It appears that Russia’s favorite dictator is once again stirring the nationalist waters, poking at the US, and generally acting the part of totalitarian hawk.

“U.S. citizens were indeed in the area in conflict,” Putin said. “They were acting in implementing those orders doing as they were ordered, and the only one who can give such orders is their leader.”

Right.

In an exclusive interview with CNN’s Matthew Chance in the Black Sea city of Sochi Thursday, Putin said the U.S. had encouraged Georgia to attack the autonomous region of South Ossetia.

Putin told CNN his defense officials had told him it was done to benefit a presidential candidate — Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama are competing to succeed George W. Bush — although he presented no evidence to back it up.

And here is where the Lefties and the Pro-Russian nationalists join up.  Now if Putin had only tossed in some remarks about the evil Zionists…

If you don’t read Totten’s work, you should.  And for a very close and revealing look at the Russian aggression in Georgia, read his latest piece, reported from Tblisi…

TBILISI, GEORGIA – Virtually everyone believes Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili foolishly provoked a Russian invasion on August 7, 2008, when he sent troops into the breakaway district of South Ossetia. “The warfare began Aug. 7 when Georgia launched a barrage targeting South Ossetia,” the Associated Press reported over the weekend in typical fashion.

Virtually everyone is wrong. Georgia didn’t start it on August 7, nor on any other date. The South Ossetian militia started it on August 6 when its fighters fired on Georgian peacekeepers and Georgian villages with weapons banned by the agreement hammered out between the two sides in 1994. At the same time, the Russian military sent its invasion force bearing down on Georgia from the north side of the Caucasus Mountains on the Russian side of the border through the Roki tunnel and into Georgia. This happened before Saakashvili sent additional troops to South Ossetia and allegedly started the war.

Regional expert, German native, and former European Commission official Patrick Worms was recently hired by the Georgian government as a media advisor, and he explained to me exactly what happened when I met him in downtown Tbilisi. You should always be careful with the version of events told by someone on government payroll even when the government is friendly as democratic as Georgia’s. I was lucky, though, that another regional expert, author and academic Thomas Goltz, was present during Worms’ briefing to me and signed off on it as completely accurate aside from one tiny quibble.

Goltz has been writing about the Caucasus region for almost 20 years, and he isn’t on Georgian government payroll. He earns his living from the University of Montana and from the sales of his books Azerbaijan Diary, Georgia Diary and Chechnya Diary. Goltz experienced these three Caucasus republics at their absolute worst, and he knows the players and the events better than just about anyone. Every journalist in Tbilisi seeks him out as the old hand who knows more than the rest of us put together, and he wanted to hear Patrick Worms’ spiel to reporters in part to ensure its accuracy.

“You,” Worms said to Goltz just before he started to flesh out the real story to me, “are going to be bored because I’m going to give some back story that you know better than I do.”

“Go,” Goltz said. “Go.”

Read the rest….

(Totten asks for donations as he is a free-lance journalist.  His reporting is so much more in depth and interesting than most of what the MSM provides, I highly encourage people to donate what they can!  Totten’s reporting is so much more than a blog, and so much better than mainstream…)

Gordon C Chang has harsh words for NATO.  Harsher words for President Bush.

That’s it? Russia invades a country, and the Atlantic Alliance sets up a commission? Dmitry Rogozin, the Kremlin’s NATO envoy, put it best. He labeled the emergency summit a “mountain that gave birth to a mouse.”

But we shouldn’t blame the Alliance for its uninspiring response. The establishment of an organizational structure to deepen ties to endangered Georgia actually looks resolute in comparison to the American reaction.

Chang is correct.  The NATO reaction is flawed, but the utter lack of any sort of meaningful diplomatic reaction from the Whitehouse is stunning. The silence, as they say, deafening.

Mr. President, your Russia policy, which appears to have been based on your personal relationship with an autocrat, was fundamentally misguided. Yet what is especially disheartening is that, when it is clear that the assumptions underlining that policy have been proven wrong by the events of the last eleven days, you have failed to change course or even show leadership. This, as you may have noticed, is a critical moment for the West.

Where are you?

Russia has succeeded in capturing South Ossetia and manufacturing a pretext for the attack: the supposed “defense” of the province from the power-hungry Georgians. Now that Russia has South Ossetia in its grasp and it has acquired a launchpad on the Georgian side of the Caucasus Mountains, it will move to bring Georgia’s days of independence to an end. If Georgia doesn’t play along, the Russians have already shown that they can charge forward to Gori and cut the country’s road and rail transports in half, leaving western Georgia disconnected from the capital of Tbilisi in the east. Russia can now station thousands more troops in South Ossetia than were there for the supposed “peacekeeping” mission and they can have much heavier weapons since they aren’t meant to be peacekeeping troops any longer.

The United States needs to take swift, decisive action to prevent Georgia from being cut down like a tree by Russia. We chose not to intervene while Russia was defeating Georgia militarily and killing its civilians which was, in my estimation, a mistake since it is always more difficult to eject a party from an area than it is to keep them out in the first place. The United States’ best (and perhaps only logical) option now is to increase the number of American troops in Georgia significantly. Russia has already shown its hand by raiding Gori: that will be their first destination when they try to undermine the current Georgian government. Therefore, the United States should station a significant number of troops in and around Gori as well as stationing more troops in Tbilisi. It would be wise to sprinkle more troop contingents throughout Georgia near possible targets of the Russian military but the largest numbers should remain in Gori and Tbilisi.

These American troops are going to serve a very important function for continued Georgian independence. They considerably raise the price of a potential attack by hostile Russian forces. By intermixing American troops with Georgian troops, Russia will have to carefully consider any attack on Georgia because if they kill American troops then they will either have to withdraw from Georgia under international pressure or face the brunt of an American retaliation against the Russian forces that would be invading Georgia to destabilize it. This is a tactic that has been used many times in military history: utilizing human shields. Many times the human shields were hostages from the enemy that were important people because they would think twice before possibly killing them unintentionally in an attack. In this situation, however, our troops will be acting as a foot in the door preventing it from shutting on Georgian independence as well as one of our few footholds close to Russia. If our troops are killed by Russian forces perpetrating an attack on Georgia that gives us a legitimate right of unlimited retaliation including an unremitting air campaign to assist Georgian ground forces in not only pushing the Russians back but also driving them out of South Ossetia and into North Ossetia.

Some may be saying that it is foolish to antagonize Russia over a small country such as Georgia. I disagree. Georgia is an American ally and that should mean something. Russia’s attack on Georgia is a slap in the face to America. They know that Georgia is our ally and they dare us to do anything to stop them from overrunning the entire country. Today it may be Georgia but if we do not extract a price from the Russians for attacking one of our allies, the next time the attack will be more bold. The next time it won’t be an attempt to kill the leader of Ukraine. The next time it will be a military strike on Ukraine to bring it back under Russia’s yoke as a satellite country.

Russia has made great amounts of money from its oil and it has used that money to rebuild and vastly improve its military. History shows us that armies are not built for peace; they are built for war. Vladimir Putin has bent the government in Russia to his will and ensconced himself as the leader of Russia in perpetuity. There was a time 70 years ago when an autocratic leader overseas acted belligerently and demanded territorial concessions based on questionable ethnic ties. The major powers foolishly thought that giving up this land would quench his thirst for conquest and bring peace. Instead, it only whetted his appetite for war and convinced him that the other powers were gullible and could be defeated by a concerted attack. The leader was Hitler, the territory was the Sudetenland and the small country that the major powers sacrificed on the altar of peace was Czechoslovakia. The Sudetenland contained most of Czechoslovakia’s industrial and military might so when Czechoslovakia was forced to cede it to Germany it was left nearly defenseless against the later onslaught by Germany. If the West sacrifices Georgia in the misguided hope of “peace” with Russia and not starting any trouble, it does so at its own peril. The West has seen what appeasement does to the countries that lay down at the feet of the bully. We would do well to remember the principle lesson from the Munich Agreement: “Peace” kills.

By Andrew L. Jaffee, netwmd.com

Russian President Putin’s goon-squad is using “’scorched-earth’ tactics” in Georgia, has promised to annex territory (South Ossetia and Abkhazia), and now is threatening to attack Poland. This is pure madness, but look at the reaction from Europe (or, should I say, lack thereof?), as described by the brave Russian soul, Garry Kasparov:

Russia’s invasion of Georgia reminded me of a conversation I had three years ago in Moscow with a high-ranking European Union official. Russia was much freer then, but President Vladimir Putin’s onslaught against democratic rights was already underway.

“What would it take,” I asked, “for Europe to stop treating Putin like a democrat? If all opposition parties are banned? Or what if they started shooting people in the street?” The official shrugged and replied that even in such cases, there would be little the EU could do. He added: “Staying engaged will always be the best hope for the people of both Europe and Russia.”

The citizens of Georgia would likely disagree. Russia’s invasion was the direct result of nearly a decade of Western helplessness and delusion. Inexperienced and cautious in the international arena at the start of his reign in 2000, Mr. Putin soon learned he could get away with anything without repercussions from the EU or America.

Russia reverted to a KGB dictatorship while Mr. Putin was treated as an equal at G-8 summits. …

Think about the rhetoric which flows from Western Europe regarding Israel. “Israel is the greatest threat to world peace.” “Israel is illegally occupying foreign territory.” “Israel is an aggressor nation.” Hmmm… Israel — with a population of 7.3 million; a country 290 miles long and 85 miles across at its widest point — is the “greatest threat to world peace?” But Russian neo-imperialists are not a threat, merely to be “engaged” and never confronted?

European cowardice in fact “turns reality, and history, upside down.” Europeans still haven’t learned their lesson after their homelands were the setting for two of the world’s greatest evils, Stalin and Hitler.

Soviet Russia’s ethnic cleansing of its neighbors (Tartars, Ukrainians, Balts, etc.) during the 20th century wasn’t enough? Will Europe sit back and watch a repeat of these horrors again, waiting until the U.S. steps in to save their lazy, morally complacent rear ends again?

Under Putin:

- Russia’s free press has basically been shut down by government censorship;

- Russian journalists have been murdered;

- “The control Putin is building over the country’s corporate sector resembles the kind of fascism instituted by Italian dictator Benito Mussolini or Spain’s Francisco Franco…”

- Use of torture by Russian troops in Chechnya is rampant;

- Putin has rigged all elections, arresting opposition leader Gary Kasparov, a chess player;

- The last “vote” held “may be the least democratic election since the USSR collapsed;”

- Putin tried to cover up the tragic loss of the Kursk’s Russian sailors;

- “The excessive violence and force used to break up the recent peaceful political demonstrations in Moscow and St. Petersburg highlight the increasing pressure on civil society in Russia…”

- Russia has be intimidating and persecuting the Ukraine by withholding energy deliveries;

- Putin tried to poison Ukrainian President Yushchenko because he didn’t like his politics; and,

- Putin has tormented tiny Estonia because he’s such a big, tough hero.

Now read the Christian Science Monitor’s description of Georgia as a “young democracy”. for some perspective….

Control of Georgia's oil pipeline may be at the heart of this conflict.

“I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest.”

~WInston Churchill

The Russians are tricky. They have suckered the world into thinking that they are a more peaceful, progressive nation than they were during the Soviet era. We have been duped into believing this over the years, despite mounting evidence to the contrary. Now, as Georgia burns, and the world wonders whether a ceasefire will hold or whether Putin’s puppet Medvedev will simply (as the Russians so often do) say one thing and do another…

Neo-Neocon writes:

The fact is that, unless we are willing to back up our rhetoric with military force or the meaningful sanctions to which Europe seems averse, talk is cheap. And if you compare Obama’s statement on the topic with that of McCain, you’ll find that both contain some meaningless cheap talk of the “the Security Council needs to condemn this” variety (at least McCain acknowledges the Russian threat of a veto; Obama does not).

For the rest of the article, read Russia and Georgia, and wars cold and hot: the Kingdom of Earth.

Her prose is really quite excellent, and it was this piece, along with an interview on NPR with Marshall Goldman, author of Petrostate, that made me write yet another piece on the Georgian conflict.

(more…)

~by MIKHEIL SAAKASHVILI

As I write, Russia is waging war on my country.

On Friday, hundreds of Russian tanks crossed into Georgian territory, and Russian air force jets bombed Georgian airports, bases, ports and public markets. Many are dead, many more wounded. This invasion, which echoes Afghanistan in 1979 and the Prague Spring of 1968, threatens to undermine the stability of the international security system.

Ostensibly, this war is about an unresolved separatist conflict. Yet in reality, it is a war about the independence and the future of Georgia. And above all, it is a war over the kind of Europe our children will live in. Let us be frank: This conflict is about the future of freedom in Europe.

No country of the former Soviet Union has made more progress toward consolidating democracy, eradicating corruption and building an independent foreign policy than Georgia. This is precisely what Russia seeks to crush.

This conflict is therefore about our common trans-Atlantic values of liberty and democracy. It is about the right of small nations to live freely and determine their own future. It is about the great power struggles for influence of the 20th century, versus the path of integration and unity defined by the European Union of the 21st. Georgia has made its choice.

When my government was swept into power by a peaceful revolution in 2004, we inherited a dysfunctional state plagued by two unresolved conflicts dating to the early 1990s. I pledged to reunify my country — not by the force of arms, but by making Georgia a pole of attraction. I wanted the people living in the conflict zones to share in the prosperous, democratic country that Georgia could — and has — become.

In a similar spirit, we sought friendly relations with Russia, which is and always will be Georgia’s neighbor. We sought deep ties built on mutual respect for each other’s independence and interests. While we heeded Russia’s interests, we also made it clear that our independence and sovereignty were not negotiable. As such, we felt we could freely pursue the sovereign choice of the Georgian nation — to seek deeper integration into European economic and security institutions.

We have worked hard to peacefully bring Abkhazia and South Ossetia back into the Georgian fold, on terms that would fully protect the rights and interests of the residents of these territories. For years, we have offered direct talks with the leaders of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, so that we could discuss our plan to grant them the broadest possible autonomy within the internationally recognized borders of Georgia.

But Russia, which effectively controls the separatists, responded to our efforts with a policy of outright annexation. While we appealed to residents of Abkhazia and South Ossetia with our vision of a common future, Moscow increasingly took control of the separatist regimes. The Kremlin even appointed Russian security officers to arm and administer the self-styled separatist governments.

Under any circumstances, Russia’s meddling in our domestic affairs would have constituted a gross violation of international norms. But its actions were made more egregious by the fact that Russia, since the 1990s, has been entrusted with the responsibility of peacekeeping and mediating in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Rather than serve as honest broker, Russia became a direct party to the conflicts, and now an open aggressor.

As Europe expanded its security institutions to the Black Sea, my government appealed to the Western community of nations — particularly European governments and institutions — to play a leading role in resolving our separatist conflicts. The key to any resolution was to replace the outdated peacekeeping and negotiating structures created almost two decades ago, and dominated by Russia, with a genuine international effort.

But Europe kept its distance and, predictably, Russia escalated its provocations. Our friends in Europe counseled restraint, arguing that diplomacy would take its course. We followed their advice and took it one step further, by constantly proposing new ideas to resolve the conflicts. Just this past spring, we offered the separatist leaders sweeping autonomy, international guarantees and broad representation in our government.

Our offers of peace were rejected. Moscow sought war. In April, Russia began treating the Georgian regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia as Russian provinces. Again, our friends in the West asked us to show restraint, and we did. But under the guise of peacekeeping, Russia sent paratroopers and heavy artillery into Abkhazia. Repeated provocations were designed to bring Georgia to the brink of war.

When this failed, the Kremlin turned its attention to South Ossetia, ordering its proxies there to escalate attacks on Georgian positions. My government answered with a unilateral cease-fire; the separatists began attacking civilians and Russian tanks pierced the Georgian border. We had no choice but to protect our civilians and restore our constitutional order. Moscow then used this as pretext for a full-scale military invasion of Georgia.

Over the past days, Russia has waged an all-out attack on Georgia. Its tanks have been pouring into South Ossetia. Its jets have bombed not only Georgian military bases, but also civilian and economic infrastructure, including demolishing the port of Poti on the Black Sea coast. Its Black Sea fleet is now massing on our shores and an attack is under way in Abkhazia.

What is at stake in this war?

Most obviously, the future of my country is at stake. The people of Georgia have spoken with a loud and clear voice: They see their future in Europe. Georgia is an ancient European nation, tied to Europe by culture, civilization and values. In January, three in four Georgians voted in a referendum to support membership in NATO. These aims are not negotiable; now, we are paying the price for our democratic ambitions.

Second, Russia’s future is at stake. Can a Russia that wages aggressive war on its neighbors be a partner for Europe? It is clear that Russia’s current leadership is bent on restoring a neocolonial form of control over the entire space once governed by Moscow.

If Georgia falls, this will also mean the fall of the West in the entire former Soviet Union and beyond. Leaders in neighboring states — whether in Ukraine, in other Caucasian states or in Central Asia — will have to consider whether the price of freedom and independence is indeed too high.

Mr. Saakashvili is president of Georgia.

This essay was taken from the Opinion page at the Wall Street Journal.  I feel it is important that it is spread…

Unlike the previous Gulf War, the United States mustered a smaller coalition of nations willing to engage in the liberation of Iraq prior to the invasion in 2003. Much has been made of the weaknesses in the international alliance, in so far as it did not include powers such as Germany and France, two pivotal players on the European mainland. Germany and France, for reasons cultural, strategic, and financial, where unwilling to work with the Bush administration’s stated goals for dealing with Saddam Hussein’s government in 2003, and this has plagued relations between the U.S. and its traditional allies in Europe since.

Yet, other European nations bucked the leadership coming from the old continental forces. A number of these “new” European states were formerly members of the communist Eastern-bloc, and sided with the American mission to topple Iraq’s totalitarian government and establish a democracy in its remains. One of the key nations in this union was Poland, lead by Aleksander Kwasniewski’s government, which headed the nation between 1995 and 2005. (more…)

Well, I’m not planning on adding a “joke of the day” section to this blog, but on this Leap Year February the 29th, I just couldn’t resist. So here it is:

Millions of Russians have voted in general elections expected to confirm President Vladimir Putin’s popularity, but blighted by claims of fraud.

~The BBC

and….

Claims on Monday of widespread ballot-rigging have marred the poll from the day before, which gave United Russia more than 64 per cent of the vote, which will translate into 70 per cent of seats in the Russian parliament.

~Al Jazeera

and…

“I headed United Russia ticket, and, of course, it’s a sign of public trust,” Putin said in televised comments, adding that victory would let the United Russia party cement its power base in the Duma.

~CNN

and…

European election observers warned Wednesday that they might once again refuse to take part in a Russian election, saying the government was still imposing unacceptable restrictions on their work.

~NY Times

and…

The vote followed a tense Kremlin campaign that relied on a combination of persuasion and intimidation to ensure victory for the United Russia party and for Putin, who has used a flood of oil revenues to move his country into a more assertive position on the global stage.

~Fox News

So I’m not sure if this is funny because they’re still calling it an election, or because Fox, Al Jazeera, the NY Times, etc. can all agree on something. Either way, it’s already shaping up to be a hilarious Leap Year!.