worried about now is the passports Russia is distributing in the Crimean peninsula of Ukraine.
In sum, my opinion is that Russia was justified in moving into S.O. in response to Georgia's belligerence, but Russia was wrong to continue into Georgia and target civilians. The West must respond economically.
Pendulum Politics
RD,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment. I agree with you; Georgia's actions in S Ossetia were ill-conceived, at best, and Russia, while acting in its own best interest, did something that is not really excusable anymore (if ever it was). I am going to check out the Pendulum Politics blog you linked to in your comment...