World War Three Thread....

[American Patriot]

Russia-Syria weapons deal alarms US
The United States has said it is "very concerned" about reports that Russia was planning to sell weapons to Syria.


Last Updated: 8:31PM BST 22 Aug 2008

Russia's foreign minister Sergei Lavrov said he was ready to deliver "defensive" weapons to the Arab state when the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad visited Moscow on Thursday.

"We are obviously very concerned about reports that Russia may be providing weapons systems to Syria," said the State Department spokesman Robert Wood. "We have always said to the Russians that these sales should not go forward, they don't contribute to regional stability and, again, I urge them not to go through with these sales if there is any intent to go through with them."

The warning followed an Israeli statement that the weapons sales could "destabilise" the balance of power in the Middle East.

Ehud Olmert, the Israeli prime minister, now plans to visit Moscow in early September to try to persuade President Dmitry Medvedev to abandon any arms deal.

"Depending on the nature of the deal, he may try to block it," an aide to Mr Olmert said of the planned trip.

The Jewish state is particularly worried about the prospect of Syria obtaining anti-tank or anti-aircraft missiles that could then be channelled to Hizbollah in Lebanon.

Israel fears its own history of arms sales to Georgia could provoke Russia into a retaliatory move after the recent conflict in the Caucasus.

"A reinforcement of links between Damascus and Moscow amounts to a very negative development," said Tazhi Hanegvi, head of the Israeli parliament's foreign affairs committee. "It would push Syria to adopt an irresponsible and adventurist policy."

Despite the tension, however, Israel and Syria are engaged in indirect peace talks for the first time in eight years.

Syria is hoping to negotiate an Israeli withdrawal from territory in the Golan Heights, which Israel seized during the six day war in 1967.

[American Patriot]

Provisions of the Georgia-Russia truce agreement

By The Associated Press – 8 minutes ago

Provisions of the agreement reached between Georgia and Russia to end fighting in Georgia. Text is according to the Kremlin following the Aug. 13 announcement of the agreement. Below the text is explanation of Russian plans for a withdrawal and "additional security measures" allowed under point 5.

_ Do not resort to the use of force.

_ The absolute cessation of all hostilities.

_ Free access to humanitarian assistance.

_ The armed forces of Georgia must withdraw to their permanent positions.

_ The armed forces of the Russian Federation must withdraw to the line where they were stationed prior to the beginning of hostilities. Prior to the establishment of international mechanisms, the Russian peacekeeping forces will take additional security measures.

_ An international debate on the future status of South Ossetia and Abkhazia and ways to ensure their lasting security will take place.

___

On Aug. 17, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev expanded on Russia's plans under point 5 of the agreement, which allows Russian peacekeeping troops to take "additional security measures" in Georgia.

The Kremlin said Medvedev told French President Nicolas Sarkozy that Russia would withdraw combat forces it sent into Georgia to South Ossetia and what it called a surrounding "security zone" set in 1999.

The zone extends 7 kilometers (4.3 miles) in both directions from the administrative border between South Ossetia and Georgia.

[American Patriot]

Opinion & analysis
Has the Iranian atom become a bargaining chip?
19:33 | 25/ 08/ 2008

MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Pyotr Goncharov) - The media has long been talking about the use of the Iranian nuclear program as a bargaining chip in Russian-U.S. relations. The proposed deal is as follows: the United States leaves Georgia to Russia, and in exchange Russia allows it to lead Iran like a lamb to the slaughter. To all intents and purposes, Georgia's adventure in South Ossetia should have dismissed this option, but the suspicions of an exchange have become even stronger. However, it is not clear how justified they are.

The tune was set by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. In the first days after Georgia's "restoration of order" operation it was obvious in all TV reports that Condi was finding it hard to control her emotions, although this is not typical of her. She did not chew a tie like Mikheil Saakashvili, but excessive irritation is not helpful in such cases.

Eventually, Washington threatened to re-think its relations with Moscow across the board. In response, Russia's envoy to the UN Vitaly Churkin told U.S. television that "Russia may deny its help to the United States in resolving some major problems, for instance, the one with Iran."

This exchange of diplomatic "niceties" took place against the background of American and NATO naval exercises apparently directly linked to the Iranian nuclear problem.

The Egyptian Middle East Times reported that having completed exercises simulating the blockade of the Iranian coast, the joint U.S., British, and French fleet is already moving to the Persian Gulf. The fleet includes three carrier groups, the first led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt with 80 aircraft, the second by the USS Ronald Reagan, and the third by the USS Iwo Jima. All in all, more than 40 naval units, including aircraft-carriers, cruisers, and submarines, some of which carry nuclear weapons, will gather off the Iranian shores.

This situation is hardly normal, though the United States regularly concentrates excessive numbers of naval units in the Persian Gulf. The Middle East Times wrote that Kuwait has already introduced a program of action in the event of war.

For the most part, experts are talking about two explanations. Under the first one, the United States and its allies are getting ready to blockade Iran. They want to shut down the Persian Gulf, through which Iran receives 40% of its fuel, and to prevent the Iranian navy from sinking oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz in case of a blockade. The second theory is that the huge naval presence is intended to support Israeli air strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities.

The first looks more plausible. Just the other day, the U.S. Department of Finance imposed new sanctions against five Iranian companies for their contribution to the nuclear program. It has frozen their assets in the United States, and prohibited American companies from dealing with them.

Europe has not remained a passive onlooker, either. The European Union has introduced more sanctions against the Iranian nuclear program (in addition to those envisaged by the relevant Security Council resolution), considerably reduced the issue of credits to limit trade with Iran, and toughened inspections of sea and air shipments between the EU and Iran.

These facts point to a plan to impose a tough economic blockade on Iran. Most experts believe that the state of the Iranian economy will compel Tehran to surrender.

Air strikes at Iranian nuclear facilities seem premature. Israel is not ready for a war with Iran because it is not invulnerable to potential Iranian missile retaliation. The new air defense systems promised by the United States will become operational no sooner than 2009. Moreover, the United States is reluctant to supply Israel with precision offensive weapons because it does not want it to go to war with Iran.

However, a sea blockade may lead to Iranian retaliation, which is bound to trigger off a large-scale war in which carrier-based aircraft will not be enough. Some media reported that Rice unexpectedly visited the Incirlik air base in Turkey, which plays a key role in U.S. air operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Tehran has not yet responded to these actions, though it has issued its routine reports about the development of a new submarine, a radar-evading surface ship, a new generation plane that can fly three thousand km (1,864 miles) without refueling, and the launch of a satellite or its model. It also promised that anyone who attacks Iran "will not leave the region alive."

The United States, to say nothing of Israel, will not bomb Iran in the near future. But this does not mean that Moscow will shut its eyes to the unilateral U.S. and NATO naval blockade of Iran.

The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.

[American Patriot]

RED ALERT!!!!!!!




Russia cruiser to test weapons in crowded Black Sea
25 Aug 2008 18:44:17 GMT
Source: Reuters

MOSCOW, Aug 25 (Reuters) - Russia's flagship cruiser re-entered the Black Sea on Monday for weapons tests hours after the Russian military complained about the presence of U.S. and other NATO naval ships near the Georgian coast.

The 'Moskva' had led a battle group of Russian naval vessels stationed off the coastline of Georgia's breakaway region of Abkhazia during Russia's recent conflict with Georgia and sank smaller Georgian craft.

The assistant to the Russian Navy's commander-in-chief told Russian news agencies the cruiser had put to sea again two days after returning to its base at the Ukrainian port of Sevastopol.

"'Moskva' has today departed toward the Black Sea Fleet's naval training range to check its radio-controlled weapons and onboard communications systems," Captain Igor Dygalo was quoted as saying by Interfax.

The Russian navy's press office was unable to confirm his comments when contacted by Reuters.

The presence of so many ships from NATO countries earlier drew the ire of a Russian military spokesman during a daily media briefing on the conflict.

"The fact that there are nine Western warships in the Black Sea cannot but be a cause for concern. They include two U.S. warships, one each from Spain and Poland, and four from Turkey," Anatoly Nogovitsyn, the deputy chief of the Russian military's General Staff said.

On Sunday, the U.S. guided missile destroyer USS McFaul arrived with aid including camp beds, bedding, tents and mobile kitchen units, the U.S Defense Department spokesman Bryan. Whitman said.

Separately, the U.S. Coast Guard cutter Dallas has been dispatched with aid, while a third vessel, the Navy command ship USS Mount Whitney, is being loaded in Italy with humanitarian supplies for Georgia, he said.

The NATO ships in the Black Sea are carrying more than 100 'Tomahawk' cruise missiles, with more than 50 onboard the USS McFaul alone that could hit ground targets, reported RIA news agency, quoting unnamed sources in Russian military intelligence. (Reporting by Conor Sweeney, additional reporting by David Morgan in Washington)

[American Patriot]

Russia defies calls for withdrawal; U.S. continues Georgia relief


By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Aug. 25, 2008 – Russia continues to defy international calls for the country to pull its forces out of Georgia, and humanitarian operations continue, a Pentagon official said here today.

Russian troops continue to occupy the breakaway region of South Ossetia, and Russian troops continue to maintain troops in Gori, a Georgian city that is the gateway to South Ossetia, Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said.

"It is fair to say they are still not living up to the terms of the cease-fire agreement," Whitman said during a meeting with reporters. The terms of the cease-fire include monitoring by military officers under the auspices of the Organization of Security Cooperation in Europe.

The Russian Duma – equivalent to the U.S. House of Representatives -- has called on the government to recognize the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia from Georgia.

Meanwhile, U.S. military personnel continue to deliver humanitarian aid to Georgia. Whitman said about 100 U.S. military and DoD civilian personnel are in Georgia coordinating the aid.

The Navy's USS McFaul docked in the Georgian port of Batumi over the weekend and began off-loading supplies as more humanitarian aid continued to arrive by airlift. "Over the weekend, we have 48 sorties that have flown in with 774 short tons of materials," Whitman said.

The Coast Guard Cutter Dallas has passed through the Dardanelles and entered the Black Sea with more supplies. The USS Mount Whitney is loading humanitarian supplies at Gaeta, Italy.

The United States has provided $18.3 million in aid, with the Defense Department's portion standing at $7.2 million so far for airlift and emergency supplies. DoD's "spend rate" -- the continuing contribution – is about $1 million per day, Whitman said.

Cots, bedding, mattresses, sleeping bags, small tents, mobile kitchen units and medical supplies are "still in need and are priorities," Whitman said.

A U.S. European Command assessment team remains in the country, working with Georgians and the U.S. Embassy in the Georgian capital of Tbilisi.

[American Patriot]

Russia defies calls for withdrawal; US continues Georgia relief
ReliefWeb (press release), Switzerland - 1 hour ago
The Navy's USS McFaul docked in the Georgian port of Batumi over the weekend and began off-loading supplies as more humanitarian aid continued to arrive by ...

Link and blurb only, requires registration.

[American Patriot]

I'm telling you guys, the Russians planned this, they knew this crap and they are pushing the world to the brink for a REASON.

here's the reasoning....

http://www.daily.pk/world/84-worldne...k-on-iran.html

Israel Planned To Use Georgia Airbases In Attack on Iran
Tuesday, 26 August 2008 00:00 www.daily.pk

The Role of Israel in the Georgian War
Two airfields in southern Georgia had been earmarked for the use of Israeli military aircraft, intended to launch an attack on identified targets relating to Iranian atomic energy projects. This attack was approved by President Bush in an undertaking with the government of Israel signed in Washington, D.C., on July 4, 2006 it is now believed that the Russian special forces have captured, intact, a number of the Israeli drones and, far more important, their radio controlling equipment... , units of the Russian air force bombed the Israeli bases in central Georgia and in the area of the capital, Tbilisi. They also severely damaged the runways and service areas of the two Georgian airbases designed to launch Israeli sir force units in a sudden attack on Iran.

The Role Of Israel In The Georgian War



Georgia became a huge source of income, and military advantage, for the Israeli government and Israeli arms dealers.. Israel began selling arms to Georgia about seven years ago, following an initiative by Georgian citizens who immigrated to Israel and became weapons hustlers.

They contacted Israeli defense industry officials and arms dealers and told them that Georgia had relatively large budgets, mostly American grants, and could be interested in purchasing Israeli weapons.

The military cooperation between the countries developed swiftly. The fact that Georgia's defense minister, Davit Kezerashvili, is a former Israeli who is fluent in Hebrew contributed to this cooperation. "We are now in a fight against the great Russia," he said, "and our hope is to receive assistance from the White House, because Georgia cannot survive on its own. "

Kezerashvili's door was always open to the Israelis who came and offered his country arms systems made in Israel. Compared to countries in Eastern Europe, the deals in this country were conducted fast, mainly due to the pro-Israeli defense minister's personal involvement.

The Jerusalem Post on August 12, 2008 reported: "Georgian Prime Minister Vladimer (Lado) Gurgenidze(Jewish) made a special call to Israel Tuesday morning to receive a blessing from one of the Haredi community's most important rabbis and spiritual leaders, Rabbi Aharon Leib Steinman." The Prime Minister of Georgia, principally a nation of Orthodox Christians called Rabbi Steinman saying 'I've heard he is a holy man. I want him to pray for us and our state.'

Among the Israelis who took advantage of the opportunity and began doing business in Georgia were former Minister Roni Milo and his brother Shlomo, former director-general of the Military Industries, Brigadier-General (Res.) Gal Hirsch and Major-General (Res.) Yisrael Ziv.

Roni Milo conducted business in Georgia for Elbit Systems and the Military Industries, and with his help Israel's defense industries managed to sell to Georgia remote-piloted vehicles (RPVs), automatic turrets for armored vehicles, antiaircraft systems, communication systems, shells and rockets.

The Ministry of Defense of Israel had supplied the Georgian government their Hermes 450 UAV spy drones, made by Elbit Maarahot Systems Ltd, for use, under the strict control of Israeli intelligence units, to conduct intelligence-gathering flights over southern Russia and, most especially into a Iran, targeted for Israeli Air Force attacks in the near future.

Two airfields in southern Georgia had been earmarked for the use of Israeli military aircraft, intended to launch an attack on identified targets relating to Iranian atomic energy projects. This attack was approved by President Bush in an undertaking with the government of Israel signed in Washington, D.C., on July 4, 2006.

The thrust of this top secret agreement was that the Israeli government would have "free and unfettered use" of unspecified Georgian airfields, under American control, onto which they could ferry fighter-bombers which then could fly south, over Turkish territory (and with clandestine Turkish permission) to strike at Tehran. The distance from Georgia to Tehran is obviously far less than from Tel Aviv.

No one expected that these attacks would completely destroy Iranian military or scientific targets, but there would be the element of complete surprise coupled with serious property damage which might well interdict future Iranian atomic development and certainly serve as a serious warning to Iran not to threaten Israel again. Using Georgian bases, with the consent and full assistance of, the United States, would make such an attack much more feasible that attempting to fly from Israeli bases with overflights that might have serious regional diplomatic consequences.

Now, thanks to the irrational actions of the thoroughly unstable Georgian president, all of these schemes have collapsed and it is now believed that the Russian special forces have captured, intact, a number of the Israeli drones and, far more important, their radio controlling equipment.

In the main, Israeli military and intelligence units stationed in Georgia were mostly composed of Israel Defense Force reservists working for Global CST, owned by Maj. Gen. Israel Ziv, and Defense Shield, owned by Brig. Gen. Gal Hirsch. "The Israelis should be proud of themselves for the Israeli training and education received by the Georgian soldiers," Georgian Minister Temur Yakobashvili.

By this manner, Israel could claim that it had a very small number of IDF people in Georgia "mainly connected with our Embassy in Tiblisi." The Russians, however, were not fooled by this and their own intelligence had pinpointed Israeli surveillance bases and when they went after the Georgians who invaded South Ossetia, units of the Russian air force bombed the Israeli bases in central Georgia and in the area of the capital, Tbilisi. They also severely damaged the runways and service areas of the two Georgian airbases designed to launch Israeli sir force units in a sudden attack on Iran.

Israel is currently a part of the Anglo-American military axis, which cooperates with the interests of the Western oil giants in the Middle East and Central Asia.

Israel is a partner in the Baku-Tblisi- Ceyhan pipeline which brings oil and gas to the Eastern Mediterranean. More than 20 percent of Israeli oil is imported from Azerbaijan, of which a large share transits through the BTC pipeline. Controlled by British Petroleum, the BTC pipeline has dramatically changed the geopolitics of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Caucusus:

"[The BTC pipeline] considerably changes the status of the region's countries and cements a new pro-West alliance. Having taken the pipeline to the Mediterranean, Washington has practically set up a new bloc with Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey and Israel, " (Komerzant, Moscow, 14 July 2006)

While the official reports state that the BTC pipeline will "channel oil to Western markets", what is rarely acknowledged is that part of the oil from the Caspian sea would be directly channeled towards Israel, via Georgia. In this regard, an Israeli-Turkish pipeline project has also been envisaged which would link Ceyhan to the Israeli port of Ashkelon and from there through Israel's main pipeline system, to the Red Sea.

The objective of Israel is not only to acquire Caspian sea oil for its own consumption needs but also to play a key role in re-exporting Caspian sea oil back to the Asian markets through the Red Sea port of Eilat. The strategic implications of this re-routing of Caspian sea oil are far-reaching

What has been planned, is to link the BTC pipeline to the Trans-Israel Eilat-Ashkelon pipeline, also known as Israel's Tipline, from Ceyhan to the Israeli port of Ashkelon.

The Isreali unmanned surveillance drones

The unmanned Israeli clandestine surveillance drones are a favorite of intelligence agencies world-wide. Their most popular drone is the Hermes 450 drone aircraft.

The Hermes 450 is a large, capable 450 kg spy drone manufactured by Elbit Systems of Israel. Able to stay airborne for a maximum of 20 hours, it has a 10.5 metre wingspan and is 6.1 metres long. It can carry a variety of different surveillance packages, including the CoMPASS (Compact Multi-Purpose Advanced Stabilised System), which is a combined laser marker and infrared scanner.

Elbit also offers Hermes with the AN/ZPQ-1 TESAR (Tactical Endurance Synthetic Aperture Radar) from Northrop Grumman of the US, a ground-sweeping radar which can detect objects as small as one foot in size and pick out those which are moving from those which aren't. Radars of this type are essential for full bad weather capability, and help a lot with scanning large areas of terrain. Electro-optical scanners such as CoMPASS tend to offer a "drink-straw" view of only small areas in detail. The TESAR is the same radar used in the hugely successful "Predator" drone, in service for several years now with the US forces.

The U.S. Army has a drone trainng school located at Ft. Huachuca, Arizona, an intelligence center located 10 miles from the Mexican border and the home of massive telephonic intelligence intercept units, aimed at Central and South America. At present there are 225 soldiers, reservists, and National Guardsmen training at this school. And on the faculty are three Israeli specialists. This unit is not destined for the middle east or even Pakistan; it has been set up to conduct surveillance of northern Mexico. There are two reasons for wanting to watch our southern neighbor. The first is to watch for great treks of illegal aliens but the second, and most important, is to conduct reconnaissance of territory over which American military units might be traversing in any punitive actions that could very, very well be triggered by the growing political instability in Mexico, caused by a growing struggle between the central government and the very powerful Mexican-based drug lords, who are wreaking havoc in that very corrupt country.

If a highly irate CIA employee, complaining of "excessive Israeli influence" in his agency, had not passed on files of information to the Russians late last year in Miami, in all probability, we would be reading about a stunning Israeli attack on Tehran. Now, the Iranian anti-aircraft missile batteries, supplied and manned by Russian "technicians," have the probable coordinates of such an Israeli surprise attack, from the north, which would give the defenses of Tehran a vital heads-up.

This is a tale of US expansion not Russian aggression

War in the Caucasus is as much the product of an American imperial drive as local conflicts. It's likely to be a taste of things to come

The outcome of six grim days of bloodshed in the Caucasus has triggered an outpouring of the most nauseating hypocrisy from western politicians and their captive media. As talking heads thundered against Russian imperialism and brutal disproportionality, US vice-president Dick Cheney, faithfully echoed by Gordon Brown and David Miliband, declared that "Russian aggression must not go unanswered". George Bush denounced Russia for having "invaded a sovereign neighbouring state" and threatening "a democratic government". Such an action, he insisted, "is unacceptable in the 21st century".

Could these by any chance be the leaders of the same governments that in 2003 invaded and occupied - along with Georgia, as luck would have it - the sovereign state of Iraq on a false pretext at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives? Or even the two governments that blocked a ceasefire in the summer of 2006 as Israel pulverised Lebanon's infrastructure and killed more than a thousand civilians in retaliation for the capture or killing of five soldiers?

You'd be hard put to recall after all the fury over Russian aggression that it was actually Georgia that began the war last Thursday with an all-out attack on South Ossetia to "restore constitutional order" - in other words, rule over an area it has never controlled since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Nor, amid the outrage at Russian bombardments, have there been much more than the briefest references to the atrocities committed by Georgian forces against citizens it claims as its own in South Ossetia's capital Tskhinvali. Several hundred civilians were killed there by Georgian troops last week, along with Russian soldiers operating under a 1990s peace agreement: "I saw a Georgian soldier throw a grenade into a basement full of women and children," one Tskhinvali resident, Saramat Tskhovredov, told reporters on Tuesday.

Might it be because Georgia is what Jim Murphy, Britain's minister for Europe, called a "small beautiful democracy". Well it's certainly small and beautiful, but both the current president, Mikheil Saakashvili, and his predecessor came to power in western-backed coups, the most recent prettified as a "Rose revolution". Saakashvili was then initially rubber-stamped into office with 96% of the vote before establishing what the International Crisis Group recently described as an "increasingly authoritarian" government, violently cracking down on opposition dissent and independent media last November. "Democratic" simply seems to mean "pro-western" in these cases.

The long-running dispute over South Ossetia - as well as Abkhazia, the other contested region of Georgia - is the inevitable consequence of the breakup of the Soviet Union. As in the case of Yugoslavia, minorities who were happy enough to live on either side of an internal boundary that made little difference to their lives feel quite differently when they find themselves on the wrong side of an international state border.

Such problems would be hard enough to settle through negotiation in any circumstances. But add in the tireless US promotion of Georgia as a pro-western, anti-Russian forward base in the region, its efforts to bring Georgia into NATO, the routing of a key Caspian oil pipeline through its territory aimed at weakening Russia's control of energy supplies, and the US-sponsored recognition of the independence of Kosovo - whose status Russia had explicitly linked to that of South Ossetia and Abkhazia - and conflict was only a matter of time.

The CIA has in fact been closely involved in Georgia since the Soviet collapse. But under the Bush administration, Georgia has become a fully fledged US satellite. Georgia's forces are armed and trained by the US and Israel. It has the third-largest military contingent in Iraq - hence the US need to airlift 800 of them back to fight the Russians at the weekend. Saakashvili's links with the neoconservatives in Washington are particularly close: the lobbying firm headed by US Republican candidate John McCain's top foreign policy adviser, Randy Scheunemann, has been paid nearly $900,000 by the Georgian government since 2004.

But underlying the conflict of the past week has also been the Bush administration's wider, explicit determination to enforce US global hegemony and prevent any regional challenge, particularly from a resurgent Russia. That aim was first spelled out when Cheney was defence secretary under Bush's father, but its full impact has only been felt as Russia has begun to recover from the disintegration of the 1990s.

Over the past decade, NATO's relentless eastward expansion has brought the western military alliance hard up against Russia's borders and deep into former Soviet territory. American military bases have spread across eastern Europe and central Asia, as the US has helped install one anti-Russian client government after another through a series of colour-coded revolutions. Now the Bush administration is preparing to site a missile defence system in eastern Europe transparently targeted at Russia.

By any sensible reckoning, this is not a story of Russian aggression, but of US imperial expansion and ever tighter encirclement of Russia by a potentially hostile power. That a stronger Russia has now used the South Ossetian imbroglio to put a check on that expansion should hardly come as a surprise. What is harder to work out is why Saakashvili launched last week's attack and whether he was given any encouragement by his friends in Washington.

If so, it has spectacularly backfired, at savage human cost. And despite Bush's attempts to talk tough yesterday, the war has also exposed the limits of US power in the region. As long as Georgia proper's independence is respected - best protected by opting for neutrality - that should be no bad thing. Unipolar domination of the world has squeezed the space for genuine self-determination and the return of some counterweight has to be welcome. But the process of adjustment also brings huge dangers. If Georgia had been a member of NATO, this week's conflict would have risked a far sharper escalation. That would be even more obvious in the case of Ukraine - which yesterday gave a warning of the potential for future confrontation when its pro-western president threatened to restrict the movement of Russian ships in and out of their Crimean base in Sevastopol. As great power conflict returns, South Ossetia is likely to be only a taste of things to come.

Six days that broke one country - and reshaped the world order
Pity Georgia's bedraggled First Infantry Brigade. And its Second. And its hapless Navy.

For the past few evenings in the foothills of the Southern Caucasus on the outskirts of Joseph Stalin's hometown of Gori, reconnaissance units of Russia's 58th Army have been raking through the spoils of war at what was the Georgian Army's pride and joy, a shiny new military base inaugurated only last January for the First Infantry, the Army Engineers, and an Artillery Brigade.

A couple of hours to the west, in the town of Senaki, it's the same picture. A flagship military base, home to the Second Infantry Brigade, is in Russian hands. And down on the Black Sea coast, the radars and installations for Georgia's sole naval base at Poti have been scrupulously pinpointed by the Russians and destroyed.

Gori and Senaki are not ramshackle relics of the old Red Army of the type that litter the landscape of eastern Europe. "These bases have only recently been upgraded to NATO standard," said Matthew Clements, Eurasia analyst at Jane's Information Group. "They have been operationally targeted to seriously degrade the Georgian military."

"There is a presence of our armed forces near Gori and Senaki. We make no secret of it," said the general staff in Moscow. "They are there to defuse an enormous arsenal of weapons and military hardware which have been discovered in the vicinity of Gori and Senaki without any guard whatsoever."

The "enormous arsenals" are American-made or American-supplied. American money, know-how, planning, and equipment built these bases as part of Washington's drive to bring NATO membership to a small country that is Russia's underbelly.

The American "train and equip" mission for the Georgian military is six years old. It has been destroyed in as many days. And with it, Georgia's NATO ambitions. "There are a few countries that will say 'told you so'" about the need to get Georgia into NATO," said Andrew Wilson, Russia expert at the European Council on Foreign Relations. "But many more will want to walk away from the problem. And for the next few years, Georgia will be far too busy trying to pick itself up."

If Georgia and NATO are the principal casualties of this week's ruthless display of brute power by Vladimir Putin, the consequences are bigger still, the fallout immense, if uncertain. The regional and the global balance of power looks to have tilted, against the west and in favour of the rising or resurgent players of the east.

In a seminal speech in Munich last year, Putin confidently warned the west that he would not tolerate the age of American hyperpower. Seven years in office at the time and at the height of his powers, he delivered his most anti-western tirade

Pernicious
To an audience that included John McCain, the White House contender, and Robert Gates, the US defence secretary and ex-Kremlinologist, he served notice: "What is a unipolar world? It refers to one type of situation, one centre of authority, one centre of force, one centre of decision-making. It is world in which there is one master, one sovereign. This is pernicious ... unacceptable ... impossible."

This week, he turned those words into action, demonstrating the limits of US power with his rout of Georgia. His forces roamed at will along the roads of the Southern Caucasus, beyond Russia's borders for the first time since the disastrous Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s.

As the Russian officers sat on the American stockpiles of machine guns, ammunition, and equipment in Gori, they were savouring a highly unusual scenario. Not since the Afghan war had the Russians seized vast caches of US weaponry. "People are sick to the stomach in Washington," said a former Pentagon official. And the Russians are giddy with success.

Celebrating the biggest victory in eight years of what might be termed Putinism, the dogged pursuit by whatever means to avenge a long period of Russian humiliation and to deploy his limited range of levers - oil, gas, or brute force - to make the world listen to Moscow, the Russian prime minister has redrawn the geopolitical map.

In less than a week, Putin has invaded another country, effectively partitioned Georgia in a lightning campaign, weakened his arch-enemy, President Mikheil Saakashvili, divided the west, and presented a fait accompli. The impact - locally, regionally, and globally - is huge.

"The war in Georgia has put the European order in question," said Alexander Rahr, one of Germany's leading Russia experts and a Putin biographer. "The times are past when you can punish Russia."

That seems to be the view among leading European policymakers who have been scrambling all week to arrange and shore up a fragile ceasefire, risking charges of appeasing the Kremlin.

"Don't ask us who's good and who's bad here," said Bernard Kouchner, the French foreign minister, after shuttling between Tbilisi and Moscow to try to halt the violence. "We shouldn't make any moral judgments on this war. Stopping the war, that's what we're interested in."

His boss, President Nicolas Sarkozy, went to the Kremlin to negotiate a ceasefire and parade as a peacemaker. Critics said he acted as Moscow's messenger, noting Putin's terms then taking them to Tbilisi to persuade Saakashvili to capitulate. Germany also refused to take sides while Italy warned against building an "anti-Moscow coalition".

That contrasted with Gordon Brown's and David Milliband's talk of Russian "aggression" and Condoleezza Rice's arrival in Tbilisi yesterday to rally "the free world behind a free Georgia".

The effects of Putin's coup are first felt locally and around Russia's rim. "My view is that the Russians, and I would say principally prime minister Putin, is interested in reasserting Russia's, not only Russia's great power or superpower status, but in reasserting Russia's traditional spheres of influence," said Gates. "My guess is that everyone is going to be looking at Russia through a different set of lenses as we look ahead."

In Kiev certainly. Ukraine's pro-western prime minister, Viktor Yushchenko, Saaksahvili's fellow colour-revolutionary, is chastened and wary. His firebrand anti-Russian prime minister, Yuliya Tymoshenko, has gone uncharacteristically quiet.

Invasion of the Ukraine?

"An invasion of Ukraine by 'peacekeeping tanks' is just a question of time," wrote Aleksandr Sushko, director of Kiev's Institute of Euro-Atlantic Cooperation. "Weimar Russia is completing its transformation into something else. If Russia wins this war, a new order will take shape in Europe which will have no place for Ukraine as a sovereign state."

All around Russia's rim, the former Soviet "captive states" are trembling. Even Belarus, the slavishly loyal "last dictatorship in Europe", went strangely silent, taking days before the regime offered Moscow its support. "Everybody's nervous," said Wilson.

The EU states of the Baltic and Poland are drumming up support for Georgia, with the Polish president Lech Kaczynski declaring that Russia has revealed "its true face". That divides the EU since the French and the Germans refuse to take sides and are scornful of east European "hysteria" towards Russia. Rahr in Berlin says the German and French governments are striving to keep the Poles and the Baltic states well away from any EU-led peace negotiations. It was the Germans and the French who, in April, blunted George Bush's drive to get Georgia into NATO. They will also resist potential US moves to kick Russia out of the G8 or other international bodies.

There are many who argue that Putin's gamble will backfire, that he has bitten off more than he can chew, that Russia remains weak, a "Saudi Arabia with trees" in the words of Robert Hunter, the former US ambassador to NATO.

Compared to the other rising powers of China, India or even Brazil - the companions referred to as the BRIC - Russia does indeed appear weak. Its economy struggles to develop goods or services, depends on raw material exports and on European consumption and the price of oil for its current wealth.

But Putin's talent is for playing a weak hand well, maximising and concentrating his limited resources, and creating facts on the ground while the west dithers.

"There is a lack of a clear and unified European policy towards Russia," said Clements. In the crucial contest over energy "the Russian strategy of keeping control of exports and supply is outpacing any European response".

Putin may now calculate he can call off the dogs of war, having achieved his aims and able to pocket his gains very cheaply. The Georgia campaign becomes the triumphant climax of Putinism.

"In politics, it is very important to know one's measure," wrote Aleksey Arbatov, director of Moscow's International Security Centre. "If Russia continues to inflict strikes on Georgian territory, on facilities, on population centres, we may lose the moral supremacy we have today."

But Wilson and many in eastern Europe worry that rather than being the climax of Putinism, the Russians in Georgia signal the start of something else. "This may not be a culmination, but only step one," said Wilson. "If you don't stop this kind of behaviour, it escalates."

[American Patriot]

West steps up pressure on Moscow over Georgia

• Adam Plowright, Tbilisi
• August 26, 2008

Ukrainian cadets march down Kiev's main street during a parade of military might to mark their country's independence. Photo: AP


THE West has ramped up the pressure on Russia to withdraw its troops from Georgia. And the European Union has announced an urgent summit just as a US warship has anchored off Georgia.


France's President Nicolas Sarkozy, whose country holds the rotating presidency of the EU, kept his promise to convene a special summit if Russia failed to pull back its troops from Georgia.


European leaders are to meet in Brussels next Monday to discuss the future of EU relations with Russia and aid to Georgia.


A US destroyer carrying relief supplies arrived at a Black Sea port in Georgia, a sign of US support that provided a conspicuous display of NATO military might. The USS McFaul dropped anchor off Batumi, 50 kilometres south of the Russian-occupied port of Poti, the first of three ships carrying aid to help Georgia deal with about 100,000 displaced people.


A Russian general accused NATO countries at the weekend of using humanitarian aid as "cover" for a build-up of naval forces in the Black Sea, heightening tension. Russia withdrew tanks, artillery and hundreds of troops from their most advanced positions in Georgia on Friday, saying it had fulfilled all obligations.


But Russian troops still control access to Poti, south of the Moscow-backed rebel region of Abkhazia, and have set up other checkpoints around South Ossetia, where the conflict began. The peace plan negotiated by France has been interpreted differently by Russia and the West, with Russia saying it has the right to leave peacekeepers deep inside Georgia.


France, Britain, the US, NATO and other Western powers have demanded Russia pull back further.
AFP

[American Patriot]

Russian general criticizes US Black Sea presence

By DAVID RISING – 8 hours ago


ABOARD THE U.S.S. MCFAUL (AP) — A Russian general suggested that U.S. ships in the Black Sea loaded with humanitarian aid would worsen tensions already driven to a post-Cold War high by a short but intense war between Russia and Georgia.
The U.S. Navy destroyer U.S.S. McFaul reached Georgia's Black Sea port of Batumi on Sunday, bringing baby food, bottled water and a message of support for an embattled ally.


The deputy chief of Russia's general staff suggested the arrival of the McFaul and other U.S. and NATO ships would increase tensions: Russia shares the sea with NATO members Turkey, Romania and Bulgaria as well as Georgia and Ukraine, whose pro-Western presidents are leading drives for NATO membership.


"I don't think such a buildup will foster the stabilization of the atmosphere in the region," Russia's ITAR-Tass news agency quoted Col. Gen. Anatoly Nogovitsyn as saying Saturday.


Georgian Defense Minister David Kezerashvili told The Associated Press on the aft missile deck of the McFaul after greeting U.S. Navy officers that the population of Georgia would feel "more safe" from the "Russian aggression" as a result of the ship's arrival.


"They will feel safe not because the destroyer is here but because they will feel they are not alone facing the Russian aggression," he said.


Local children offered the Americans wine and flowers.


In Europe, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said he would convene a special meeting of European Union leaders over the crisis as Russia ignored Western accusations it has fallen short of its commitment to withdraw forces from its smaller neighbor.


The war erupted Aug. 7 as Georgia launched a massive artillery barrage targeting the Russian-backed separatist province of South Ossetia. Russian forces repelled the offensive and drove deep into Georgia, taking crucial positions across the small former Soviet republic.


Russia pulled the bulk of its troops and tanks out Friday under a cease-fire brokered by Sarkozy, but built up its forces in and around South Ossetia and Abkhazia, another separatist region. They also left other military posts at locations inside Georgia proper.


The U.S. and EU say both those moves violated Russia's commitments.


NATO halted the operations of its vehicle for interaction with Russia, demanding a fuller withdrawal, and Moscow responded by freezing military contacts with the alliance — its Cold War foe whose eastward expansion has angered a resurgent Russia.


The guided missile cruiser USS McFaul, carrying about 55 tons of humanitarian aid, is the first of three American ships scheduled to arrive this week. It brought baby food, diapers, bottled water, milk and hygiene products.


Sailors in a chain on deck passed the supplies up from the hold to be lifted by a crane for transport to shore.


The commander of the U.S. task force carrying aid to Georgia by ship, Navy Capt. John Moore, downplayed the significance of a destroyer bringing aid.


"We really are here on a humanitarian mission," he said.


The McFaul, an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, is outfitted with an array of weaponry, including Tomahawk cruise missiles, which can carry either conventional or nuclear warheads, and a sophisticated radar system. For security reasons the Navy does not say whether ships are carrying nuclear weapons, but they usually do not.


A U.S. official said the American ship anchored in Batumi, Georgia's main oil port on the Black Sea, because of concerns about damage to the Georgian port of Poti — not because Poti is closer to Russian forces in Abkhazia and Georgia proper.


Russian troops still hold positions near Poti, and Georgian port officials say radar, Coast Guard ships and other port facilities were extensively damaged by Russian forces. AP journalists there have reported on Russians looting the area.


An AP television cameraman and his Georgian driver were treated roughly and briefly detained Sunday by Russian troops outside Poti as he shot video of Russian positions.


Adding to the tension, South Ossetian officials claimed that Georgia was building up military forces in an area along the edge of the battered region and had fired sporadically at villages overnight.


As Moscow's military moved to redraw de facto borders on the ground, Russia's parliament on Monday was planning to consider renewed requests from South Ossetia and Abkhazia for recognition of their claims of independence from Georgia.
Georgia claims Russia wants to annex the regions.


Associated Press Writers Christopher Torchia in Gori and Skra, Georgia; Misha Dzhindhzikhashvili in Tbilisi, Georgia; and Steve Gutterman in Moscow contributed to this report.

[American Patriot]

This is pretty strange... but posting it here because it's related.

Fatih Cekirge: U.S. likely to demand new arrangement for Turkish Straits

Turkey's state-run Anatolian Agency Friday had published a "warning" story, which contradicted with its news style. However it was well prepared and based on concrete facts.

AA was issuing an official warning:

"Turkey should be prepared that the lace w:st="on">lace u2:st="on">U.S.lace>lace> would demand the amendment of the Montreux Convention..."

This statement was told by Hasan Kanbolat, an expert with Turkish think tank, ASAM, was a signal of a concern which had been recently dominated lace w:st="on">Ankaralace>.

The real question is:

- Was the war on Georgia a plan to open the Black Seal to NATO forces?
>
The whole world had asked the same question after the war erupted: Is the Georgian leader, Saakashvili, a mad man, who held a military operation in South Ossetia despite Russialace?
>
Now this question has a possible answer: This war had sped up Georgialace's NATO membership process, moreover turned into an urgent requirement.

So Saakashvili is not a mad man.

If we go back to the straits issue. In the short term the U.S. would propose Turkey make a new arrangement on its straits. And it would ask for an easing on the arrangements for the passage of warships, including American ones (possibly on the condition of a NATO decision).

It is for this reason that the Black Sealace is no longer an internal sea and had become the waterway of the world's most important energy lines. And Russia does not want any other country's hegemony here.

This is the main reason for the Georgia war, Russia's greenlight to the invasion of Azerbaijan by Armenialace and the increased partnership of Moscow-Tehran-Damascus-Beijing.

The Montreux Convention was signed in 1936 and the NATO was established in 1949. The lace w:st="on">lace u2:st="on">U.S.lace>lace> did not sign the Montreux Convention and NATO was born afterwards, meaning they could demand a new arrangement. Moreover, the new members of NATO, Romania and Bulgaria, also have coasts bordering the lace w:st="on">lace u2:st="on">Black Sealace>lace>.>>
> >
In the Bucharest summit of NATO in April, lace w:st="on">lace u2:st="on">Georgialace>lace>'s NATO membership caused widespread debate. If Georgia was a NATO member, then U.S. warships would have been deployed to the lace w:st="on">lace u2:st="on">Black Sealace>lace> under the NATO umbrella. Or they were about to.>>
> >
Moreover as a NATO member, lace w:st="on">lace u2:st="on">Turkeylace>lace> was likely to support this. So the "operation on South Ossetia" could well be a part of a larger to move to make lace w:st="on">lace u2:st="on">Georgialace>lace> a NATO member.>>
> >
The real question for lace u2:st="on">Turkeylace> still lies ahead; because the Black Sea is now an "energy sea" and neither the U.S. nor lace w:st="on">lace u2:st="on">Russialace>lace> would want to leave it alone.>>

Therefore, in the short term, a debate could be opened on the Montreux Convention at a NATO meeting. The process to water down the Montreux Convention may have already started. The lace w:st="on">lace u2:st="on">U.S.lace>lace> and NATO could ask for new arrangements on the status of the Turkish Straits. lace w:st="on">lace u2:st="on">Turkeylace>lace>, of course, would resist this. This serious question has been debated in the strategic rooms and corridors of diplomacy in lace w:st="on">lace u2:st="on">Ankaralace>lace>.

[American Patriot]

Russian troops stay in Georgia, France calls EU meet

Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:06am IST





By Niko Mchedlishvili
BATUMI, Georgia (Reuters) - A U.S. navy warship delivered humanitarian aid on Sunday for victims of Georgia's brief war with Russia while Moscow ignored Western demands to pull its remaining troops from the Caucasus country's heartland.
On the diplomatic front, France called for a meeting of European Union leaders to discuss the crisis and to review the bloc's relations with Russia. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said ties with Moscow could be scaled back if its troops were not withdrawn.
Russia says residual troops are peacekeepers needed to avert further bloodshed and to protect Georgia's separatist, pro-Moscow provinces of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Moscow withdrew the bulk of its forces from Georgia proper on Friday.
But in a sign of simmering tensions, a fuel train exploded on Georgia's east-west rail line on Sunday near the central town of Gori after hitting a landmine, Georgian officials said.
Georgia's Prime Minister Lado Gurgenidze told Reuters the damaged rail link was vital to the economy of Georgia and its neighbours. Azeri officials said oil cargoes were being held up at the Georgian border following the explosion.
The Russia-Georgia conflict broke out on Aug. 7-8 when Georgian troops tried to retake South Ossetia. A Russian counter-offensive pushed into Georgia proper, crossing its main east-west highway and nearing an oil pipeline from Azerbaijan.
Russian troops also moved into Western Georgia from Abkhazia, another breakaway region on the Black Sea. Hundreds of people were killed, tens of thousands displaced and housing and infrastructure wrecked in the fighting.
A Reuters reporter in Batumi, 80 km south of the port of Poti where Russian troops are still present, saw a giant crane unload 55 tonnes of aid from the USS McFaul. Continued...

[American Patriot]

Cheney visit to Georgia keeps pressure on Russia

By BEN FELLER – 22 minutes ago

CRAWFORD, Texas (AP) — President Bush is dispatching Vice President Dick Cheney to Georgia, the latest burst of political support for an ally reeling from war with Russia.

The White House announced Cheney's trip Monday as the administration blasted Russia anew for failing to fully honor a cease-fire deal with Georgia, a former Soviet republic. The administration also chided Russian lawmakers for endorsing independence of Georgia's two breakaway regions, saying its Cold War foe has no authority to make that decision on its own.

Cheney is heading abroad on Sept. 2 for stops in three former Soviet Republics — Azerbaijan, Georgia and Ukraine — plus Italy.

"The vice president will be delivering the word of America's support," White House spokesman Tony Fratto.

Indeed, Cheney's presence in the war zone is a clear sign to Russia of the U.S. resolve behind Georgia after the small country was pummeled by a Russian military response. The vice president is the top-ranking U.S. official to visit Georgia since war erupted on Aug. 7.

Even before those hostilities began, Cheney's trip to Italy, Georgia and Azerbaijan was in the works.

The vice president has no plans to visit Russia and speak directly with leaders there.

Cheney's trip is the latest in a flurry of activity, including an earlier Georgia trip by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, that is meant to signal a strong U.S. position.

The White House also announced Monday that the U.S. is sending an interagency delegation to Tbilisi, the Georgian capital, to assess the country's vast reconstruction needs.

Catching much of the world off guard, war erupted this month as Georgia launched an artillery barrage targeting the separatist province of South Ossetia. Russian forces repelled the offensive and responded with tremendous force, attacking deep into Georgia.

Yet questions remain about what actions, if any, the U.S. will take against Russia. NATO foreign ministers suspended their formal contacts with Russia as punishment. But the NATO allies, bowing to pressure from European nations that depend heavily on Russia for energy, stopped short of more severe penalties being pushed by the United States.

The Pentagon has ruled out a military response. Cheney's office has used tough rhetoric, saying that "Russian aggression must not go unanswered."

"It hasn't gone unanswered. In fact, I'd say it's been loudly answered," Fratto said Monday from Crawford, Texas, where Bush is on vacation at his ranch.

"I don't think there's any question that Russia's reputation has suffered since it took these disproportionate military steps in Georgia," Fratto said.

As for specific consequences, The White House is reviewing its "entire relationship" with Russia, Fratto said, but focusing now on how to support Georgia's recovery.

Meanwhile, Russia's parliament voted unanimously Monday to urge the country's president to recognize the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, another breakaway region. The U.S. government swiftly rejected the move.

Fratto said the status of the two regions is "not a matter for any one country to decide," but rather a topic for negotiation among the parties through the United Nations.

Cheney will hold talks in Georgia with President Mikhail Saakashvili, and will meet with the respective presidents of the other countries he is visiting.

Russia pulled the bulk of its troops and tanks out of Georgia on Friday under a cease-fire brokered by French President Nicolas Sarkozy, but built up its forces in and around South Ossetia and Abkhazia. It also left military posts inside Georgia proper.

"There's no question that Russia hasn't lived up to the cease-fire agreement," Fratto said, a point Russia fiercely disputes. The White House says the presence of large numbers of Russian troops and checkpoints are signs that Russia remains in violation.

Cheney's trip was originally driven by his plans to attend the Ambrosetti forum in Italy, an annual meeting of world leaders. Ukraine was added recently to the agenda, White House officials said.

Ukraine, like Georgia, has angered Moscow by seeking closer ties with the West. While siding with Georgia, Ukrainian officials have acknowledged that Moscow's quick military victory exposed their nation's own vulnerability.

[American Patriot]

Cheney to visit Georgia amid Russian chill

CRAWFORD, Texas (AFP) — US Vice President Dick Cheney will visit Georgia next week in a show of support for the war-battered US ally amid a deepening freeze in Russian ties with the West, the White House said Monday.

Cheney will become the most senior US official to visit the former Soviet republic since Russian tanks rolled into its smaller neighbor when Tbilisi tried to retake the Moscow-backed rebel region of South Ossetia by force.

The vice president, who warned early in the crisis that "Russian aggression must not go unanswered," will also visit Azebaijan, Ukraine and attend an economic forum in Italy, the White House said.

Cheney "will be delivering the word of America's support and also consulting on how these leaders in the region see the future playing out," spokesman Tony Fratto said as US President George W. Bush spent time on his Texas ranch.

The vice president's trip was planned before the conflict erupted in early August, prompting the addition of Ukraine to his itinerary and raising the stakes for his latest high-profile diplomatic foray, said Fratto.

Fratto also sternly warned Moscow that it could not by itself decide the fate of South Ossetia or another breakaway region, Abkhazia, after Russia's parliament endorsed their independence from Georgia.

"The status of those two regions in Georgia are not a matter for any one country to decide. They're a matter for the international community, through the mechanisms at the United Nations," he said.

For now, "the two regions are part of Georgia," he added.

Fratto brushed aside any claims that Moscow had not suffered for what Washington has repeatedly called its "disproportionate" offensive in Georgia, saying in an echo of Cheney's words that the move had been "loudly answered."

"I know a lot of people have asked the question as to, what is the cost to Russia? There's been costs in terms of their reputation. There's costs in terms of the ability and willingness to do business in Russia, for example," he said.

"We're reviewing our entire relationship with Russia," said Fratto, who charged "there's no question that Russia remains in violation' of a ceasefire pact brokered by France, which holds the rotating EU presidency.

Russia withdrew tanks, artillery and hundreds of troops from their most advanced positions in Georgia on Friday, saying it had fulfilled all obligations under the agreement.

But as of late Sunday Russian troops still controlled access to the key port of Poti and had established other checkpoints around South Ossetia.

The conflict has sent Russia's ties with the United States, the European Union, and NATO into a deep chill, amid talk of a new Cold War, a lasting break in relations that had warmed since the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991.

The crisis has sparked fears of instability in the Caucasus, where Tbilisi's press for NATO membership and Ukraine's support of Georgia have riled Moscow.

NATO has warned that its ties with Russia hinge on Moscow's compliance with the Sarkozy-brokered ceasefire pact, while Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said he was prepared for "a complete break in relations" with the alliance.

Cheney will meet with Saakashvili, President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan, Georgia's neighbor to the southeast, President Viktor Yushchenko of Ukraine, and Italy's Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and President Giorgio Napolitano.

The United States and European leaders said the two rebel regions are now part of Georgia, and Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili has warned of "disastrous results" if the Kremlin redraws the post-Soviet map.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy has announced a special European summit on the Georgia crisis on September 1.

And Russia announced Monday it would to break off some trade agreements reached during negotiations to join the World Trade Organization (WTO).

[American Patriot]

Czech ruling party for Georgia's NATO membership

Prague- The executive council of the Civic Democratic Party (ODS, Czech senior coalition member) called for speedy talks on Georgia's membership of NATO, Deputy Prime Minister for European Affairs Alexandr Vondra told journalists.

The ODS has accused Russia of having used the conflict in South Ossetia to demonstrate strength on the territory of a different country, Vondra said.

President Vaclav Klaus, the honorary chairman of the ODS, recently accused Georgian representatives of responsibility for the conflict, whereby he triggered a dispute with the coalition government led by Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek (ODS).

"The executive council of the ODS is watching with concern the real objectives of the Russian aggression, which was the violation of Georgia's territorial integrity, the final secession of South Ossetia and Abkhazia and the replacement of President Mikheil Saakashvili's pro-Western government with a pro-Russian regime," the ODS says in its resolution.

Russian troops entered Georgia in early August after Tbilisi tried to dominate its province South Ossetia by force.

"Georgia's rash reaction to the growing separatist tendencies in South Ossetia must not erase the fact that the development had been deliberately incited by Russia in the long run," the ODS added.

Russia is against NATO's enlargement to Georgia and Ukraine. The USA and Germany want Georgia to join NATO.

[American Patriot]

Russia, Syria Back Iran's N. Rights
FNA (iranian) ^ | 08.22.08

Speaking to reporters during a joint press conference in Russia's Black Sea resort of Sochi, both the Russian and Syrian presidents backed Iran's right to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.

The United States and its Western allies accuse Iran of trying to develop nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian nuclear program, while they have never presented any corroborative document to substantiate their allegations. Iran denies the charges and insists that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only.

(Excerpt) Read more at english.farsnews.com ...

[American Patriot]

Polish Commentary Analyzes Russia's Relations With West
redOrbit ^ | 25 August 2008 | Marek Ostrowski

Polish Commentary Analyzes Russia's Relations With West

Posted on: Monday, 25 August 2008, 06:00 CDT

Text of report by Polish newspaper Polityka on 23 August

[Commentary by Marek Ostrowski: "What about Russia?" - the article incorporates a box with commentary by "W.S": "Shield Still Uncertain"]

The interests of global powers - Russia, the United States and the EU - are bound up with the issue of Georgia, a small yet strategically located country. This conflict has yet again intensified Poland's fear of Russia, a feeling that runs in our blood. Do we have reason to fear?

History likes to repeat itself: August 2008 in Georgia comes a mere 40 years after August 1968 in Czechoslovakia. Back then, Moscow ousted the disobedient government from Prague in line with [deceased Soviet leader] Brezhnev's doctrine and replaced it with a friendly government, brought in Russian tanks. Even though no new government has been brought to Tbilisi this time, the military defeat of the Georgians' incursion into Ossetia may remove the pro-American President Saakashvili from power. And it serves as a warning to other countries, the former Soviet satellite states: do not mess with us, because we are close and America is far away. Does this mean that Moscow has adopted a softer version of Brezhnev's doctrine, namely [Russian Prime Minister] Putin's doctrine?

First of all, who is to blame for the war, victims and suffering? Today, it appears that both sides - Saakashvili and Moscow - wanted a confrontation, but Moscow waited for the naive and hotheaded Saakashvili to make a serious mistake and pull the trigger. And this is what happened. Saakashvili made a bad mistake by promising to "restore the constitutional order" during the election campaign. Fulfilling this promise (sending troops to take control over Ossetia) was an even worse mistake. This is because the Russian- Georgian agreement of 1992 did not give him the right to do so. Ossetia is part of Georgia but enjoys autonomy and the supervision of "international" (in this case Russian) troops.

Saakashvili's faults paled when the international community saw the brutality of Russia's response. Russia decided not only to fight back but also to impose an exemplary punishment on its neighbour. Russia's disproportionate use of force, also in Georgian territory, means a unanimous verdict of guilty.

Zones of influence

For a brief moment, Russia's intervention in Georgia brought back the forgotten imperial categories of "the near abroad" [the now independent former Soviet republics] (a Russian political term that indicates that the countries that are close to Russia, even the independent ones, should have a special status of not fully sovereign states), "the zone of influence", and "the game of superpowers".

Russia sent out an evident signal that the former Soviet republics should not seek closer relations with America in the Caucasus, which is allegedly part of the "near abroad" or "gray area".

When the satellite states from Central Asia were given a free hand following the USSR dissolution, the Americans did not let the opportunity slip and joined the race for natural gas and oil in the former Soviet backyard. This race was not a pleasant experience for Russia, especially because Washington showed no consideration for Russia's pride. In the US Department of State, the person in charge of Caucasian affairs is Matthew Bryza, an energetic diplomat and deputy assistant secretary of state who frequently visits Tbilisi. Incidentally, he is fluent in both Polish and Russian. "The United States wants to break Moscow's iron grip by mobilizing businesses and countries to build new pipelines that will bypass Russia and Iran," Bryza said in public. And such pipelines, bypassing Russia in the Southern Corridor, have been built over the past 10 years.

In this war over pipelines, Georgia has special importance. If resources in Azerbaijan are a rich bottle, Georgia is the cork of this bottle. What is located further towards the Caspian Sea and behind it must be transported via Georgia. Moreover, if the West loses Georgia and Azerbaijan, it will also lose the only route to Central Asia that is independent of Russia, which means the route leading to natural gas in Turkmenistan and oil in Kazakhstan. These resources may be transported to the West either through Russia or through the Caucasus, which means Georgia.

In the area of rivalry between Russia and the West, not everyone is faring so badly as Georgia. There is another model of relations: a clever game on both sides. This is Azerbaijan. It became independent when [former] President Heydar Aliyev sold the right to extract oil to Western oil concerns in 1994. Russia worried even more about the launch of the BTC [Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan] pipeline, which deprived it of the monopoly on the transportation of Caspian oil to the West. Despite the Kremlin's dissatisfaction, [Azerbaijani President] Ilham Aliyev has very closely cooperated with Mikheil Saakashvili over recent years: when Russia cut off gas supplies to Georgia in 2006, it was Aliyev who helped Georgia by offering a contract. Moreover, Azerbaijan and Georgia are building a Transcaucasian railroad to Turkey.

But Azerbaijan does not want to mess with Russia and even cannot afford to do so. In order to maintain good relations, it leased a radar station in Qabala to Russia and is still eager to sell oil to this country.

Putin's soul

However, Georgia with its European and NATO-oriented aspirations is not Azerbaijan. Georgia poses a serious problem and further relations between countries in the world will be largely determined by how the West solves this problem.

It is now clearly visible that the EU made a mistake when it pushed for Kosovo's independence, completely ignoring Russia's opinion. After all, the rule of Serbia's territorial integrity could have been maintained. There are sufficient legal formulas to ensure this. But Russia was offered an argument: no one can be forced to stay under a given country's flag. Now Moscow is issuing a challenge not only on the issue of the Georgian regions of Ossetia and Abkhazia. Transnistria (ruled by Russian placemen) is severing contacts with Moldova, even though in theory it constitutionally belongs to this country. (Romania not only failed to recognize Kosovo but warned against its recognition in public specifically because of negative consequences for the "Russian" Transnistria in the future.)

Was President Kaczynski right when he shouted at the rally in Tbilisi that Moscow would now reach for Ukraine, for the Baltic republics and, in the long term, perhaps also for Poland? Russia's cold war with the Baltic republics has been waged for nearly 20 years. Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia proclaimed independence in Spring 1990 and were able to negotiate the withdrawal of Russian troops in the early 1990s: the last echelons left Estonia in August 1994. [Deceased Russian President] Boris Yeltsin's weak Russia could not stop the Baltic states' dreams about membership in NATO and the EU, even though it protested extremely vociferously and set "impassable lines."

In this local cold war, Moscow is accusing Latvia and Estonia of oppressing the Russian minority and glorifying the Baltic SS divisions that fought against the Red Army, while Lithuania comes under criticism for impeding transportation links with the Kaliningrad Region.

The Baltic states are paying back by accusing Russia of aggressive and imperialist intentions, at the same time claiming compensation for the years of Soviet occupation. Until recently, Latvia and Estonia did not even have border treaties with Russia! Latvia solved this problem as recently ago as in 2007. Wherever it can, Russia tries to make relations with small neighbours more complicated. Hence the espionage scandals that break out every now and then, the tussle over the Bronze Soldier of Tallinn and the fact of cutting off oil supplies to the refinery in Mazeikiai, which had been purchased by Orlen [Polish oil concern].

For years, the Kremlin has been trying to create the impression in the West that Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia are not yet prepared to join NATO or the EU. But when their membership became a fact, the Kremlin began to treat the Baltic states not as independent partners but as Brussels' provinces. According to the Kremlin, Brussels should now discipline these provinces. Of course, the best thing to do would be to discipline them in accordance with Russian suggestions and warnings. According to the Russians, the EU is therefore now responsible for the situation of the Russian minority in Latvia and Estonia.

But many things have changed! Poland and the Baltic republics are members of both the EU and NATO and there is absolutely no indication that things could be different.

However, what happened in Georgia exposed the painful lack of a well thought-out Western policy towards Russia under Putin (which is stronger and wealthier than under Yeltsin) more clearly than ever before. At the beginning of his term, Bush was enchanted by Putin. He said that he "looked into his eyes and saw a good soul". He had tangible reasons to see Russian goodwill. Shortly after that, following the 9/11 attacks, Putin did not hesitate to help America, especially by making Russian bases in Uzbekistan (an ostensibly independent country that was, after all, right under Russia's nose) available to the United States. Western gratitude towards Russia proved tangible, too. Russia was given rewards that need not have been given: a formal mechanism of cooperation with NATO, which means the NATO-Russia Council, and international prestige in the form of a place in the Group of Seven (annual consultations between the leaders of the world's most industrialized countries, even though Russia's level did not make it a suitable member). But the West failed to agree on any common policy on Russia.

Roughly speaking, one can see three approaches. The United States approach involves pulling Russia into the Atlantic area of influence, competing fiercely with this country in politics and business and forcefully taking over zones of influence wherever it can. The approach adopted by Germany and France involves doing business with Russia, hoping that security will be ensured by links established through mutual arm-twisting. When it comes to Poland and the former Soviet satellites - well, whoever can should try and describe these relations. One option involves adopting a cautious approach to business, stressing how much we suffered from Soviet crimes and warning the naive West against Russia's expansion.

Should Russia be isolated?

Georgia caused an upheaval among Western countries or at least a wave of opinions that the West needs to adopt a tougher or more sober policy on Moscow under Putin and [Russian President] Medvedev. [French] President Sarkozy helped negotiate an understanding that should prompt the Russians to pull out. [German] Chancellor Angela Merkel flatly stated that Georgia would be a NATO member if it wanted it. Likewise, prospects for Ukraine's membership in NATO may be now better. George Bush mentioned the possibility of withdrawing the US support for efforts to introduce Russia into the political and economic structures of the 21st century. Condoleezza Rice also threatened with the international isolation of Russia. Commentators named all possible ways of sending out signals to Moscow that its policy will not be helplessly tolerated in the West. Theoretically, this includes refusing to accept Moscow as member of the OECD or WTO (which is a more serious issue, as this organization defines the rules of global trade) as well as pulling back from pushing for a new agreement about partnership and cooperation with the EU (but does Moscow want this agreement?), discontinuing its membership in the Group of Eight, suspending the NATO-Russia Council and depriving Russia of the right to stage the 2014 Sochi Olympic Games. But is such isolation possible?

The Kremlin's current policy enjoys support among the Russian public and it is difficult to find anyone in Moscow who would feel indignant at the use of force against Georgia. However, Russia appears to be losing on a very important field of European propaganda, especially in big countries - in Germany and France, where it enjoyed considerable support until recently. If this decision were vested solely with the leaders of Germany and France, they would probably ignore Georgia, especially because this is a far- away country and the fighting is now over. However, the public may now require more of its politicians: cooperation with Russia - yes, of course, but Russia must observe the international rules of the game.

A prominent Polish expert on security issues says that Russia would have achieved much more if it had demonstrated only the possibility of a military response following Saakashvili's attack and immediately referred to international organizations and arbitration. Most probably, Russia would have made the EU and NATO force Saakashvili to pull out of South Ossetia and Abkhazia by invoking the agreements of 1992, which gave these two Georgian provinces great autonomy. But Russia decided to do something else.

Drawing the short straw

Our problem involves the fact that Poland's domestic and international policies have become so closely entwined that no refined diplomacy can be conducted because the aim is not to achieve tangible results (also in the area of security!) but above all to win applause in a patriotic costume show. Much has been written about President Kaczynski's presence at the rally in Tbilisi and his inauspicious comment of "we have come here to fight" as well as about the division into those who were present (the brave ones) and those who were absent (by implication, cowards). Well, politics is after all more difficult than propaganda.

Unfortunately, the Russian issue has important internal (as well as historical and emotional) connotations in Poland and whenever it is necessary to pursue policy together with Russia or towards Russia, politicians (who are scared stiff of pragmatism and realpolitik) make attempts to outdo each other. It has been wrongly and childishly assumed that patriotism manifests itself in "courageous and uncompromising" declarations against Russia, not in how much Poland and the Poles actually obtain in foreign policy.

Under the circumstances, there is no reason to be glad about the US missile defence shield (see box on page 13). This project is distant and still uncertain. Likewise, it is a bad thing that the shield will be built in Poland not as a NATO initiative but in response to the Georgian crisis. Tomasz Zalewski, our correspondent in Washington, is hinting that given the current context, the shield has been apparently treated there as part of sanctions against Russia.

Right now, the Bush administration has nothing to lose, because the policy of pulling Russia into partnership-based cooperation, pursued for 16 years (since the USSR collapse), has been abandoned. The situation is no longer idyllic and Moscow has to be made clearly aware of this fact. But how? "If a military response is out of the question, Patriots play the role of a surrogate signal," explains Charles Kupchan, a leading expert on European affairs and former high-ranking official in President Clinton's administration.

Well then, but who will draw the short straw in this project? America? The Russians will do no harm to the Americans. Europe? Certainly not. Poland? Of course! When Brzezinski, who is after all no friend of Putin's, asked if America would cover the costs of Russia's potential boycott of Poland, why did no one give an answer in that discussion? Of course, an alliance with America is very important for Poland's national interests, but we cannot be an ally that keeps drawing the short straw. Our fears of Russia are justified, not only historically. Many of Russia's current activities raise concerns. Responding to these activities, we cannot by guided by historical experience alone, by fear or by political calculation at home.

On the face of it, Warsaw should be glad about the fact that Russia's public image has been spoilt and that we can hear Western pledges to adopt a tougher line on Moscow or even to isolate it. In essence, however, this is a major challenge for Polish policy. Will we gain more by standing out among those who are criticizing Russia and making our rhetoric even more pointed or by showing self- restraint and becoming open to dialogue? Warsaw should appreciate the Russian saying "the quieter you are, the further you go," especially because the slogan of isolating Moscow is good in Portugal or across the Atlantic but not in a country that borders Russia.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov is supposed to visit Warsaw in September and we have many important bilateral issues to resolve with him. Despite bad experience with Georgia, the West is still faced with the same choice in Eastern policy: isolation or engagement and inclusion? The answer to this question cannot be too hasty or intuitive.

Today, Poland is part of the West and should influence Eastern policy in the EU and NATO, also because of its historical experience. Russia's imperialist inclinations can be more effectively fought in Berlin, Paris, Brussels or Washington than in Tbilisi. But this is more difficult than achievements in wars fought with faces and words, which make people feel better.

[Box] Shield still uncertain

In exchange for our agreement to deploy 10 US anti-missiles near Slupsk, Washington agreed to delegate one battery with 96 Patriot missiles to Poland and sign an agreement with Warsaw about closer military cooperation, which includes covering Poland with the Patriot air-defence system as well as setting up a joint commission to examine threats from third-party states. The agreement includes no provisions about the target number of batteries or the amount of the US outlays for the modernization of the Polish Armed Forces. Nonetheless, this is not what the government wanted. Rejecting the previous offer in July, [Prime Minister] Donald Tusk clearly said that he made efforts to obtain not money for the Armed Forces but security guarantees for Poland. According to the government, the current missile defence agreement's wording has in fact the value of a bilateral military alliance. We will see whether this is in fact the case when the agreement is published. Either way, this enthusiasm should be slightly dampened already today. First of all, the US guarantees hinge on the deployment of the shield and this may be prevented not only by the future US president but also by the conditions that the US Congress may impose on the project, making further funding conditional on the ratification of [missile defence] agreement in Polish and Czech parliaments and on whether the Pentagon presents evidence that the shield is effective. In the Czech Republic, the ratification will not take place until 2009 and may be unsuccessful. Realistically, there is no such thing as successful missile tests.

Secondly, the initialled agreement is not binding upon the next US government. George Bush himself failed to honour a range of significantly more formal agreements concluded by his predecessor. The future of the shield and related US guarantees for Poland is therefore uncertain. And it will remain so for a long time, even after the agreement is officially signed.

Originally published by Polityka, Warsaw, in Polish 23 Aug 08 pp 12-14.

[American Patriot]

Eastern Europe Can Defend Itself
Wall Street Journal ^ | August 25, 2008 | MAX BOOT

Eastern Europe Can Defend Itself

By MAX BOOT

August 25, 2008; Page A13

Eastern Europeans are rightly alarmed about the brazenness and success of the Russian blitzkrieg into Georgia. For many living in Russia's shadow, this is reviving traumatic memories -- of 1968 for Czechs, 1956 for Hungarians, 1939 for Poles. It does not help that senior Russian generals are threatening to rain nuclear annihilation on Ukraine and Poland if they refuse to toe the Kremlin's line.

Even those states which, unlike Georgia and Ukraine, are already in NATO can take scant comfort. As Poland's foreign minister, Radek Sikorski, says, "Parchments and treaties are all very well, but we have a history in Poland of fighting alone and being left to our own devices by our allies."

Warsaw's response has been to draw closer to the United States, by rapidly concluding an agreement in long drawn-out negotiations over the basing of U.S. interceptor missiles on Polish soil. That's a good start, but it's a move of symbolic import only. The small number of interceptors are designed to shoot down an equally small number of Iranian missiles -- not the overwhelming numbers that Russia deploys. Poland and other states should be under no illusion they can count on the U.S. in a crisis. In the past we left Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia in the lurch. More recently we haven't done much to help Georgia.

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...

[American Patriot]

What Georgia crisis means for Israel
Miami Herald ^ | Aug. 25, 2008 | FRIDA GHTIS

What Georgia crisis means for Israel

Posted on Mon, Aug. 25, 2008

By FRIDA GHTIS

A war between a resurgent Russia and tiny Georgia over the microscopic region of South Ossetia should have little impact on another miniature country on the shores of the Mediterranean. And yet, the course of this conflict points in a direction that should trouble those who care about Israel and about the prospects for peace in the Middle East.

The rumblings of a new model of Cold War could mean that cooperation between the West and Russia on matters crucial to Israel, particularly Iran, is coming to an end. Even worse, a possible new cycle of strategic competition between Moscow and Washington could become a game-changer in the Middle East.

Israel has maintained a strong and friendly relationship with Georgia. At the same time, links with Moscow -- the traditional supporter of Israel's enemies during the Cold War -- have also improved markedly over the years. The new conflict placed Israel in a position where it might face a choice between betraying an old friend and antagonizing a country -- Russia -- with the ability to bolster Israel's most dangerous enemies.

Diplomats appeared to find their way through the thorny path between the two nations. In the end, however, larger geopolitical forces outside Israel's control could easily mean that the Russo-Georgian war is the first step in a global realignment that harms Israel's interests.

On Wednesday, the United States and Poland signed an agreement placing a missile defense system on Polish soil, a deal that could lead Russia to respond by placing missiles on the soil of a nation unfriendly to NATO.

This might have little to do with Israel, except that the recipient of new Russian missiles could well be Syria, which is still technically in a state of war with Israel.

Late in 2007, Israeli government strategists predicted that a conflict between Tbilisi and Moscow was likely. As a result, Israel started ending arms sales to Georgia. Tbilisi has been a client of private Israeli defense firms. Most sales had already stopped when the war began.

Once the fighting started, Israel's Foreign Ministry told the Ministry of Defense it should suspend all private arms sales to Georgia. At the same time, the Foreign Ministry made a strong statement in support of Georgia's territorial integrity.

The diplomatic maneuver may have worked, but all is not well.

Israel's need to see Iran's nuclear ambitions thwarted could become the first victim of this conflict.

While Iran has been calling for Israel's destruction, the international community generally agrees that Iran's nuclear program represents a threat to the entire world, not just to Israel. Israel's hope is that diplomatic efforts will succeed in deterring Iran.

The strategy to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons relies on international sanctions, which are all but meaningless without Russian help. And efforts to give sanctions the imprimatur of the entire international community would fail without Russian cooperation, since Russia's veto power in the United Nations Security Council allows it to block U.N. resolutions.

In reality, Russia has been a reluctant partner in efforts to stop Iran's nuclear program. Russians are helping build one of Iran's nuclear facilities in Bushehr, and they have worked to stall U.N. efforts. Russia has mixed feelings about Iran.

Russia and Iran have a long history of animosity. The two countries are not ideological or historical allies. But if they see a common enemy in the United States and the West, they would be more inclined to act together.

The signs so far are mixed. Russian Prime Minister Putin spoke with Israeli President Shimon Peres in Beijing at the Olympic Games. Their conversation came after the conflict in Georgia had started. Putin reportedly told Peres, ``I am not indifferent to Israel's concerns over a nuclear-armed Iran. There should be no doubt that Russia does not want a nuclear Iran.''

Israel, however, faces other threats besides Iran. There, too, Russia could create problems if it decides to start arming Israel's enemies, as it did during the Cold War, to tweak the United States.

A more optimistic possibility is that Russia and the West will remember that they do have common interests. After all, the Islamic Republic could increase instability in and around Russia, stirring up trouble with Russia's Muslim minorities.

If it is true that Moscow wants to stop Iran, it is precisely the Iran issue that could provide a road to reconciliation with the West.

Ultimately, it's mostly out of Israel's hands.

As Israelis try to glean lessons from a battered Georgia, the talk in Israel now is that tiny countries -- such as Georgia and Israel -- cannot rely on their friends coming to their rescue; they must stand ready to defend themselves.

[American Patriot]

US reviewing 'entire relationship' with Russia: White House
Aug 25 02:12 PM US/Eastern

The United States is reviewing its "entire relationship" with Russia, the White House said Monday, charging that Moscow was still violating a ceasefire deal for the Georgia conflict.

"We're reviewing our entire relationship with Russia, both for the medium term and the long term," said spokesman Tony Fratto, who charged there is "no question that Russia has not lived up to the ceasefire agreement."

Fratto disputed any assertion that Moscow has yet to pay a steep price for its August 8 invasion of Georgia in response to Tbilisi's military offensive to retake the breakaway region of South Ossetia.

"It hasn't gone unanswered. In fact, I'd say it's been loudly answered," he said. "I don't think there's any question that Russia's reputation has suffered since it took these disproportionate military steps in Georgia."

"I know a lot of people have asked the question as to, what is the cost to Russia? There's been costs in terms of their reputation. There's costs in terms of the ability and willingness to do business in Russia, for example," he said.

"Clearly in the short term, I think they are paying a price for the disproportionate actions that they've taken. But our focus right now is on supporting Georgia," said Fratto.

Fratto accused Moscow, which sent tanks and troops into Georgian territory in response to a Georgian offensive on August 7 to retake the breakaway region of South Ossetia, of not adhering to the French-brokered peace agreement.

"We're still concerned that Russia still remains in places where they should not be," he said, as US President George W. Bush watched the crisis from this Texas ranch.

Russia withdrew tanks, artillery and hundreds of troops from their most advanced positions in Georgia on Friday, saying it had fulfilled all obligations under the agreement.

But as of late Sunday Russian troops still controlled access to the key port of Poti located south of the Moscow-backed rebel region of Abkhazia, and had established other checkpoints around South Ossetia, where the conflict began.

"We are still hopeful that Russia will make choices that will return it to its previous efforts to integrate more closely into the international economic community, into Europe, and to be a positive force in cooperation with Europe and the rest of the world," said Fratto.

[American Patriot]

This won't set too well with US troops sitting there...

Russia preparing to attack Georgia again?
World Press ^ | 8.25.08 | williamamos

Russia has information that Georgia is planning a military attack on Abkhazia to seize the capital Sukhumi, the Deputy Chief of the Russian General Staff, Colonel General Anatoly Nogovitsyn, told a media briefing in Moscow on Monday. He said that the military potential of Georgia was being restored for a repeated act of aggression.

“We have received serious intelligence information, and we shall discuss in detail the Georgian-Abkhazian direction on Tuesday,” he said.

“The information is serious. If many media outlets still see Russia as the aggressor in the South Ossetian direction, the plan for seizing Sukhumi is so clear that we shall be able to prove that Georgia was the aggressor in the second direction as well,” he added.

(Excerpt) Read more at williamamos.wordpress.com ...