[Peace-discuss] Geopolitical machinations

[Karen Medina]

Thanks Mort,

Thanks Mort for the article. I don't think any of what Ramzy Baroud had to say was new information, but I must admit very few are actually saying it. 
* Georgia attacked South Ossetia while Putin was in China. If not to directly test Russia, then definitely to sneak one in while Putin's Medvedev was in charge.
* Russia responded. If it did not respond, it would have been in trouble too.
* Russia is blasted by the media, NATO, and countries like Poland
* In the US's view, Georgia is seen as the victim even though our buddy Saakashvili started it all, and by the way, Georgia has state-of-the-art weapons from Israel. 
* The media helps spread the view of Georgia = good, Russia = bad.
* Poland suddenly decides that the US missile defense shield in Poland is a great idea even though a week before 70% of Poles thought it was a horrible idea.
* NATO, that sworn alliance to defend each other, has countries clamoring to get in
* Georgia thinks the US and Israel are its best buddies, and so does Poland now. 
* The US thinks that its oily fingers look great intertwined in Georgia's and Poland's. Pipelines and missile sites are the ultimate prize.
* "the US will do its utmost to maintain a level of tension, if not hostilities in the region, for without it neither a missile shield nor the 270 billion barrels of oil in the Caspian basin can be brought within Washington's reach." -- a good quote to remember.

-karen medina

---- Original message ----
>Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 11:35:06 -0500
>From: "Brussel Morton K." <mkbrussel at comcast.net>  
>Subject: [Peace-discuss] Geopolitical machinations  
>To: Peace-discuss Discuss <peace-discuss at anti-war.net>
>
>   Interesting analysis of the Georgia/Ruassian/USA
>   conflict.
>   The Saakashvili Experiment
>   August 23, 2008
>
>   By Ramzy Baroud
>
>   Ramzy Baroud's ZSpace Page
>
>   Join ZSpace
>
>   Just as the world's attention was focussed on
>   China's Beijing Olympics, Georgian President Mikheil
>   Saakashvili, on 7 August, invaded the tiny breakaway
>   province of South Ossetia. The initial attack on the
>   South Ossetian capital, Tskninvali, soon extended to
>   an all out war, which eventually invited Russia's
>   wrath, and the death of thousands of innocent
>   civilians on both sides.
>
>    
>
>   Prior to Saakashvili's war, little was known about
>   the political specifics of that area and the brewing
>   decades-long territorial disputes which date back to
>   the early 20th century, highlighted during an
>   intense civil war that followed the break-up of the
>   Soviet Union and its satellite states. Georgia's
>   successful secession from the Soviet grip,
>   understandably, inspired independence fervour in
>   ethnic regions within Georgia. The small region of
>   South Ossetia -- majority ethnic Russians and
>   minority Georgians -- sought to join the North
>   Ossetian province, which remained part of Russia.
>   Another region was Abkhazia, whose protracted fight
>   with the central Georgian government has also
>   provoked much violence.
>
>    
>
>   The fact that South Ossetia belongs to Georgia was
>   hardly contested. Even Russia has long recognised
>   Georgian sovereignty in that region. Russia,
>   nonetheless, remained largely involved in South
>   Ossetia -- mostly as a "peacekeeping force",
>   rationalising such involvement as essential for the
>   national security of the country and the safety of
>   its citizens. Most South Ossentians -- like
>   Abkhazians -- hold Russian citizenship.
>
>    
>
>   But setting such rationale aside, the fact is that
>   South Ossetia is an important component in Russian
>   foreign policy, and particularly its policy and
>   attitude towards former Soviet republics and
>   satellite states in Eastern Europe. Since the
>   collapse of the Soviet Union, the Cold War was
>   transformed into a political scramble: the US and
>   NATO expanded their boundaries of influence and
>   territorial outreach, while Russia struggled to
>   maintain a level of influence and halt the
>   encroachment of the US-led NATO.
>
>    
>
>   Georgia, situated strategically between Russia, the
>   Black Sea, Turkey and Iran, deserved due attention.
>   The US became keenly interested in ensuring the
>   inclusion of Georgia into its sphere of influence.
>   Through dedicated efforts, a pro-Western leader,
>   Saakashvili, came to power through a highly
>   televised "Rose Revolution". While the integrity of
>   the elections that followed and the role of the CIA
>   in concocting and ensuring the success of the
>   "revolution" are still intensely debated, the fact
>   is Georgia fell into a new sphere of influence.
>   Saakashvili is a man desperate for European-US
>   validation. He too sought NATO membership and
>   heedlessly invited Israeli military "specialists" to
>   modernise his country's armed forces in anticipation
>   of a battle with Russia.
>
>    
>
>   Evidently, Georgia's leader knew well that a victory
>   against Russia was unattainable. By embarking on a
>   war against a tiny province, because, as he claimed,
>   he ran out of patience, Saakashvili was following a
>   script that was hardly of his own writing. The logic
>   behind the war was to test Russia's resolve, and the
>   readiness of its newest president, Dmitri Medvedev.
>   A hesitant Russian response would be taken as
>   another sign of weakness or lack of political and
>   military decisiveness in Moscow, which might also
>   inspire more such experiments. Too harsh a response
>   could also be decried as "genocide" and war crimes
>   and could be exploited to compel Russia's weaker
>   neighbours to seek the protection of NATO.
>
>    
>
>   This is what indeed transpired since Russia called
>   off military actions 13 August.
>
>    
>
>   First, leaders of pro-US countries in the region --
>   namely, Poland, Ukraine and the Baltic states of
>   Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia -- attended a rally in
>   support of Georgia's Saakashvili on 14 August in
>   Tbilisi. The televised event was accompanied by a
>   flood of experts pedalling Russia's evil intents to
>   the world media while promoting a larger US role to
>   ensure the independence of these nations and to
>   preserve their fragile democracies. "They're all
>   seriously worried that it's Georgia today and one of
>   them tomorrow," surmised Krzysztof Bobinski,
>   director of the Warsaw-based Unia & Polska
>   Foundation.
>
>    
>
>   Second, the Russian response to Georgia's war in
>   South Ossetia has resulted in a remarkable
>   breakthrough in negotiations between the US and East
>   European countries regarding the Bush
>   administration's plans for a new missile defence
>   shield. On 14 August, "Poland and the US signed a
>   deal to build a controversial missile defence shield
>   in Eastern Europe," reported the British Telegraph
>   newspaper. "The agreement highlights how Russia's
>   invasion of Georgia has prompted a swift reappraisal
>   of the region's security and alliances. The US and
>   Poland have been talking about the missile shield
>   for a year but rushed to cement their alliance in
>   the wake of this week's conflict."
>
>    
>
>   It's rather interesting how a controversial and
>   unpopular plan that has raised the ire of the Polish
>   people -- 70 per cent of the country is against it
>   -- was overcome within days of war and is now
>   embraced as a necessary deterrent. One cannot help
>   but question the relationship between the decision
>   to invade South Ossetia, which was certain to compel
>   some Russian response, and the rush to embrace
>   Bush's military designs in that region. The plan to
>   place missiles in Poland seemed like a resounding
>   failure as late as last month when US Secretary of
>   State Condoleezza Rice "tried and failed just before
>   leaving for Europe on Monday [7 July] to seal a deal
>   to place missiles in Poland, the State Department
>   said," according to CNN. Now Poland is all for it.
>   It return, Poland would receive US assistance in
>   overhauling its military, reminiscent of the
>   Israeli-US efforts in aiding Georgia's military,
>   which emboldened the latter to pursue war with
>   Russia.
>
>    
>
>   While Russia's decisive response to Saakashvili's
>   war may have temporarily reaffirmed Russia's
>   military readiness, it has already provided the
>   needed justification for greater US-NATO
>   intervention in Georgia, Poland, the Czech Republic
>   and elsewhere. That US presence might be welcomed by
>   the unnerved "democratic" leaders of these states
>   but it will pique the fury of Russia, whose
>   political radars are intercepting the Bush
>   administration's every move in the region with great
>   alarm.
>
>    
>
>   The ceasefire between Russia and Georgia, achieved
>   through French mediation, will hardly be the end of
>   the new Cold War underway in an area too accustomed
>   to cold wars. The fact is that Russia will fight to
>   break away from the pro- US ring of former Soviet
>   states that promise to undermine its influence in a
>   Eurasia, and the US will do its utmost to maintain a
>   level of tension, if not hostilities in the region,
>   for without it neither a missile shield nor the 270
>   billion barrels of oil in the Caspian basin can be
>   brought within Washington's reach.
>
>    
>
>   -Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net) is an author and
>   editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His work has been
>   published in many newspapers and journals worldwide.
>   His latest book is The Second Palestinian Intifada:
>   A Chronicle of a People's Struggle (Pluto Press,
>   London).
>
>    
>________________
>_______________________________________________
>Peace-discuss mailing list
>Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss