Month: August 2008

A PIPELINE RUNS THROUGH IT

Investor’s Business Daily
Posted 8/13/2008

Geopolitics: Russia’s aggression is not only about toppling a
pro-Western democracy and potential NATO member. It’s about the only
pipeline bringing Caspian Sea oil to the West not controlled by Moscow
or Iran.

Georgia is only the latest instance of Russia’s plans to reassemble the
"evil empire" and neuter NATO expansion, using energy as both a weapon
and a means of financing its rapid military expansion. Russia has
doubled its military in the past five years, thanks in large part to
the "windfall profits" it has reaped from skyrocketing energy prices.

One of the Russian targets in Georgia is a pipeline carrying oil
from the Caspian to the West. Georgia was a target of renewed Russian
imperialism because it was a democracy, a future NATO member and an
energy supplier to the West. Its use would accelerate declining oil
prices worldwide and put a serious crimp in Moscow’s plans.

The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline, in which British Petroleum is
the lead partner, can carry up to a million barrels of oil a day. It
runs from Kazakhstan through Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey and breaks
Russia’s stranglehold on supplying energy to Europe. Moscow currently
supplies 25% of Europe’s energy needs.

Another pipeline, the South Caucasus Pipeline, will carry natural gas
along the same route. It has a capacity of 16 trillion cubic feet of
natural gas a year and is needed to get Turkmenistan’s vast natural
gas reserves to European customers.

Georgian officials claimed that Russian aircraft dropped at least
30 bombs but failed to damage or disable the underground BTC
pipeline. "The Russian bear is trying to choke the vital east-west
energy arteries in the Caucasus, specifically the BTC oil pipeline
and the gas pipeline," says Ariel Cohen of the Heritage Foundation.

Adds Clifford Gaddy, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution:
"We have to assume that the pipelines are a military target of the
Russians. If they need to, they will bomb the pipelines." Failing
that, if Russia cannot control the pipelines directly or through a
new puppet government in Tbilisi, it at least wants to discourage
investors from completing the projects.

It’s the fragile economies of Eastern Europe and the energy-starved
European Union that are the most immediate victims of Putin’s power
grab. Moscow has seized the assets of the once-private oil giant
Yukos and cut off oil supplies or abruptly hiked prices to former
Eastern Europe client nations that have dared to pursue economic and
political policies independent from Russia.

In January 2006, Russia cut off gas supplies to Ukraine, supposedly
over a pricing dispute. The pipeline disruption temporarily curtailed
gas deliveries to Western Europe, sending a message that energy is
also a weapon in Moscow’s arsenal.

It’s also in part Putin’s response to NATO expansion and U.S. plans
to put missile interceptors in Poland and tracking radars in the
Czech Republic.

Finally, it’s a message to Ukraine that a price will be paid if it
pursues NATO membership as Georgia has. Russia has made clear its
displeasure with Ukraine, cutting off gas supplies 2 1/2 years ago
and reducing deliveries last March.

For its part, Ukraine recently threatened to bar Russian ships using
leased bases in the Crimea to support military operations in the
Black Sea against Georgia.

A month ago, about 1,000 U.S. soldiers joined 600 Georgians and 100
from Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Armenia participating in joint military
exercises at the Vaziani military base near Tbilisi. The base was a
target of Russian air attacks. The U.S. also airlifted 2,000 Georgian
troops serving in Iraq back to defend their homeland.

Russia needs to pay a hefty price for its actions. At the very least,
it needs to be told it can forget about WTO or G-8 membership. At the
same time, NATO should put membership for both Georgia and Ukraine
on the fast track.

PAUL GOBLE’S WINDOW ON EURASIA – GEORGIAN CRISIS

Georgiandaily
08/14/2008 1:08:52 AM
NY

IN THIS ISSUE

– Was There a Russian Intelligence Failure in Georgia?

– Will the CIS Become a Collateral Victim of Russian Aggression?

– Russian TV’s Distorted Coverage of Georgia Forces Many to Turn to
Internet, Western Broadcasts

– Russian Actions in Georgia Destabilizing the North Caucasus

– How Well Have Russian Forces Performed in Georgia?

Was There a Russian Intelligence Failure in Georgia?

August 13, 2008

Russia’s intelligence services failed to detect and warn Moscow’s
top leaders about Georgian plans to send forces into South Ossetia, a
shortcoming that cannot be covered up by Vladimir Putin’s decision to
hand out awards to more than 50 FSB, SVR, and GRU officers, according
to a Russian analyst who tracks that country’s security community.

Indeed, Vladimir Yermolin writes in an article posted on the
Grani.ru portal today, these awards are the height of hypocrisy
because they have being given "for the timely and precise supply by
the intelligence services of various levels of the General Staff
of the Armed Forces and consequently of the country’s leadership"
( p.139995.html).

The course of events suggests that no such information was provided,
at least in a timely fashion. "The introduction of Georgian units
into the unrecognized republic [of South Ossetia] was, judging by
Moscow’s reaction political and military, sudden." In fact, he notes,
Moscow dredged up the term "from distant 1941" – "perfidious attack"
– to describe it.

Georgia’s quick moves clearly caught Russian peacekeeping forces there
off guard. They were soon trapped, without a chance for "a timely
withdrawal or assistance" for almost a day. They had to burn secret
documents lest they fall into Georgian hands. And the only person
who did flee in a timely manner was republic President Eduard Kokoita.

Clearly, tactical intelligence broke down, Yermolin argues, but so
too did strategic intelligence at the level of Russia’s national
command center. On August 8th, President Dmitry Medvedev was at a
recreation facility in Samara oblast, while Prime Minister Vladimir
Putin and Russian Security Council secretary Nikolai Patrushev were
at the Beijing Olympics.

They clearly had not been given a head’s up about what the Georgians
were about to do, Yermolin suggests, or at least one of them – perhaps
Patrushev – would have been in Moscow or at a military facility in
the North Caucasus Military District.

Thus, Yermolin continues, it turns out that "it is easier to spy in
Senegal than in Georgia." Or "in a word, neither from Tbilisi, nor
from the observation posts, nor from the raids of special forces, nor
from the air, nor from the cosmos, nor from our remarkable ‘spies,’
nor from anywhere else came to Moscow the signal about the invasion
being planned."

Indeed, as far as one can tell, Yermolin suggests, those who were
watching television or listening to the radio may have known about
Georgian plans at nearly the same instant that Medvedev, Putin the
other senior leaders in Moscow did, a serious intelligence failure
given Russian involvement in the region.

The only place where the security agencies demonstrated their "skills"
during the start of this crisis was in seizing "Georgian spies in
Moscow." With regard to providing the kind of warning intelligence
services are supposed to provide, they did "not a thing if one judges
by the results."

What might have happened in the Russian intelligence services
had worked more effectively? Moscow could have raised an alarm
diplomatically and reinforced its position on the ground in Ossetia
militarily. Tbilisi would certainly have denied that it planned to
do anything and complained yet again about what Moscow was doing.

But – and in Yermolin’s view, this is the important thing – with good
intelligence, Moscow would not have yielded the initiative to the
Georgians and would thus have been in a position to defend Russia’s
interests in the region with much less loss of life and much less
loss of its political position.

There is of course one possible justification for Putin to hand out
these awards to his colleagues in the intelligence business: Some of
them may have been involved in "convincing the Georgian leader and
his generals that Moscow would not risk introducing forces on the
territory of Georgia." For such an effort, Yermolin says, it is of
course "possible to give awards."

Will the CIS Become a Collateral Victim of Russian Aggression?

August 12, 2008

Georgian President Mihkiel Saakashvili said today that Georgia will
"finally" leave the Russian-dominated Commonwealth of Independent
States (CIS) as a way of underscoring that "the USSR will never again
return." And he called on Ukraine and other countries which are now
members to do the same.

Saakashvili’s statement came in an emotional address to his
country’s parliament during which he also labeled Russian
troops in Abkhazia and South Ossetia "occupation forces"
( ). Given recent events,
Saakashvili’s remarks come as no surprise, but they call attention
to something Moscow has been reluctant to acknowledge.

Not only have Russian actions called into question Moscow’s insistence
that it can be an honest broker in regional disputes and that it will
operate within the principles of international law, but these actions
have highlighted the new reality that many of the CIS countries are
anything but enthusiastic about what Moscow has just done.

In a survey posted online yesterday, Fontanka.ru’s Mariya Tsygankova
pointed out that the former Soviet republics have not supported
Russian actions to the extent that Moscow had hoped. Belarus and
Moldova "have not supported Russia openly despite expectations"
in the Russian capital that they would do precisely that
().

To no one’s surprise, the three Baltic countries which are in NATO and
the EU but not the CIS took the lead in condemning Moscow’s actions,
but Ukraine staked out a harder line than many had thought possible,
Azerbaijan backed Georgia’s territorial integrity, while Armenia
called for vigilance in case Baku should try to exploit the situation
over Karabakh.

In Central Asia, Kyrgyzstan called for consultations, while
Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan have been silent,
while Kazakhstan’s Nursultan Nazarbayev backed Moscow’s actions
() but in words that suggested he
was less than fully in accord with what Moscow has done than Moscow
would like, according to Tsygankova.

In short, the media commentator points out, the post-Soviet states
in general and the CIS members in particular are very much divided,
a reality Moscow has no interest in calling attention to and one that
Saakashvili’s statement today could have the effect of exacerbating
at least in the short term.

The reaction of Belarus must have been especially offensive to
Moscow. On the one hand, "official Minsk" in the words of Tsygankova
indicated that it was most concerned about the fate of its own
nationals in Georgia. And on the other, a foreign ministry spokesman
called for "an immediate cease fire" and "the peaceful and civilized
path" of negotiations.

Given these attitudes, it is possible that one or more of the other
countries might follow Georgia out, although there is certain to be
pressure from Moscow against any such step and there may be pressure
from the United States as well, even against the decision that
Saakashvili clearly indicates Tbilisi has already taken.

After all, Georgia did not want to join the CIS in 1991 and was more
or less compelled to do so by the United States which believed that
at a minimum that body could serve as a kind of divorce court or
coordinating agency that would soften the landing of the Russian
Federation and other countries after the break-up of the USSR.

But Moscow’s actions have emboldened some in the Russian capital to
look at the CIS not as a means of coping with the end of empire but
as an institution that can serve as the basis for the rise of a new
USSR. Indeed, one article posted on a pro-communist website today made
precisely that argument (forum.msk.ru/material/fpolitic/513099.html).

In it, economist Vladislav Fel’dblyum argues that the post-Soviet
states cannot overcome their current problems economic or political
without coming back together into a single entity, one that he suggests
should bear the name "the Strategic Union of Sovereign Republics" –
or USSR according to the acronym of the Russian term.

Such proposals – and it is unlikely that they enjoy the support of the
top Russian leaders even though Vladimir Putin has described the end
of the Soviet Union as "the greatest tragedy of the 20th century –
may contribute to Russian overreaching, but they will add weight to
Georgian arguments that leaving the CIS is now in the best interests
of some of its current members.

Russian TV’s Distorted Coverage of Georgia Forces Many to Turn to
Internet, Western Broadcasts

August 12, 2008

Russian television, the most influential media channel in that country,
has so distorted what is taking place in Georgia in the course of its
"construction" of reality there that Russians who want to know what
is really happening have been forced to turn to the Internet or,
as during the Cold War, to Western broadcasters such as Radio Liberty.

In an analysis which was posted on Fontanka.ru today, media critic
Sergey Ilchenko observes that "facts, especially in our days,
do not exist on the television screen ‘in a pure form,’ separate
from interpretation and commentary" as Russian TV’s approach
to Georgia has clearly demonstrated over the last five days
().

Catastrop hes and conflicts, he points out, are "constructed" by
television whose editors and reporters "ever more frequently appear
in the role of directors of reality," as the movie "Wagging the Dog"
and Russian coverage of the war in Georgia show to the satisfaction
of anyone who cares to pay attention.

But what is striking, Ilchenko suggests about this, is how unoriginal
Russian television has been. "The way in which leading television
channels in Russia have covered military actions in South Ossetia
recalls the work of TV journalists during the second Chechen campaign
and the seizure of the school in Beslan."

The only difference is that "This time in the role of enemies of
Russia and all progressive humanity appear not Chechen militants
or abstract ‘international terrorists’ but Georgian soldiers and
President Saakashvili personally, who has been transformed by the
efforts of the domestic propaganda machine into something between
Hitler and Pinochet."

Russia’s military correspondents have been doing a good job, Ilchenko
hastens to say, but those sitting in Moscow offices understand that
"on the basis of one and the same data, contemporary television can
create two totally opposite ‘texts.’" If necessary, "Georgian forces
in the blink of an eye can become angels" or equivalents of the
"punitive agencies of the SS."

"From the very beginning," Ilchenko continues, "Russian media occupied
a radically anti-Georgian position," one that was striking even though
Moscow media had never been pro-Georgian. And Russian TV did everything
it could to present Georgian forces as "Hitlerites" and Saakashvili as
"a hysterical fuehrer."

But Russian television did more than that to distort the situation, the
media critic says. It created an image of the situation in Georgia in
which some kind of "dues ex machine" would have to appear – and just
such a person was on offer: Vladimir Putin, who could be presented
as the savior of the situation.

Because the distortions of Russian television were so obvious to anyone
who cared to reflect, Zoya Svetova and Dar’ya Okunyeva of "Novyye
izvestiya" write today, thoughtful Russians quickly recognized that
the only place in the Russian media where there could be a serious
discussion is the Internet ().

"The information deficit" left by the official government media "is
in part being filled by the Internet," they write. "There are sharp
arguments in the blogosphere, communities of opponents and supporters
of continuing military operations are forming." And many extremely
interesting and valuable pieces of reporting are contained in these
online discussions.

Having noted that so far "pacifist attitudes" predominate on line,
Svetova and Okunyeva point out that "net surfers, who in [Russia]
do not represent more than 25 percent of the population do not set
the tone." And they suggest that "in the near future one should expect
not anti-war but patriotic and pro-Russian statements" to predominate
there as well.

But many of the articles posted online do provide remarkable details
about the situation in Georgia and the background of the current
crisis. One of the more interesting offerings in this regard is by
Dmitry Tayevsky, who writes for the Siberian news agency Babr.ru
which is based in Irkutsk (babr.ru/?pt=news&event=v1&IDE=46993).

Am ong other things, he addresses the issue of the number of Russian
passport holders in South Ossetia, a number that Russian officials
from Dmitry Medvedev and Vladimir Putin on down have made central to
their claims that this region must remain under Russian control in
the future.

Not only is South Ossetia famed for continuing to use Soviet-era
postage stamps – something that has attracted the interest of
philatelists, but "it is curious that South Ossetia which is one of
the world leaders in the production of counterfeit dollars with a
great deal of humor deals with the fact of the production of [false]
Russian passports in the republic."

As early as two years ago, Tayevsky says, "the entire Caucasus world
laughed over the reliable but humorous report of an unknown Ossetin
author in which President Kokoita, having received freshly printed
passport number 2 (number one was sent as a gift to Putin) found
instead of his own photograph a portrait of Abraham Lincoln taken
from a one hundred dollar bill."

But there is yet another source that Russians who want to find out what
is going on are turning to. When experts on the post-Soviet space at
Moscow State University wanted to keep track of Georgian developments,
they turned not to Russian media but to the broadcasts of U.S. funded
Radio Liberty ().

Tragically, instead of helping Russians who increasingly cannot learn
the facts from their own media, all too many Western governments –
including the U.S. – have been cutting back on such broadcasts, thereby
unintentionally helping Putin and Medvedev to distort the "reality"
on offer on Russian television far more easily and effectively.

Russian Actions in Georgia Destabilizing the North Caucasus

August 12, 2008

Moscow’s military actions in Georgia to the surprise of no one
following events in the region are destabilizing the situation in all
the republics of the North Caucasus, exacerbating longstanding problems
in some and creating new threats to stability and Russian control in
others, according to an increasing chorus of Russian commentators.

In today’s "Vremya," Ivan Sukhov is blunt about just how
counterproductive Russian actions in Georgia may be in the North
Caucasus, asserting that "the crisis" in Georgia now "threatens the
stability" of the entire region in ways that Moscow will find very
difficult to counter (vremya.ru/2008/145/4/210203.html).

Pointing out that many of the borders in this region were designed
by Stalin to create tensions rather than resolve them, Sukhov argues
that the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 destroyed the structure
that held them in place and left "several ethno-territorial mines,
some of which blew up already in the late 1990s."

It is critically important to recognize this reality, Sukhov says,
because Moscow has generally ignored the fact that in this region
borders are both barriers and bridges, barriers in the sense that
they lock communities together or apart and bridges in that they
permit problems in one republic under certain conditions to spread
quickly to another.

Moscow has tried to control each of the republics in turn, and in
recent years, it has claimed to have succeeded. But a close look at
the situation, particularly in the wake of Russian military action
in Georgia shows that Moscow’s "successes" have been "illusory"
and can disappear overnight.

The Russian government’s control over Chechnya, for example, "for a
long time was measured by the control of Vladimir Putin over Ramzan
Kadyrov. But "the defect" of this approach was highlighted in May when
"the popularity of Kadyrov ceased to grow because his co-ethnics felt
his own lack of confidence" about who "the lord protector of Chechnya"
now is.

Wealthy and well-placed Chechens began to cut their own deals with
new groups in the Russian capital, Sukhov continues, and "young
people again began to go into the mountains and Russian army columns
again began to be shot at" by these new recruits in their mountain
fastnesses.

"Similar movement within regional elites," Sukhov continues, can
be observed "in other Russian regions," but in the Caucasus they
are exacerbated by the "obvious" links between the Moscow-supported
elites and the anti-Moscow underground: "In a paradoxical way, local
officials are both the main enemy and the main source of financing"
of the latter.

South Ossetian leader Eduard Kokoita, although close to the Russian
siloviki, "just like certain of his colleagues over the mountains
could not but be concerned by the possible change of his lobby ties
in Moscow" following the changeover in the Kremlin, something that may
have been behind his stirring of the pot in order to save his own skin.

And both because of what the events in Georgia say about Russia and
because of the refugee flows that Russian military action there have
provoked, many places in the North , particularly North Ossetia,
Ingushetia and Daghestan will be destabilized both ideologically
and practically.

Finally, Sukhov notes, "the reports about the formation of volunteer
units in Daghestan and Makhachkala testify about two things (among
which is no f fraternal feeling to the people of Ossetia. First, local
politicians are remaining the Kremlin about themselves and second,
the North Caucasus remains a place where significant groups of armed
people can assemble and move about – without any clarity as to whom
they are subordinate."

"It is difficult to imagine that someone in Russia or beyond its
borders can be cheered by this reality."

Two other articles today not only provide evidentiary support for
all of Sukhov’s contentions but also offer additional reasons for
thinking that the events in Georgia represent a lighted match that
is going to land in the increasingly combustible social and political
situations in the republics of the North Caucasus.

In the one, Abdulla Istamulov, the head of the SK-Strategy
Analytic Center, argues that the driving force of the opposition
to Russian control no longer consists of traditional ethnic
groups but rather ideologically defined bands, making it
easier for developments in one republic to jump to another
( interview_banda_silnee_roda/).

And in the other, Igor Boykov points out that Russian officials
have now acknowledged that they and the government they thought
they controlled in Makhachkala is "losing the ideological war to the
underground bands of Wahhabis" in Daghestan, thus threatening Russian
control there as well ().

Ho w Well Have Russian Forces Performed in Georgia?

August 11, 2008

Given the enormous imbalance in numbers and arms of Russian and
Georgian forces, the advance of the former in South Ossetia and
beyond surprised no one. But Russian experts are already debating
how well Russian forces performed given the nature of their tasks,
which so far have been limited, and the quality of their opponent,
which they do not rate highly.

In an interview posted on the Kreml.org website yesterday, Anatoly
Tsyganok, a retired officer who heads the center for military
forecasting at the Moscow Institute of Political and Military Analysis,
argued that Russian forces had performed impressively quickly and
extraordinarily well ().

But in an article carried on the anti-Kremlin website Forum.msk.ru,
Maksim Kalashnikov, who writes frequently on military affairs,
suggests that the Russian military’s performance in this first
war between former Soviet republics and in the first Russian
conflict with a regular army since 1969 was not impressive
(forum.msk.ru/material/power/512073.htm l).

For his part, Tsyganok points to three things to justify his conclusion
that the Russian military prepared well. First, he says, the Georgians
had a good plan, one based on Pentagon plans for operations in Serbia
in the 1990s, and thus presented a challenge to Russian forces out
of proportion to their numbers.

Second, he notes, the Russian military responded quickly. "No one
expected that Russia would so quickly become involved in an armed
conflict between Georgia and South Ossetia and thereby undercut
Georgian plans for a lightning-fast war." But political Moscow made
the decision and the Russian military responded incredibly fast.

The reason? Georgian actions constituted "a moment of truth for
Moscow," one in which the authorities had to choose between the
problems military action would create for Russia around the world and
"the physical liquidation" of South Ossetia, something that would be
from Moscow’s point of view "still worse."

And third, again despite expectations in Tbilisi and elsewhere, Russian
forces in the Northern Caucasus were ready to move. They left their
bases less than five hours after the order was given, their training
mean that they did not suffer the kind of losses many in Georgia had
thought they would, and they achieved their objectives promptly.

One of the reasons for this success, Tsyganok says, is that the 58th
Army had just completed a few days earlier the Caucasus 2008 exercises
and thus was ready to take the field especially against an opponent
like the Georgian military so much smaller and more poorly equipped
than itself.

There are more than 100,000 Russian troops in the North Caucasus
military district, with some 620 tanks, 200 armored personal carriers,
and 875 pieces of artillery. While not all of the men or materiel
were available for the operation in Georgia, he notes, enough were
to overwhelm the 35,000-man Georgian army with its 160 tanks.

Indeed, one measure of just how pressed Georgian forces immediately
and unexpectedly became was a decision by Tbilisi to withdraw
its 2,000-man contingent from the American-led forces in Iraq, a
withdrawal that Tsyganok implies won’t matter all that much on the
ground but is symbolically important. (For a map of these forces,
see shurigin.livejournal.com/153936.html.)

Kalashniko v does not so much challenge the points Tsyganok makes
as advances other considerations that he believes suggest that the
Russian military’s performance in Georgia, while victorious so far,
is far from the level that Moscow propagandists and many observers
have been claiming.

According to Kalashnikov, Moscow has had six years to prepare for a
response to or an intervention against Georgia but did "practically
nothing" to get ready for either eventuality. Nowhere is that failure
more obvious, he says, than in the failure of Russian forces to
use air power to knock out key Georgian institutions and especially
Georgian artillery.

The Russian forces did not fly a sufficient number of sorties to
do either, he continues, and they lacked the pilotless drones that
could have allowed Russian artillery to attack Georgian targets more
effectively. And that meant that Russian forces suffered more delay
and losses from Georgian artillery than was necessary.

Instead of relying on airport to deal a knockout blow to the enemy,
Kalashnikov says, Russian commanders relied on the notion that if
Moscow introduces tanks in sufficient number, the opposition will
simply "raise its hands" in surrender – even though that "did not
work in Afghanistan in the 1980s or in Chechnya in 1995."

As a result, he argues, there is a very real danger that the war
between Russia and Georgia will drag on, with the possibility that
the United States will resupply Georgia or provide it with various
kinds of technologies that Russian forces are not currently capable
of neutralizing except at the cost of far greater losses than they
have suffered up to now.

——————————————– ————————————

Paul Goble is director of research and publications at the Azerbaijan
Diplomatic Academy. Earlier, he served as vice dean for the social
sciences and humanities at Audentes University in Tallinn and a senior
research associate at the EuroCollege of the University of Tartu in
Estonia. While there, he launched the "Window on Eurasia" series. Prior
to joining the faculty there in 2004, he served in various capacities
in the U.S. State Department, the Central Intelligence Agency and the
International Broadcasting Bureau as well as at the Voice of America
and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and at the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace. He writes frequently on ethnic and religious
issues and has edited five volumes on ethnicity and religion in
the former Soviet space. Trained at Miami University in Ohio and
the University of Chicago, he has been decorated by the governments
of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania for his work in promoting Baltic
independence and the withdrawal of Russian forces from those formerly
occupied lands.

GEORGIA’S DREAM IS SHATTERED, BUT IT ONLY HAS ITSELF TO BLAME
Christopher Langton

The National
Aug 13, 2008
United Arab Emirates

It happened finally. Mikheil Saakashvili’s government in Georgia
decided to try and retake the separatist province of South Ossetia
by force. This was a massive miscalculation by Georgia. Russia was
looking for an excuse to stamp its authority on the South Caucasus
having become increasingly angered by the imminent Nato membership
of Georgia as well as growing western interest in the region. Russia
claims that it acted in response to the Georgian assault on the South
Ossetian capital, Tskhinvali, in order to protect its citizens in
the separatist region.

These citizens, who are actually Georgian nationals although ethnically
Ossetian, gained Russian citizenship when Moscow issued passports to
many of them whilst cynically upholding the notion of the territorial
integrity of Georgia. The issuing of Russian passports to citizens
of both South Ossetia and Abkhazia, the other separatist region, is
at odds with the principle of "territorial integrity" and indicates
the true Russian intention – to maintain a physical presence in the
South Caucasus. Moscow wants a bastion against Nato, but also acted
out of a machoistic sense of regaining pride lost when the Soviet
Union collapsed and former territories became independent.

None of the actors in this drama can claim to be right. Georgia acted
disproportionately and unnecessarily and is now worse off than it
was before, with a large number of internally displaced people to
add to those from previous conflicts. Its aspirations towards Nato
membership and a closer relationship with Europe are in doubt. (Despite
its criticism of Russia’s role in the crisis, Nato members are likely
to view the irresponsible and ill-considered actions of Tbilisi with
dismay). Russia invaded the territory of a sovereign state and used
disproportionate and sometimes indiscriminate force – particularly
air power.

The US, which has the most influence over Saakashvili, could have at
least restrained Tbilisi’s actions. Europe, too, has influence but
failed to use it. The West stood and watched as Tbilisi ratcheted
up its military activity and rhetoric, but failed to prevent the
crisis. Now it is the western partners of Georgia who most probably
will be called upon to rebuild the country once Russia has finished
its punitive actions.

Abkhaz and Russian forces are completing the tearing up of the
1994 Moscow Agreement which governs the peace process in Abkhazia by
removing Georgian forces from the Kodori Valley in Georgia’s Svanetian
region. This will effectively re-establish Abkhazia as it was before
the break up of the Soviet Union.

Through its actions in South Ossetia, Georgia has lost any moral
position it had in relation to its two separatist regions; the
painstaking peace processes that started between 1992 and 1994 are in
tatters. In both regions there is a growing sense that their future
lies with or within Russia and not with Georgia and her partners.

The presence of 3,000 Russian troops in Abkhazia underwrites the
security of that territory and may lead the Abkhaz leadership to
request the withdrawal of the UN Observer Mission (UNOMIG). And the
Russian troops from the 58th Army who are now ensconced in South
Ossetia are likely to stay for the foreseeable future – as will the
Russian military contingent in Abkhazia.

What happens next? For Georgia the dream that followed the 2003
Rose Revolution of a united country within the western community has
been shattered. By any normal calculation, President Saakashvili’s
unpredictable and emotional behaviour, which has damaged his country
irreparably, would lead to his removal. However, for the moment at
least it appears that the Georgian people support him as he vows to
continue the struggle against Russian domination.

For Russia there is an extension of influence into the energy corridor
of the West and an iron grip on the South Caucasus. Paradoxically, the
Russian war in Georgia is likely to have had the effect of reducing the
likelihood of conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh. It will have also secured
the region for the Winter Olympics in Sochi in 2014, by removing any
destabilising threat.

There will have to be a re-appraisal of Moscow’s relationship with
Washington and Europe, of course. The architect of the Russian action
was former President Vladimir Putin, who has long wanted to be seen
as the strongman underwriting Russia’s renewed great power status
against the US and its partners.

Given the virulent rhetoric of both Medvedev and Saakashvili towards
each other it is hard to see how there can possibly be a return to
the "status quo ante bellum" and a resumption of the peace processes
governing the two conflict zones in Georgia. There will most likely
be some kind of talks, possibly brokered by France along the lines
put forward by the French foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner.

However, having gone so far in achieving long sought after objectives,
Moscow is unlikely to continue to uphold the idea of "territorial
integrity" enshrined in the 1994 Moscow Agreement. President
Saakashvili, for his part, will continue to demand the return of the
territories as he has promised to the Georgian people.

With positions entrenched in this way there is likely to be a
long-lasting stalemate. Georgia has lost any ability it had to get back
South Ossetia and Abkhazia by force. These regions will most likely
become more independent – with or without international recognition –
and Russian dominance over them will strengthen, with the possibility
of South Ossetia uniting with North Ossetia in the Russian Federation.

Col Christopher Langton is Senior Fellow for Conflict & Defence
Diplomacy at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, London

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

EU DIPLOMATS WARY OF RUSSIA CONTROVERSY

BusinessWeek
August 13, 2008, 1:58PM EST

An EU declaration will fall short of Georgia’s hopes, offering
humanitarian aid but not blaming either Russia or Georgia for the
conflict

The French EU presidency is expected to endorse the Russia-Georgia
ceasefire, offer humanitarian aid and urge EU unity in a statement
after an EU foreign ministers meeting on Wednesday (13 August),
with Paris keen to avoid controversy on who to blame for the crisis.

Preparatory discussions by EU diplomats on Tuesday saw a group of
former communist states speak in "sharp language" about Russia, but
the tone was "less radical than they used for their domestic press,"
one diplomat who attended the debates told EUobserver.

"The presidency thinks, right now, it’s better to focus on
problem-solving, rather than trying to go into characterisation of
the war, who started what, who reacted, and the EU is united behind
the idea," he added. "The presidency wants to preserve as much room
for manoeuvre for future mediation as possible."

Wednesday’s EU statement will probably be a French declaration rather
than a formal joint position by all 27 countries, an EU official said.

"The situation is still evolving. It’s not black and white. Of course,
Georgia made some mistakes, Russia made some mistakes. But the idea
now is to help mediation, to see what we can do from a humanitarian
point of view."

The declaration is likely to fall short of Georgian hopes, with
Georgia’s EU ambassador, Salome Samadashvili, saying she would
like the EU to label Russia’s behaviour as an "act of aggression,"
condemn the bombing of the Georgian town of Gori, cast doubt on
EU-Russia negotiations on a new strategic pact and reaffirm Georgia’s
territorial integrity.

The foreign ministers meeting will begin with a briefing by France’s
Bernard Kouchner, who came to Brussels from Tbilisi on Tuesday night
after taking part in talks between French president Nicolas Sarkozy
and Georgian president Mikhail Saakashvili.

Russia and Georgia on Tuesday signed a Russian-drafted, six-point
ceasefire plan which calls for troops to pull back and for
international talks about the "modalities of security and stability"
in Georgian separatist regions.

Shockwaves

The five day war erupted when Georgia fired on Russia-backed rebels
in the Georgian province of South Ossetia last Friday (8 August)
and Russia launched a massive retaliation, moving tanks deep into
Georgian territory, mobilising its navy and ordering bombing raids.

The fighting killed hundreds of civilians and shocked former communist
EU states, as well as Ukraine, Moldova, Armenia and Azerbaijan, some
of which fear that a newly-assertive Russia will try to undermine
other pro-western neighbours in future.

"The EU should say ‘no’ [to Russia’s subjugation of Georgia] and push
Russia out. This means tough language, sanctions [against Russia]
and quick EU humanitarian intervention," a diplomat from one of the
former communist EU states said, looking at the EU’s policy options
down the line.

The Russian incursion into Georgia was clearly "military aggression"
and should bear "costs" in terms of EU-Russia relations, but a
suspension of the current Partnership and Cooperation Agreement or
of military cooperation would be ineffective, European Council on
Foreign Relations analyst, Nicu Popescu, said.

The EU’s main focus should instead be the swift deployment of an
impartial, international peacekeeping force made up of UN or EU
soldiers and civilian monitors followed by a donors’ conference to
help rebuild the war zone, he advised.

"The first lesson of this crisis is that the old policy of
EU non-engagement has encouraged both parties to escalate their
actions. From an EU perspective, the first casualty is the theory that
by getting more involved in Georgia, the EU will irritate Russia and
provoke instability."

Mr Sarkozy in Moscow on Tuesday spoke of the possibility of an EU
peacekeeping mission, with Estonia quickly offering to send troops.

Peacekeeping conundrum

But creating a force that will be acceptable to all sides could prove
hard, with Russia’s NATO ambassador, Dmitry Rogozin, on Tuesday
ruling out any Georgian component, while Ms Samadashvili said no
Russian troops can take part.

Last year, Russia and Estonia were involved in an ugly row
over Tallinn’s decision to move a Soviet-era statue from its city
centre. And the current Russia-Georgia conflict has injected bitterness
into international relations beyond Europe.

Russia’s Mr Rogozin at a briefing in Brussels on Tuesday complained
that NATO had listened to Georgian delegates but failed to convene a
NATO Russia Council as planned, implying that Georgia ally, the US,
secretly knew about Georgia’s plans to attack the South Ossetia rebels
last week.

"I suspect the American allies will be ashamed to discuss this with
their European colleagues," he said.

AFTERNOON OLYMPIC

WJBF-TV
Aug 13, 2008 – 02:17 PM
GA

The latest from the Beijing Olympic Games

MEN’S SWIMMING: Sullivan, Bernard trade world record in 100 free

BEIJING (AP) – Eamon Sullivan has taken back the world record in the
100-meter freestyle semifinals at the Beijing Olympics, about two
minutes after Frenchman Alain Bernard lowered it.

Sullivan won his heat Wednesday morning in 47.05 seconds, topping
Bernard’s time of 47.20 set in the first semifinal.

They both went under the mark of 47.24 set by Sullivan during the
leadoff leg of the 400 free relay on Monday.

It’s the fifth time this year that Sullivan and Bernard have traded
the record.

WOMEN’S SWIMMING: Pellegrini wins Olympic 200 free with world mark

BEIJING (AP) – Federica Pellegrini of Italy has won the 200-meter
freestyle at the Beijing Olympics, lowering her own world record set
a day earlier.

She won in 1 minute, 54.82 seconds, erasing her previous time of
1:55.45.

Sara Isakovic of Slovenia took the silver in 1:54.97. Pang Jiaying
of China earned the bronze in 1:55.05, giving the Chinese women their
first swimming medal of these games.

American Katie Hoff finished fourth in 1:55.78, the first time in
three events she failed to medal.

WOMEN’S SWIMMING: Rice wins another IM gold

BEIJING (AP) – Stephanie Rice of Australia has won the 200-meter
individual medley at the Beijing Olympics, lowering her own world
record and adding to her victory in the 400 IM.

She won in 2 minutes, 8.45 seconds, erasing her mark of 2:08.92 set
at the Australian trials in March.

Kirsty Coventry of Zimbabwe took the silver in 2:08.59, also below
the previous world record. Natalie Coughlin of the United States won
the bronze in 2:10.34, her third medal of the games.

American Katie Hoff picked up her second fourth-place of the morning,
finishing behind Coughlin in 2:10.68. She also was just out of the
medals in the 200 freestyle.

MEN’S VOLLEYBALL: Georgia beats Russia in beach volleyball

BEIJING (AP) – Cristine Santanna and Andrezza Martins, native
Brazilians playing for Georgia at the Olympics, rallied to a three-set
victory over Russia, advancing to the medal round and sending a proud
message to their adopted and war-torn homeland.

The Georgian team rallied Wednesday from a sloppy 21-10 loss in the
first set to win the next two, 22-20 and 15-12, and beat Alexandra
Shiryaeva and Natalia Uryadova.

Although they made just a few short visits to the country to obtain
their new passports, Santanna and Martins took on the nicknames Saka
and Rtvelo, "Georgia," in Georgian, out of affection for the land
that allowed them to qualify for the Olympics.

BASEBALL: Taiwanese baseball Olympian fails drug test

TAIPEI, Taiwan (AP) – A Taiwanese baseball player has been banned
from participating in the team’s first Olympic game after failing a
drug test.

Taiwan Baseball Association Secretary-General Lin Tsung-cheng said that
third baseman Chang Tai-shan did not suit up for Wednesday’s opener
against the Netherlands after the International Olympic Committee
informed the association of the test results.

Taiwan is one of eight baseball teams participating in the Beijing
Games. The sport is widely popular on the island and millions of fans
follow the team.

WOMEN’S CYCLING: Armstrong wins time trial gold for United States

BEIJING (AP) – Kristin Armstrong of the United States has won the gold
medal in the women’s time trial, making her just the second American
women’s cyclist ever to become an Olympic champion.

Armstrong finished the 14.6-mile course in 34 minutes, 51.72
seconds Wednesday, 24.29 seconds better than Emma Pooley of Great
Britain. Switzerland’s Karin Thuerig was third, almost a minute behind
the time set by Armstrong.

Armstrong was the only woman close to Pooley at the halfway mark, and
erased the gap before reaching the finish at the Great Wall. She joins
Connie Carpenter-Phinney as the only American women to win Olympic
cycling gold; Carpenter won the road race at Los Angeles 24 years ago.

WOMEN’S SOFTBALL: Osterman, Bustos power US past Australia

BEIJING (AP) – Cat Osterman pitched a no-hitter, Crystl Bustos hit a
two-run homer and the U.S. softball team extended its Olympic winning
streak to 16 games with a 3-0 win over Australia on Wednesday.

The Americans are seeking a fourth straight gold medal.

Osterman was locked in a pitcher’s duel for four innings with Tanya
Harding, who had handed the U.S. team two of its four losses in the
games since 1996. Osterman struck out 13 as the Americans posted
their 14th shutout during the winning streak.

Natasha Watley’s RBI single off Harding snapped a 0-0 tie in the fifth,
and Bustos connected for her 10th career Olympic homer in the sixth.

MEN’S DIVING: China makes it 4-for-4 at the diving pool

BEIJING (AP) – China kept up its dominance at the diving pool,
completing a sweep of the synchronized events with a runaway win in
men’s 3-meter springboard Wednesday.

Wang Feng and Qin Kai had the highest-scoring dive in each of the six
rounds, piling up a total of 469.08 points. The Chinese are halfway to
their goal of sweeping all eight diving golds in their home country,
where the sport is immensely popular.

Dmitry Sautin, 34 and competing in his fifth Olympics, added an eighth
medal to his collection, teaming with 18-year-old Yuriy Kunakov to
take silver with a mark of 421.98. Illya Kvasha and Oleksiy Prygorov
of the Ukraine claimed the bronze at 415.05.

The Americans, Chris Colwill and Jevon Tarantino, were third going
to the final round. But Tarantino botched his entry and they slipped
to fourth, 410.73.

MEN’S CYCLING: Cancellara wins men’s road time-trial

JUYONGGUAN, China (AP) – Fabian Cancellara of Switzerland has won
gold in the Olympic men’s road cycling time-trial, completing the
47.3-kilometer (29.4-mile) course in 1 hour, 2 minutes, 11.43 seconds.

The medal is the second for world champion Cancellara in Beijing. He
took the bronze in the men’s road race on Saturday.

Gustav Larsson of Sweden took the silver Wednesday and Levi Leipheimer
of the United States the bronze on the course in the shadow of the
Great Wall, northeast of Beijing.

Thirty-nine riders from 29 countries took part in Wednesday’s
competition.

WOMEN’S WEIGHTLIFTING: China’s Liu breaks 3 weightlifting records

BEIJING (AP) – Liu Chunhong broke three world records in the women’s
69-kilogram division, defending her Olympic title to win China’s
sixth gold medal in the weightlifting competition.

Liu set a new high score of 128 kg (282.2 pounds) in her third attempt
in the snatch Wednesday. She then lifted 158 kg (348.3 pounds) to
set a new top mark in the clean and jerk.

Her total of 286 kg (630.52 pounds) also was a world record, beating
the previous mark by an astounding 10 kg (22.1 pounds).

World champion Oxana Slivenko of Russia was a distant second, lifting
a total of 255 kg (562.17 pounds). Ukraine’s Natalya Davydova took
the bronze.

WRESTLING: Guenot wins 1st French wrestling gold in 84 years

BEIJING (AP) – Steeve Guenot, a railway worker with little government
athletic subsidy, has won France’s first Olympic wrestling gold medal
in 84 years by taking the Greco-Roman 66-kilogram weight class.

Guenot, whose brother Christophe wrestled for a bronze at 74 kg,
defeated Kanatbek Begaliev 3-0, 3-1. Begaliev was trying for
Kyrgyzstan’s first Olympic gold medal.

France hadn’t won a wrestling gold since Henri Deglane took the 82
kg class in the 1924 Paris Olympics.

Winning the bronzes were Ukraine’s Armen Vardanyan and Mikhail
Siamionau of Belarus.

The field became wide open when Farid Mansurov, the 2004 Olympic
champion from Azerbaijan, lost 3-0, 3-0 to Vardanyan in the first
round. Mansurov didn’t lose a period while winning last year’s world
championship.

MEN’S SOCCER: 10-man Cameroon holds Italy to 0-0 draw

TIANJIN, China (AP) – Cameroon held Italy to a 0-0 draw Wednesday
despite playing the final 58 minutes with 10 men, a result that
sent the Africans to the quarterfinals of the men’s Olympic football
tournament along with the Azzurrini.

Italy, which claimed a bronze at the 2004 Olympics in Athens and
finished fifth at Sydney in 2000, already had clinched its place in
the final eight. As Group D winner, it will will face the runner-up
from Group C on Saturday in Beijing.

Cameroon finished second in the group and will face the Group C winner,
likely Brazil, on Saturday in Shenyang.

Both awaited the results of matches later Wednesday to confirm their
opponents.

MEN’S SOCCER: South Korea beats Honduras 1-0 but out of Olympics

SHANGHAI, China (AP) – Kim Dong-jin has fired South Korea to a 1-0
victory over Honduras, but it wasn’t enough to capture a place in
the quarterfinal of the Olympic soccer competition.

Kim’s 23rd-minute goal at the Shanghai Olympic Stadium meant the
South Koreans ended up with four points from their three Group D
games but stayed third behind Italy and Cameroon, who qualified for
the last eight.

The Koreans missed many more chances against the Hondurans, who
finished last in the group after three defeats and without a goal.

MEN’S WRESTLING: Kvirkelia wins Georgia’s 1st wrestling gold

BEIJING (AP) – Manuchar Kvirkelia has turned two strong moves into
a two-period victory over China’s Chang Yongxiang in the Greco-Roman
74-kilogram weight class, giving Georgia its first Olympic wrestling
gold medal.

Kvirkelia’s decisive 6-0, 3-0 victory Wednesday came in the same
week Russian troops stormed through Georgia. The gold also was the
country’s first in Beijing.

Kvirkelia used a 5-point throw to prematurely end the first period. Any
period ends when a wrestler takes a 6-0 lead.

He added a 2-point throw on a gut wrench in the second to clearly
frustrate Chang, who settled for silver.

The bronze medalists were Christophe Guenot, whose brother Steeve won
France’s first wrestling gold in 84 years at 66 kg minutes before,
and 2007 world champion Yavor Yanakiev of Bulgaria.

MEN’S SCOOER: US out after 2-1 Olympic soccer loss to Nigeria

BEIJING (AP) – Promise Isaac and Victor Obinna scored Wednesday to
lead Nigeria over 10-man United States 2-1, earning a place in the
quarterfinals of the Olympic soccer tournament and eliminating the
Americans.

Isaac scored in the 39th minute with an easy tap-in off Chinedu Ogbuke
Obasi’s centering pass, and Obinna curled a right-footed shot into
the top of goal in the 80th.

Sacha Kljestan converted an 88th-minute penalty for the Americans
and substitute Benny Feilhaber headed onto the post in the 90th, as
the United States was eliminated from Group B after the Netherlands
beat Japan.

The Americans played with 10 men from the third minute when defender
Michael Orozco was ejected.

WOMEN’S JUDO: Ueno wins Japan’s third judo gold at Olympics

BEIJING (AP) – Masae Ueno won Japan’s third gold on the judo mats
Wednesday, defending her 2004 Olympic gold with a match-ending throw
less than one minute into her final with Cuba’s Anaysi Hernandez in
the women’s 70-kilogram class.

Winning bronze were Ronda Rousey of the United States, who scored
early with a yuko and held on to defeat Germany’s Annett Boehm,
and Edith Bosch of the Netherlands with an ippon throw over Spain’s
Leire Iglasias.

Rousey’s bronze was the first Olympic medal in women’s judo for the
U.S. since the event was put on the official schedule in 1992.

Judo awards two bronze medals in each weight class.

MEN’S SWIMMING: Phelps qualifies 6th-fastest in Olympic 200 IM

BEIJING (AP) – Michael Phelps has qualified sixth-fastest in the
200-meter individual medley at the Beijing Olympics.

The American ended a golden day at the pool by winning his preliminary
heat in 1 minute, 58.65 seconds Wednesday night, good enough to move
on to the semifinals.

Phelps’ teammate Ryan Lochte led all qualifiers in 1:58.15. Laszlo
Cseh of Hungary, already a two-time silver medalist behind Phelps in
the 400 IM and 200 butterfly, was third in 1:58.79.

Earlier in the day, Phelps claimed two more gold medals, making him
5-for-5 at these games, with world records in each victory. Overall,
his 11 career gold medals make him the winningest Olympian in history.

MEN’S WEIGHTLIFTING: South Korea’s Sa Jae-hyouk wins weightlifting gold

BEIJING (AP) – Sa Jae-hyouk of South Korea stopped China’s gold rush
in weightlifting by edging out home crowd favorite Li Hongli to win
the men’s 77-kilogram division.

Sa and Li both lifted a total of 366 kg (806.9 pounds), but Sa got
the win because of a lower body weight. Armenia’s Gevorg Davtyan took
the bronze, totaling 360 kg (793.7 pounds) in the two events.

China had previously won all six of the weight categories in which
it had participated.

Sa was 3 kg (6.6 pounds) behind Li after lifting 163 kg (359.4 pounds)
in the snatch, but stunned the Chinese crowd by heaving 203 kg (447.5
pounds) in his second clean and jerk.

It was South Korea’s first gold in the weightlifting competition.

BASEBALL: South Korea spoils Americans’ Olympic opener

BEIJING (AP) – Lee Jong-wook hit a sacrifice fly with one out and
South Korea answered the Americans’ ninth-inning rally with one of its
own, beating the United States 8-7 on Wednesday night in a thrilling
Olympic baseball opener.

Lee Taek-keun’s slide home easily beat the throw for the winning run,
and he celebrated on his knees for a long while before getting up to
join his jubilant teammates. The South Koreans then tipped their caps
to all the enthusiastic fans from their homeland. The supporters were
on their feet in the bleachers all night.

The Americans had seemed poised for the comeback victory after Matt
Brown hit a go-ahead two-run single with two outs in the top of the
ninth, but South Korea rallied against closer Jeff Stevens

MEN’S SOCCER: Argentina beats Serbia 2-0 in Olympic soccer

BEIJING (AP) – Ezequiel Lavezzi and Diego Buonanotte each scored
Wednesday night to wrap up Argentina’s perfect group start to the
Olympic soccer tournament with a 2-0 victory over Serbia.

Ezequiel Lavezzi scored from the penalty spot in the 13th minute, and
Buonanotte curled in a free kick in the 81st as defending champion
Argentina, which had already qualified for the last eight, topped
Group A with nine points.

Argentina will next play Group B runner-up and European Under-21
champion Netherlands at Shanghai Stadium on Saturday.

Serbia finished tied with Australia on one point, while Ivory Coast
was runner-up in the group with six points.

MEN’S FENCING: Germany’s Kleibrink wins men’s foil fencing gold

BEIJING (AP) – Benjamin Kleibrink of Germany won the gold medal in
men’s foil fencing with a convincing victory over Japan’s Yuki Ota
on Wednesday night.

Kleibrink defeated Ota 15-9. After the win he dashed toward his
coach and jumped into his arms before returning to the strip. He then
returned to the coach and was again hoisted into the air.

The crowd was entertained when Ota got his sword tangled in the cord
to Kleibrink’s uniform near the end of the match.

Salvatore Sanzo of Italy got the bronze with a 15-14 win over China’s
Zhu Jun. After the last point, Zhu angrily tossed his helmet off and
it rolled off the strip. He quickly composed himself, retrieved it
and shook Sanzo’s hand.

Missing from the event was Italy’s foil star Andre Baldini, who lost
his spot in the Olympics after testing positive for a banned substance.

WOMEN’S FENCING: Germany’s Heidemann wins gold in women’s epee

BEIJING (AP) – Britta Heidemann has won the gold medal in women’s epee,
giving Germany its second first-place fencing finish in one night.

Heidemann defeated Romania’s Ana Maria Branza 15-11 on
Wednesday. Fellow German Benjamin Kleibrink got the gold in men’s
foil in an earlier match.

Heidemann was still holding her sword as several people hugged and
congratulated her. One person then draped a German flag over her
shoulders. Heidemann took gold in the 2007 world championships and
was part of the team that won the silver medal in Athens.

Hungary’s Ildiko Mincza-Nebald got the bronze with a 15-11 win over
Li Na of China.

Li lost 15-10 to Heidemann in the semifinals. Heidemann also beat Li
in the finals of the 2007 world championships.

WOMEN’S BASKETBALL: Leslie perfect as US routs Mali in women’s hoops

BEIJING (AP) – Lisa Leslie sets U.S. Olympic record going 7-for-7
from the field as the women’s team continues its unblemished run
through the Beijing Games with a 97-41 victory against Mali.

Leslie finished with 16 points Wednesday night as the U.S. has now
won 28 straight Olympic contests. The last loss was to the Unified
Team in the semifinals of the 1992 Barcelona Games. The Americans
have run over their first three opponents winning by an average of
47 points. They routed the Czech Republic, China, and now Mali.

The Americans play Spain next on Friday.

GEORGIA’S DEFEAT AND AMERICA’S OPTIONS

Brussels Journal
2008-08-13 18:33
Belgium

What Mikheil Saakashvili began at his discretion, Vladimir Putin ends
at his pleasure. The Russians have called a halt to their offensive
in Georgia, and none too soon for the Georgians. What remains is the
postwar settlement, and the American part in it.

A look at the situation on the ground speaks to the Russian dominance
of the little Caucasian republic: the Russians have near-total freedom
of movement in the western plain, with soldiers in Poti. Georgia’s only
meaningful lifelines to the outside world are the port of Batumi, and
the long road to Yerevan. Neither of these are significant corridors
for supply, and the port is free only at Russian sufferance. Further
war would have seen a battle for Tbilisi in the coming 36 hours. The
Georgians would have lost, and the war thence would probably have
devolved into guerrilla actions centered about a sort of Georgian
national redoubt in the south — in regions populated more by Armenians
and Azeris than by Georgians. To be spared all this is a mercy that
Georgians, rightly inflamed by what’s been done in mere days, may
not fully appreciate.

The postwar settlement remains thoroughly opaque, even if, as the
Russians report, the conditions of a ceasefire are agreed. The Russian
war aim was never announced — or rather, it only announced itself
on the ground — and its political end remains obscure. The formal
disposition of the Russian-occupied secessionist regions of Abkhazia
and South Ossetia must be decided; the mechanisms of reparation,
if any, must be agreed upon; and, most troublingly, the Russians
are making noises about extraditing Saakashvili to the Hague. Here,
a definitive settlement is to everyone’s advantage — not least the
Georgians, who are ill-advised to act as if they are anything but
beaten. Absurdities like putting Saakashvili in the ICC dock should
be rejected, but otherwise, it is almost certainly best to let the
Russians dictate their terms — and let resistance to those terms
emanate from sources able to make that resistance count, like Europe
and the United States.

With this in mind, the first task of America’s postwar policy in
the Caucasus is distasteful in the extreme: pushing the Georgians to
understand and act like what they are, which is a defeated nation in
no position to make demands. This does not square easily with American
sentiment — nor my own — nor with the Vice President’s declaration
that Russia’s aggression "must not go unanswered," nor with John
McCain’s declaration that "today we are all Georgians." Russia’s
aggression and consequent battlefield victory will stand, and as the
last thing the volatile Caucasus needs is yet another revisionist,
revanchist state, it befits a would-be member of the Western alliance
to make its peace with that. However inflammatory the issue of "lost"
Abkhazia and South Ossetia are in the Georgian public square, it is
nothing that the Germans, the Finns, and the Greeks, to name a few,
have not had to come to terms with in the course of their accessions
to the first tier of Western nations. We should not demand less
of Georgia.

The second, and more enduring, task of our policy must be the swift
containment of Russia. I use the term deliberately: to invoke another
Cold War-era phrase, we’re not going to "roll back" any of Russia’s
recent territorial gains, nor should we attempt to reverse what
prosperity it has achieved in the past decade. (That prosperity,
being based mostly upon transitory prices for natural resources, will
itself be transitory in time.) Russia’s leadership has declared that
it seeks the reversal, de facto if not de jure, of the "catastrophe"
of the USSR’s end. Though not marked by any formal decision in the
vein of Versailles, this is nonetheless a strategic outcome that
America has a direct interest in preserving. That interest has only
gone up with the admission of former Soviet-bloc states — and former
Soviet states — to NATO. Inasmuch as Russian revisionism threatens
the alliance that has kept the peace in Europe for generations now,
it must be confronted and deterred.

The obvious question is how this may be done with the tools America
has at hand. It is a media commonplace over the past several days that
the United States has no leverage over Russia. This is false. American
policy can and does tremendously affect several things of tremendous
importance to Moscow. A brief (though not comprehensive) list of
available pressure points follows:

First, the Ukraine. First and foremost, there is no former Soviet state
that Russia wishes to have in its orbit more than the Ukraine. Not
coincidentally, the Ukraine was also the only nation besides the United
States to render Georgia material assistance in this war, when it
threatened to deny Sevastopol to the Russian Black Sea Fleet. European
reluctance to antagonize Russia scuttled the Ukraine’s potential NATO
membership at the NATO Bucharest summit this past spring. In light of
Georgia’s fate, issuance of a MAP, or even outright NATO membership,
to the Ukraine, is an appropriate riposte to Russia’s war. Unlike
Georgia, the Ukraine has no territorial or secessionist issues,
nor an unstable leadership apt to launch unwinnable wars. It does,
though, very much need the sort of guarantee that NATO exists to give.

Second, Russia’s G8 membership. The G8 is purportedly the group
of the world’s largest industrial democracies. Russia, with a GDP
smaller than Spain’s and a per-capita income lower than Gabon’s,
was admitted in 1997 as a means of supporting its integration into
international economic institutions. It’s a privilege, not a right, and
it should be conditioned upon responsible membership in the community
of nations. Expulsion of Russia from the G8 is a longtime policy
favorite of John McCain’s, and it’s time to consider his preference.

Third, Russia’s client states. This is a short list, though
Russian revisionism would wish to see it lengthen. Belarus is by
far Russia’s premier client, followed by varying degrees of Russian
influence over Armenia, Serbia, Azerbaijan, and the central Asian
states. (We’ll exclude here clients like Abkhazia, South Ossetia,
and Transnistria, all of which have statuses that are dubious at
best.) We’ve already seen that Russia reacts to defend Belarus
when the latter is criticized. An available pressure point, then,
is to turn up the heat on the Belarusian regime — specifically with
support of dissidents in Belarus — and link it explicitly to Russia’s
behavior elsewhere.

Fourth, Russia’s dissidents. Russian public life is nowhere near Soviet
depths, but it is nonetheless notable that the Moscow regime places a
premium upon the control of journalistic institutions and media. (A
great, English-language example of the slick and statist nature of
modern Russian media may be found at Russia Today — note the stories
on Georgian "spy rings" and refugees from Georgian aggression fleeing
into Russia.) Divergence from the Putin line is a good way to end up
unemployed or dead, and so we ought to lend what support we may to
independent media personnel — and their means.

Finally, Russia’s Internet. A major tool of Russian foreign policy in
the past few years is what may only be described as cyber-warfare. We
saw it when Russia wished to punish Estonia [pdf], and we saw it again
this week against nearly all of Georgia’s .ge-domain sites. This is
a tremendously thorny problem, both because cyber-war by its nature
affords the perpetrators plausible denial, and because it is quite easy
to respond to a wrong with a wrong — in America’s case, by using its
leverage over Californa-based ICANN to invalidate .ru domains from
which Russian attacks emanate. Here, the basic functionality of the
Internet must be balanced against political concerns — and there
must be some mechanism for determining when political concerns from
nations like Russia damage the basic functionality of the Internet.

Beyond applying pressure to Russia, American policy must focus upon
reassurance to the NATO nations that expressed alarm at Georgia’s
subjugation. NATO allies Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and the
Czech Republic all know quite well what it means to be crushed by
the force of Russian arms, and all were therefore demonstrative in
expressing their dismay at events in Georgia. If NATO and the American
connection in particular is going to retain its meaning for them,
it is up to us to provide the necessary reassurance. Although NATO
is no longer a formally anti-Soviet (and therefore anti-Russian)
alliance, we cannot pretend that it does not hold precisely that
meaning for several of its member states. A failure to recognize this
would concurrently weaken the alliance.

The war in Georgia is done but for the details, and the occasional
sniping. Georgia lost on the first day, and Georgia has mostly —
though not wholly — itself to blame. But if Georgia is prostrate,
America and the West are not. If some good is to come of this,
and if Russia’s adventure in its "near abroad" is to be its last,
we must act decisively — and now.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

US SENDS GEORGIA HELP AS RUSSIA BREAKS CEASEFIRE (2ND ROUNDUP)

Europe News
Aug 13, 2008, 17:54 GMT

Moscow/Tbilisi – A ceasefire ending the Ossetia war was in tatters
on Wednesday with Russian armoured and naval forces violating terms
supposedly agreed upon the day before, and the US announcing it would
send its own naval and air forces to the region.

US President George W Bush announced a sharp response to the Russian
troop and naval movements, declaring America would send its own air
force and fleet to the region ‘for humanitarian purposes.’

A Russian armoured unit shortly after dawn drove into Georgian
border town Gori, entered a Georgian tank base, and was destroying
the installation and carrying off loot, witnesses told Deutsche
Presse-Agentur dpa.

The Russian regular motor rifle unit rode on BMP and BTR armoured
personnel carriers and, according to soldiers interviewed, had spent
four days driving from Chechnya to the Ossetia sector. There were at
least 21 Russian combat vehicles and more than 100 soldiers visible
to witnesses.

Smoke was rising from the Gori tank base by mid-afternoon. Four Czech
reporters encountering the Russian soldiers were taken into custody.

Georgian media reported murders of ethnic Georgians in villages
near the border between Georgia and Ossetia. The Human Rights Watch
confirmed the reports, noting houses looted burned by Ossetian militia
in six Georgian villages.

Colonel General Anatoly Nogovytsyn, Russia’s army chief of staff,
speaking at a Moscow press conference, flatly denied Russian troops
had entered Gori. Witnesses including Gori residents interviewed by
dpa accused the Russian government of lying.

Nogovytsyn confirmed earlier Georgian reports that Russian forces
had taken control of the Georgian port of Poti and had captured and
sunk all but two Georgian naval vessels stationed there. The vessels
were sunk offshore so as not to interfere with the port’s operation,
he said.

The twin Russian military moves, apparently aimed at demolishing
Georgian military infrastructure, ruined a ceasefire agreement
seemingly brokered by French President Nicolas Sarkozy on Monday,
and approved by Russian President Dmitriy Medvedev on Tuesday.

The de facto ceasefire had held for some 12 hours, from afternoon on
Tuesday until early Wednesday morning. A key term of the ceasefire
was the return of Georgian combat units away from the front to their
bases – a transfer which was in progress when Russian forces moved
on Gori and Poti.

A US military C-17 cargo plane was flying to Georgia with supplies
and the US Navy would soon be playing a role in the humanitarian
mission to demonstrate ‘solidarity’ with the Georgian people, Bush
said in one of the most confrontational statements against Russia of
his two terms in office.

The US leader’s announcement dramatically upped the ante in the
once-obscure Ossetia conflict, for the first time placing the US
military on a collision course with Russia’s.

Bush described the planned US naval and air force movements as
intended to ‘support Georgia with humanitarian aid.’ The American’s
euphemism paralleled the term the Kremlin has consistently used to
describe its armored spearheads currently advancing deep into Georgia:
‘peacekeepers.’

US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice would travel to Tbilisi to show
US support, Bush said.

Ukraine, in a potentially related development, announced it would no
longer permit Russian warships based at the Ukrainian port Sevastopol
to sail on combat duties without clearing the move with Kiev 72 hours
ahead of time. Russia immediately declared the Ukrainian move illegal.

Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili at a press conference later in
the day said he welcomed Bush’s announcement, and predicted US military
forces would ‘operate’ Georgia’s air and sea ports, to provide Georgia
‘a lifeline like the Berlin airlift.’

Previously-announced US measures aimed at what Washington has called
excessive Russian use of force will include cancellation of a US-Russia
joint naval exercise, Bush’s boycott of a NATO meeting with Russia
and longer-term US diplomacy aimed at reducing contact between Russia
and the G7 group of industrialized nations, US media reported.

The Georgian government formally requested NATO assistance shortly
before the ceasefire came into effect, although the Caucasus nation
is not a member of the alliance.

NATO held an emergency meeting Tuesday at its Brussels headquarters,
where Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said the alliance
would not back off its eventual plans to invite Georgia into the
organization.

‘That situation has not changed,’ he said.

Georgia filed a suit in The Hague Court of International Justice
alleging Russian ‘ethnic cleansing’ after 58th Army forces moved into
South Ossetia and adjacent Georgian territories, government spokesman
Aleksander Lomaia said.

Russia for its part alleged Georgia carried out ethnic cleansing in its
attack on South Ossetia. Russian interrogators were ‘interviewing’
Georgian prisoners of war for evidence, said Vladimir Markin, a
Russian Justice Ministry spokesman.

The fast-moving military events of the day cast a shadow over the
ceasefire plan suggested by Sarkozy and approved Saakashvili.

Terms included in the document included a total ceasefire, non-
interference with humanitarian aid, return of Georgian combat units
to their bases, removal of Russian combat forces from the war zone and
installation of an international peacekeeper force in South Ossetia.

The renewed Russian advances were an embarrassment for Sarkozy, who,
as the EU’s representative, had acted as the key mediator between
Russia and Georgia in the ceasefire talks. The French leader was in
Tbilisi on Wednesday, along with the presidents of Poland, Ukraine,
Lithuania and Estonia and the prime minister of Latvia.

EU officials on Wednesday seemed to support the idea, suggesting EU
troops could indeed assist in Ossetia.

The streets of Tbilisi were practically back to normal Wednesday,
with restaurants open and cafes busy, and a government-organized pro-
Saakashvili demonstration jamming the Georgian capital’s central
Shota Rustaveli Street.

The atmosphere in the city was generally more festive than defiant,
with tens of thousands of Tbilisi residents taking the night air for
the first time since the onset of war on Thursday.

Georgia’s banks re-opened on Wednesday, one day earlier than was
planned for a wartime banking holiday.

Civilian officials within South Ossetia and particularly its unofficial
capital Tskhinvali were beginning to repair massive damage caused by
intense artillery barrages.

Regional authorities were focusing on identifying and burying corpses,
and supplying civilian survivors with food and water, said Anatoliy
Barankevich, South Ossetia’s security council chief, according to an
Interfax report.

A bread factory in the region already was functional and loaf
production had already begun.

Martial law was in effect, he said.

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin over the weekend promised
close to 500 million dollars of Kremlin money for the South Ossetia
reconstruction effort.

The Russian military said 74 of its soldiers died in the fighting
and 191 others were wounded.

Georgia reported 175 dead soldiers and 500 wounded. Russian authorities
said they captured an unspecified number of Georgian troops. Reports
of civilian casualties ranged from 200 to 2,000 dead.

The United Nations, the European Union and the United States were
mobilizing to deliver humanitarian assistance to refugees. About
25,000 people fled from South Ossetia into Russia, while another
2,000 went to Armenia.

ARMENIA, GEORGIA MAKE GAINS IN MEDALS PER CAPITA COUNT

Los Angeles Times
10:13 AM, August 13, 2008
CA

As a rule, Medals Per Capita aims for flippancy and facetiousness
and Olympic ideal by ignoring global politics and refraining from
any related poignancy.

That could prove difficult given Georgia.

In Wednesday’s Medals Per Capita, the gauge of national Olympic
performance that’s wildly, gapingly, exponentially and profoundly
superior to the lazy, shiftless, corrupt and standard medals table,
Georgia rocketed from No. 11 to No. 2.

It lodged just behind two-day front-runner and fellow former Soviet
republic Armenia, even as the Georgian athletes knew their homeland
suffered a new and comprehensively depressing war with Russia.

Yet Irakli Tsirekidze won gold in men’s middleweight judo, and Manuchar
Kvirkelin gold in men’s Greco-Roman wrestling, tripling Georgia’s
medal total to three from a smallish population of 4,630,841, for a
sterling MPC rating of one medal per every 1,543,614 Georgians.

Their concentration terribly impressive, Tsirekidze and Kvirkelin
helped Georgia make some trivial news, joining Wednesday’s MPC movers
and shakers alongside Switzerland, which rode a cluster of cycling
medals from No. 21 to No. 4. Georgia surpassed even the stalwart
third-place Australians, who ratcheted their medal count to 12
but suffered slightly from even their restrained birth rate and a
population of 20,600,856.

Switzerland, a budding MPC menace with its agreeable population total
of merely 7,581,520, ran fourth with Roger Federer still loose in
the men’s tennis draw.

And then, just as Georgia nipped portentously at Armenia, trailing only
1.4 million-1.5 million at one point, the latter leapt further ahead,
reaping a third medal — all bronze — when Gevorg Davtyan literally
lifted a small nation in the men’s 69-77 kilogram weightlifting event.

That gave Armenia three more medals than it won in all of 2004, and
given a population of 2,968,586, pared its Medals Per Capita from
1,484,293 to 989,529, making it the first country in these Olympics to
undercut the 1 million mark. Four ex-Soviet republics dot the top 10,
including also No. 7 Kyrgyzstan and No. 8 Azerbaijan.

Meanwhile, in the fraudulent medals table, the United States held an
allegedly thrilling 29-27 lead over China, both countries benefiting
from gigantic populations that have reaped numerous medals and numerous
traffic jams.

As Medals Per Capita holds a candle for countries with smaller
populations because of their willingness to minimize traffic jams,
here’s a special call-out for Mongolia, which debuted in the top 10
when Gundegmaa Otryad won her country’s first medal, a silver in the
women’s 25-meter sport pistol event.

As MPC intellectuals would remember, if only there were any MPC
intellectuals, Mongolia camped a while in the Athens 2004 top 10,
a treat for Americans who never get to hear much about Mongolia. With
a population mercifully below 3 million, the Mongolians got an Athens
bronze from Khashbaataryn Tsagaanbaatar, who suffered an upset loss
this time around to Israel’s Gal Yekutiel, else MPC would’ve been
awash in the teaching of Mongolian trivia.

Not that it can’t be one day soon, still.

The top 10 after Wednesday:

1. Armenia (3) – 989,529 2. Georgia (3) – 1,543,614 3. Australia (12)
– 1,716,738 4. Switzerland (4) – 1,895,380 5. Slovenia (1) – 2,007,711
6. Slovakia (2) – 2,622,375 7. Kyrgyzstan (2) – 2,678,435 8. Azerbaijan
(3) – 2,725,905 9. Finland (2) – 2,727,704 10. Mongolia (1) – 2,996,081

Selected Others:

13. North Korea (7) – 3,354,156 14. South Korea (13) – 3,787,142
25. France (11) – 5,823,435 26. Togo (1) – 5,858,673 30. Great Britain
(7) – 8,706,273 31. Germany (9) – 9,152,172 32. United States (29)
– 10,476,712 36. Japan (9) – 14,143,158 42. China (27) – 49,260,911
49. Indonesia (2) – 118,756,177

CHINA’S DOMINANCE CONTINUES, 17 GOLD MEDALS DECIDED ON 5TH DAY

Geo Super
Aug 13, 2008
Pakistan

BEIJING: China’s still dominates the medals table with 17 gold medals
while the United States continues to be second with 10 in the race
on the fifth day at the Beijing Olympics 2008.

On Wednesday, 17 more gold medals were decided out of which China
bagged four, the US won three and Germany got two golds.

Overall, 50 countries have so far won 225 medals, including 70 gold,
70 silver and 85 silver medals in five days.

The United States grabbed overall 29 medals which include 10 gold,
eight silver and 11 bronze medals whereas China’s aggregate is 27
(17 gold, five silver and five bronze).

However, China is the leading gold medal winner with 17, followed by
the US (10) while South Korea and Germany shared the third position
with six gold medals each.

The fourth position has been shared by three countries – Italy,
Australia and Japan. Each of them won four gold medals.

Four countries obtained two gold medals each. They are Russia, Great
Britain, Georgia and Czech Republic.

Among others, France, North Korea, Slovakia, Spain, Finland,
Netherlands, India, Switzerland, Romania, Thailand, Azerbaijan,
Zimbabwe, Cuba, Hungary, Sweden, Algeria, Austria, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Colombia, Mongolia, Norway, Slovenia, Turkey, Vietnam,
Ukraine, Armenia, Brazil, Belarus, Indonesia, Chinese Taipei,
Argentina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Egypt, Mexico, Tajikistan, Togo and
Uzbekistan. obtained one gold medal each.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

ANALYSIS-GEORGIA REBEL CONFIDENCE RISES AFTER FIGHTING
By Conor Sweeney

Reuters
Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:48am EDT

MOSCOW, Aug 13 (Reuters) – Georgia’s efforts to bring the breakaway
region of South Ossetia to heel have backfired so drastically that
it may have lost control of both it and rebel-held Abkhazia for
good. Western diplomats and analysts said Georgian President Mikheil
Saakashvili has little hope of reasserting his authority in the two
regions after his failed invasion of South Ossetia.

A ceasefire agreement to end nearly a week of fighting between
Georgian and Russian troops has given a new sense of confidence to
the separatists in Abkhazia, and in mountainous South Ossetia and
Abkhazia, which hugs the Black Sea.

Sergei Shamba, self-styled foreign minister of Abkhazia, told Reuters
that Georgia should now accept it is a separate country.

"We have held talks with Georgia for 15 years and now we will only
talk with them after recognition of our independence," Shamba said.

"There have been several drafts and they rejected them all. It’s
clear to me that it’s pointless talking to them."

Self-styled South Ossetian President Eduard Kokoity made similar
independence demands on Wednesday, Russian media reported.

Georgian troops struck at pro-Russian South Ossetia last Thursday
to retake it from separatists but the action provoked a massive
retaliation from Moscow, whose troops drove the Georgian forces back.

At the same time, fighters in Abkhazia pushed back Georgian forces
from their last stronghold there.

The result is a new power balance in the region.

"Militarily, Russia has achieved its strategic goal. It has
demonstrated its ability to strike," wrote stratfor.com in an analysis.

"Russia ejected Georgia completely from Abkhazia and South Ossetia
and has largely destroyed Georgia’s war-fighting capability.

"And with talk of ‘partial demobilisation’ as a condition for peace,
Georgia could be hobbled for quite some time."

Moscow may take different approaches to the two regions, said the
editor of Russia in Global Affairs, Fyodor Lukyanov.

Neither should be directly compared with Kosovo, which unilaterally
declared independence from Serbia this year with the backing of many
Western countries.

"The difference between Abkhazia and Kosovo is that the U.S. was
able to mobilise 40 countries to recognise Kosovo but Russia can’t
expect any single country to do it — not even Belarus or Armenia,"
Lukyanov said.

CONFLICT COULD REMAIN UNSOLVED

One scenario would be for South Ossetia to achieve independence
eventually before being absorbed into Russia, though Abkhazia may look
to countries like ex-Yugoslav Montenegro, as an example for its future.

"Abkhazia is weak but a de facto state whereas South Ossetia is not
self-sufficient, Georgia is not an option anymore so it can exist
only as part of the Russian Federation," Lukyanov said.

Although Abkhazia is belligerent towards Tbilisi and says it has
now taken full control of the Kodori gorge — the one district of
its territory Georgian forces had held – Shamba took a softer line
towards the United States.

"Against America, we have no problems, they did not give these weapons
to be used against us. This is a geopolitical question," Shamba said.

The United States has been Tbilisi’s strongest Western ally since
the 2003 "Rose Revolution" brought Saakashvili to power.

But following Kosovo’s independence — which Moscow opposed on the
grounds it would set a precedent for other frozen conflicts — both
the Abkhazians and South Ossetians redoubled diplomatic efforts.

Despite its financial and political support, Moscow has never said
it will recognise their independence.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov compared Georgia to Cyprus,
suggesting frozen conflicts could remain unresolved for decades,
as on the divided Mediterranean island.

Western diplomats think Moscow has more to gain by maintaining the
uneasy situation than resolving it.

"It’s clear that there has never been a great incentive for Russia to
solve these problems as it keeps Georgia dangling," said one Western
diplomat familiar with French peace efforts. (Additional reporting
by Oliver Bullough in Sukhumi; Editing by Angus MacSwan)