BIURAKN HAKHVERDIAN WITH GOLD MEDAL AT BEIJING OLYMPICS 2008
Noyan Tapan
Aug 25, 2008
BEIJING, AUGUST 25, ARMENIANS TODAY. Armenian-Dutch Biurakn Hakhverdian
playing in Dutch water polo team got gold medal as The Netherlands won
the gold medal in the Women’s Water Polo competition. The Netherlands
beat the United States 9-8.
Biurakn Hakhverdian was born in the Netherlands. She is 23 years old.
Schenectady Gazette, NY
Aug 24 2008
Op-ed column: The media got it wrong: Russia did not invade Georgia,
it’s the other way around
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Edwin D. Reilly Jr.
Being on vacation, I had told my editor that I wouldn’t have a new
piece for this Sunday, but something happened that changed my
mind. Whether home or away, libraries are my favorite haunt, so, while
waiting for a table at the nearby Captain’s Table, Jean and I sat on a
bench in front of the Chatham library on Cape Cod.
Sitting near us a woman on another bench and a young man on the
library steps were each typing furiously on their laptops. Could they
be within range of Wi-Fi, I wondered? So I asked the young man if he
was picking up a signal from the (closed!) library. `Why, yes,’ he
said, `this is the best time to do so, given that there is no one
inside with whom I have to share bandwidth and thus reduce response
time.’
I became conscience-stricken by such rampant assiduousness, and since
our rented cottage was a hot spot, I went back to my own laptop after
dinner, determined to tell you how the mainstream press has, by and
large, gotten the Russian battle with South Ossetia all wrong.
The impression that most Associated Press stories conveyed, and some
even in The New York Times, has been that Russia invaded part of
Georgia. But it is closer to the truth that the opposite is true. This
finally sank into my cranium when I read a column in, of all places,
the Cape Cod Times of Aug. 18, the day of this epiphany. The author,
Gwynne Dyer, an international columnist from London, wrote: `Russia
didn’t threaten Georgia; it responded to a surprise attack on South
Ossetia, a territory where there were Russian [and Georgian]
peacekeeping troops by international agreement. It has not occupied
Georgia’s capital, nor has it overthrown the government (though the
Georgians may do that themselves when they realize what a fool [their
President, Mikhail] Saakashvili has been).’
Yes, the Russians overreacted, drove deep into Georgian territory well
beyond South Ossetia, killed many people, and have started to withdraw
back into South Ossetia. But that’s as far as they will go. Fully 70
percent of the greatly depleted population of that `province,’ or
whatever it is, hold Russian citizenship and very much want to become,
like North Ossetia (to its north, obviously) one of the units of the
Russian Federation.
Now, with our forces so bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan, there is
nothing that the United States can do about this. It is certainly not
going to start a third world war, hot or cold, over it. President Bush
may or may not realize this, but surely both presidential candidates
do. But they have no recourse except to posture, saying of the
Russians, in effect, `There they go again.’
Sen. Obama suggests that the matter be referred to the U.N. Security
Council, forgetting (?) that in that venue, Russia has veto
power. Even worse, Sen. McCain, whose documented forgetfulness is that
Afghanistan lies between Iraq and Pakistan and hence the latter two
have no common border, blusters like the Great Oz behind a
curtain. And the voters are sure to look behind it.
As of 20 years ago, South Ossetia had 65,000 native Ossetians, 29,000
people who considered themselves Georgians, and practically no
`Russians.’ By now, many of each have fled the area, and most of those
left consider themselves Russian. Despite this fact, and despite the
fact that his army has been obliterated, President Mikhail Saakashvili
has vowed that `Georgia will never give up a square kilometer of its
territory.’ Essentially, it already has.
Geographic locale
But before we venture further, just what and where is this foreign
Georgia and the rebellious South Ossetia contained therein? Wikipedia
to the rescue.
The country of Georgia lies to the south of the Russian Federation
(Russia), from which it is separated by a natural boundary formed by
the Caucasus mountain range. It is a transcontinental country,
partially in Eastern Europe and partially in Southwest Asia. It is
bordered to the east by Azerbaijan, to the west by the Black Sea, to
the south by Armenia, and to the southwest by Turkey. Georgia’s area,
about 27,000 square miles, lies between that of our states of South
Carolina and West Virginia, both breakaway federal entities of our
own, the latter because it took the Union side in our Civil
War. Georgia’s population of 4.6 million is comparable to that of our
Alabama and is about half of our own Georgia.
After the Russian Revolution of 1917, Georgia had a brief period of
independence as a Democratic Republic from 1918 until the Red Army’s
invasion of 1921. Georgia became part of the USSR in 1922 and did not
regain its independence until 1991, when the Soviet Union
dissolved. Georgia is currently a representative democracy and is a
member of the United Nations, the Council of Europe, and the World
Trade Organization. To the consternation of Russia, the country seeks
to join NATO and, in the longer term, admission to the European Union.
The map of the country of Georgia looks much like a crocodile, but its
tail to the northwest and its right hind leg are, respectively, the
self-proclaimed independent republics of Abkhazia and Adjara, but no
other country other than Georgia ‘ certainly not Russia, which has
designs on the former ‘ has recognized them. Historically, there have
been dust-ups over the status of both, but they were nothing compared
to the currently raging battle over the status of South Ossetia.
South Ossetia is a region in the extreme north of Georgia, just over
the border from the Russian federal republic (oblast) of North
Ossetia. It declared itself to be the independent `Republic of South
Ossetia’ early in the 1990s. The capital of South Ossetia is
Tskhinvali, even though South Ossetia lies within the Georgian region
called Shida Kartli, whose capital is Gori.
Not recognized
The claimed independence has not been diplomatically recognized by any
member of the United Nations, which continues to regard South Ossetia
as part of Georgia. Until the armed conflict of this month, Georgia
had retained control over parts of the region’s eastern and southern
districts where it created, in April 2007, the Provisional
Administrative Entity of South Ossetia.
Barack Obama has promised me (and at least a million others) that he
will send us e-mail (or one of those hated text messages) that tell us
of his vice presidential choice. You may know who that is by the time
you read this. For his sake, I hope it is Sen. Joe Biden, the only
politician left in Washington who makes sense when he speaks of
foreign affairs. As to domestic affairs, we’ve had our fill of those.
Edwin D. Reilly Jr. lives in Niskayuna and is a regular contributor to
the Sunday Opinion section.
g/24/0824_reillyjr/
Caribbean Net News, Cayman Islands
Aug 23 2008
Cubans suffer rare off day in the ring
Published on Saturday, August 23, 2008
By Patrick Vignal
BEIJING, China (Reuters): Cuba had a rare off day in Friday’s
semi-finals of the Olympic boxing competition which marked a new era
for the showcase heavyweight class.
The superpower of amateur boxing, Cuba had placed eight fighters in
the last four but lost half of them on a day with plenty of upsets.
Light-welterweight Rosniel Iglesias became their first casualty when
he lost 10-5 to Manus Boonjumnong, who kept alive his hopes of
becoming the first Thai boxer to win successive titles and goes on to
meet Felix Diaz of the Dominican Republic.
Light-flyweight Yampier Hernandez also bowed out, losing on countback
to Mongolia’s Serdamba Purevdorj, and lightweight Yordenis Ugas was
ousted too, falling to gifted Frenchman Daouda Sow in one of a busy
day’s most exciting bouts.
The biggest shock for Cuba, however, was when Osmay Acosta lost to
Russia’s Rakhim Chakhkiev, meaning the Cubans will miss out on
heavyweight gold after winning the last four titles.
There will be no American in the heavyweight final either after
Deontay Wilder lost to Italian Clemente Russo, ending the U.S. team’s
presence in the tournament and sealing their worst Olympic
performance.
Cuba and the United States had won the last 11 heavyweight titles
between them but will have to sit and watch when Chakhkiev and Russo
battle it out in Saturday’s final.
Prior to 1984 the heavyweight class was unrestricted, though a new
super-heavyweight class was introduced at Los Angeles with the
heavyweights then restricted to under 91kgs.
Before going to pack, Wilder added his name to a long list of boxers
to have complained about the scoring and predicted the Americans would
soon be redeeming themselves.
"I think it was closer than the score showed but what are you going to
do about it?", he said after losing a 7-1 decision.
"There have been a lot of changes in our program but you’re going to
see greatness from the Americans in the next few years."
The day also saw red-haired Russian Alexey Tishchenko stay on course
to become only the fourth boxer to win gold in two different weight
classes by outpointing Armenia’s Hrachik Javakhkyan to advance to the
lightweight final.
Britain’s James DeGale had earlier strolled through to the
middleweight final and said afterwards it had been as easy as it
looked.
"It was a walk in the park for me," DeGale said after outpointing
Irishman Darren Sutherland 10-3 to set up a final bout against Cuba’s
Emilio Correa.
The day ended on a painful note for Britain when super-heavyweight
David Price was brutally stopped by Italian world champion Roberto
Cammarelle.
Price, who had dreamed of emulating compatriot Audley Harrison, the
2000 Olympic champion, was 9-0 down when he was sent reeling by a
one-two combination and the referee stopped the contest with 50
seconds left in the second round.
SOUTH OSSETIAN SCENARIO MUST NOT BE REPEATED IN OTHER FROZEN CONFLICT ZONES
Interfax
Aug 20 2008
Russia
Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko has said that everything should
be done to avoid repeating the South Ossetian scenario in other frozen
conflict zones.
"We should do everything to avoid such a scenario in other frozen
conflict zones," he said at a joint press conference with Romanian
President Traian Basescu in Kyiv on Wednesday.
He listed Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia, and Transdniestria among
such zones.
Yushchenko recalled that Ukraine does not recognize the military
solution of conflicts. "We should make it very clear that we support
the territorial integrity of any state," he said.
He said Ukraine and Romania share the same approach to the settlement
of the Georgian situation. He noted that the recognition of Georgia’s
territorial integrity should become a key principle.
The president voiced concern over the slow implementation of the
Russian-Georgian peace agreements, including the withdrawal of Russian
troops from Georgia.
Basescu, in turn, said the conflict should be settled on the basis
of the peace plan proposed by French President Nicolas Sarkozy. He
was also concerned that after the war in South Ossetia other frozen
conflicts "will be unfrozen and have negative effects."
In his opinion, Black Sea countries and EU nations must develop new
mechanisms to resolve problems in conflict zones.
HRD: TOO MANY CASES OF VIOLENCE AGAINST JOURNALISTS IN RECENT MONTH
Panorama.am
15:04 21/08/2008
On 18 August the deputy-director of radio station "Azatutyun"
("Freedom") Hrach Melqumyan was beaten by an unknown person in one
of Yerevan central parks. Melqumyan says the incident is connected
with his professional activity.
Human Rights Defender Armen Haroutyunyan made a statement concerning
the event:
"Too many cases of violence against journalists are being reported
this month, therefore, I urge the authorities to find the criminals
as soon as possible. Otherwise, such incidents can be a real threat
to freedom of expression in our country. Such inappropriate attitude
towards press correspondents is unacceptable, no matter what kind of
information the journalists present. Hopefully, this incident will
not pass unpunished."
WILL THE GEORGIA CONFLICT SET AN EXAMPLE?
AzerNews Weekly
Aug 20 2008
Azerbaijan
The outcome of the Russia-Georgia military stand-off is crucial for
talks on settling the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict over Upper (Nagorno)
Garabagh, an influential international expert says.
The developments in Georgia make the issue of Azerbaijan’s territorial
integrity extremely relevant, said Zeyno Baran, director of the
Washington-based Center for Eurasian Policy at the Hudson Institute.
"Even if Russia does recognize Georgia’s territorial integrity, by
taking the latest actions it infringed upon all existing international
norms. The outcome of Russia’s actions against Georgia will set a very
important example for those who will decide on actions regarding the
Garabagh problem," she said.
Baran said the war with Georgia is "a bad start" for the newly-elected
Russian President, Dmitry Medvedev.
The crisis was sparked when pro-Western Georgia launched a military
offensive to retake the pro-Russian region of South Ossetia, which
broke away from Georgian rule in the early 1990s. Moscow retaliated
on August 8 by sending troops to the region which struck, with
overwhelming force, at Georgian positions. In addition to ground
troops, Russia used its air force to strike strategic facilities in
Georgia. Russian President Medvedev, on August 12, ordered an end
to Russia’s military actions in Georgia, claiming Moscow said it was
seeking "to encourage peace."
Isa Gambar, leader of the Azerbaijani political party Musavat, said
developments in the neighboring South Caucasus republic are affecting
not only the Garabagh conflict, but also the situation throughout
the entire region.
"It is too early to say whether this impact will be positive or
negative, as the ongoing process, itself, has yet to reach its final
stage. But overall, I believe that what is happening in Georgia will
have a positive impact on [the resolution of] the Garabagh conflict."
Gambar said Russian authorities had "completely revealed their essence"
by their military actions.
"Moscow once again showed that it has no intention to relinquish its
ambitions for an empire and is sticking to its aggressive policy,"
he said.
Gambar said the free world "now realizes that there is no hope for
Russia’s contribution to the solution of problems regarding the
territorial integrity of South Caucasus states."
"The West has realized that Russia is not an element of stability
in the region, but, on the contrary, a destabilizing factor. In
keeping with this, I think the impact of the developments in Georgia
on the solution of the Garabagh problem will be positive," the party
leader said.
Indeed, notes observers, Russia has demonstrated what it stands for,
and the point is that Moscow, disregarding international law, is openly
supporting separatism. This being said, a valid question arises: how
can a country backing the separatist regimes in Georgia’s breakaway
republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia be brokering a settlement to
the Garabagh conflict?
Russia, along with the United States and France, co-chairs a team
of diplomats called the OSCE Minsk Group, which is brokering the
peace process.
According to the Musavat chairman, the latest developments have shown
that Russia now has no right to act as a mediator in the resolution
of any conflicts.
"And, as long as Russia is among the ‘peacekeepers’, any solution to
the Garabagh conflict is out of the question. So, realizing that truth
will foster a change in the approach to dealing with the problem,"
he said.
Azerbaijani analyst Hikmat Hajizada said the developments in Georgia
would definitely affect the Garabagh settlement.
"First of all, it has become clear to many Azerbaijanis that we can’t
just go ahead and launch a war in Upper Garabagh. And this is clear,
as Russia and Armenia are behind Upper Garabagh [the self-proclaimed
republic], while we don’t have anyone behind us. Hence, based on
what went on in Georgia, everyone understood that you can’t wage a
one-on-one war with Russia."
Secondly, Armenia will "feel more comfortable" at peace talks with
Azerbaijan if Moscow strengthens its positions in South Ossetia. These
are the adverse ramifications.
"But there are also positive sides to these events. The Russia-Georgia
conflict has finally drawn the international community’s attention
to the problems facing the South Caucasus," he said.
Hajizada said the West has realized that these problems "concern it
as well, and this should be kept in mind."
"In light of these developments, I believe Azerbaijan has two ways
to go: to integrate into NATO or find itself a powerful ally so that
it can counter the Russia-Armenia alliance," Hajizada added.
THE BENEFACTORS FROM COAF TO VISIT ARMENIA
Panorama.am
14:38 19/08/2008
This year the fifth anniversary of Children of Armenia Fund, COAF is
celebrated. For this purpose the sponsors, benefactors and committee
members of COAF will make a visit to Armenia on 22-25 August. They
will meet with RA prime-minister. Moreover, during the audience with
RA minister of Education and Science the COAF benefactors are going
to receive "Gold Medal" certificates.
Note that the main purpose of COAF is to reduce poverty in Armenia,
and make better conditions for children by immediate conduction of
useful and positive arrangements for kids and youth.
FRIENDSHIP OF SPECIAL SERVICES AGAINST AZERBAIJAN
Ekho
Aug 7 2008
Azerbaijan
Cooperation of intelligence services of Iran and Armenia is openly
against our country
Iran and Armenia have launched comprehensive cooperation between their
special services, many aspects of which are directly or indirectly
against Azerbaijan. The exchange of intelligence data, deployment of
means of technical reconnaissance, dispatch of agents to Azerbaijani
territories and not only to Azerbaijani through own channels for the
interest of a partner are not a complete list of points of contacts
between "knights of the cloak and dagger" from Iran and Armenia.
In early July, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Ali Reza Sheykh-Attar
paid a visit to Armenia. The high-ranking Iranian guest held a
host of meetings and talks in Yerevan. Amongst people he met was the
secretary of the Armenian National Security Council, Artur Bagdasaryan,
whom Sheykh-Attar handed over a very intriguing proposal on behalf
of the secretary of the Iranian Supreme National Security Council,
Sa’id Jalili: to hold bilateral political consultations between the
national security services.
And at the same time, to expand cooperation between special services
and intelligences in spheres like regular consultations and exchange
of intelligence data. Moreover, Sheykh-Attar invited Artur Bagdasaryan
to Tehran where consultations with Sa’id Jalili will take place and
a relevant agreement would be signed. The Armenian-Iranian "security
summit" is in the offing. However, as Ekho has learnt from reliable
sources, the intelligence services of the two countries already
cooperate in full swing without waiting for corresponding documents
being drawn up and signed.
Technical infrastructure between Iran and Armenia exists
First of all, in a record shortest period on the territory of Armenia
and, naturally, with consent and blessing of the authorities of the
latter Iran has set up an impressive infrastructure of technical
intelligence, incorporating into itself a unique system of optical
radars and passive optical and electronic range finders a part of
which has been manufactured in China, a part in Iran using the state
of the art European technology adopted from France and Germany.
On 18 July, Col Naser Arab-beygi already reported on the erection of
the first section of the state-of-the-art "espionage" system, which
enables Iran both expand own potential of technical reconnaissance and
also significantly increase own knowledge on a "possible enemy". In
particular, the system of optical radars and range finders will enable
"to register" takeoffs and landings of "enemy planes" already at the
earliest stage.
What Iran will actually consider enemy planes and will a helicopter
carrying the next shift to "contractual" drilling platforms fall on
this list, or a civilian "board" performing a regular flight between
Tel Aviv and Baku, this is a question requiring an explanation.
Iran controls the whole region
But at the same time, one can with great confidence quote another
point: Iran has established a network of similar type of reconnaissance
"stations" on its territory which keep under control practically
all adjoining with Armenia countries of the region Azerbaijan,
Turkey, Georgia. So, a station in [the western Armenian town of]
Gyumri "oriented" to eastern regions of Turkey. Another one has been
situated in northern Armenia near the town of Akasar its "zone of
responsibility" includes Georgia. Another two stations emerged in
the eastern Armenia and it is to track Azerbaijan.
Iran pledged to share obtained intelligence data with its partners
and it is hardly that Iran does not understand that for Armenia,
Iranian technical reconnaissance is of great importance exactly in
case of war with Azerbaijan. By the way, cooperation between Iran
and Armenia is not limited to technical reconnaissance.
The exchange of intelligence data, according to information available
to Ekho newspaper, includes analyses of data obtained by official
Tehran from its partners the special services of Syria as well as from
terrorist groups like Hezbollah and Hamas, patronized by Iran the point
here is about Israeli weapons systems and tactics which as Armenia is
confident, exported from Israel by Georgia and Azerbaijan at present.
And it is clear that this aspect, apart from other things, should
"calm" the Muslim society in case of information leakage about whom
and against whom Iran cooperates: of course, Israel is involved at
this point and so, for the sake of opposing the "Zionist regime",
one can do everything. Even reach an agreement with authors of the
Xocali [a settlement in Nagornyy Karabakh where the Armenian troops
killed hundreds of innocent civilians on 26 February 1992] genocide
against Azerbaijanis.
The cult of terror exists not for the first ten years, persons
like Vazgen Sisliyan and Varuzhan Karapetyan, not to mention of
Monte Melkonyan, have been raised to the level of national heroes
[in Armenia].
[Passage omitted: reference to historical ties between Islamic and
Armenian terrorist organizations]
In a nutshell, today when Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinezhad, who,
incidentally, before going to big politics, had direct relations to
secret operations of the Iranian mullahkratia, is refusing to visit
the mausoleum of Kamal Ataturk during his visit [on 14 August] to
Turkey, and the Iranian special services from the Armenian territory
is about to spy on Turkey and Azerbaijan – this cannot be accidental
coincidence. However, the most obvious and dangerous case is another
aspect of the Iranian-Armenian cooperation of special services.
[Passage omitted: Reference to illegal businesses in South America]
Cooperation between intelligence services against Azerbaijan and Turkey
Judging by information obtained by Ekho, Iran and Armenia contracted
to cooperate also in the sphere of intelligence-terrorist "coyotes". To
be true, bearing in mind the regional specifics of jackals.
So, Iran is keeping an eye on existing in Armenia, close to the Turkish
borders, secret bases of the PKK [the Kurdistan Workers Party] with
absolutely clear calculation: to use channels of the PKK to infiltrate
its agents first into Turkey, and then to the West, first of all
to Europe, where the PKK has comprehensive and divaricate network
to legalize own agents under the guise of "political refugees". In
exchange, Iran pledged Armenia to transfer its agents through own
channels to countries Yerevan is keen on. First of all, to Azerbaijan.
Here this is an "alliance of jackals" where Armenia has already a
solid experience of such kinds of cooperation. It is quite sufficient
to remember how the Armenian special services sent militants of the
Lezgin Sadval to Azerbaijan tasking them with acts of terror in the
[Baku] metro.
[Passage omitted: Reference to cooperation between ASALA and the PKK]
At the same time, it is obvious that if Turkey and Iran are regional
rivals and an "embarrassing example" of secular democracy in an Islamic
country, then Azerbaijan is a more dangerous "bomb". Therefore, as
an example, the independent Azerbaijan on the northern bank of the
Araz River cannot remain unnoticed in the south where the tension of
the national-liberation movement is already growing.
So, one should not surprise that Iran is engaged in "selling short" in
Azerbaijan, using for this whomever and whatever possible, beginning
Armenia until drug trafficking: drugs from Iran to Azerbaijan are
trafficked very much as it cannot be possible without the connivance
of the official circles.
However, at the same time, one cannot but pay attention to another
aspect. That very "alliance of jackals" made known itself in the region
exactly at the time when Iran is under attention of the whole world,
at least, anyway of the Western political elite in general, and of
the USA, in particular. As the analyses of the current events, in
particular, the hearings on Azerbaijan in the US Helsinki Commission
of Congress show the tension around Iran did not compel the same USA
to forget about the processes in the South Caucasus.
But at the same time, such a state of affairs are hard to be explained
minimum cooperation between Armenia with probably the most dangerous
as of now state-rogue, and moreover, this cooperation envisages
such spheres which a priori cannot be declared "natural relations
of neighbouring states", and moreover "humanitarian and civilian
cooperation". At the same time, it is better not forget that Armenia
within the framework of the Organization of the Treaty of Collective
Security has an access to intelligence data obtained, for example,
from the Qabala radar station, which Russia proposes to the USA in
exchange for the European anti-missile system with all, as the saying
goes, ensuing.
However, the first signs of concern have already emerged: the latest
report of the US Department of State on international terrorism
directly points at concern of Washington with regard to close
cooperation between Iran and Armenia. There remains only hope that by
saying "a", Washington will find the political will to also pronounce
"b" with regard to Armenia.
Interfax News Agency, Russia
Aug 13 2008
Presidents of Russia, Armenia favor steps to prevent repetition of
South Ossetian events
MOSCOW Aug 13
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Armenian President Serzh
Sargsyan had a telephone conversation on Wednesday, at the initiative
of the Armenian side, the Kremlin reported.
"On behalf of the Armenian people the Armenian president expressed
condolences over the tragic events in South Ossetia and the massive
loss of life. He also expressed readiness to offer humanitarian aid to
the afflicted population," the report said.
The presidents’ spoke "for all necessary measures to prevent the
repetition of the developments [in South Ossetia] and to guarantee the
speedy restoration of a normal situation in the region," the Kremlin
said.
IS UKRAINE NEXT? GEORGIAN WAR EXACERBATES RUSSIA-UKRAINE RELATIONS
Richard Weitz
World Politics Review
15 Aug 2008
World Politics Review Exclusive
The War in Georgia has seriously exacerbated relations between Russia
and Ukraine’s pro-Western government. On Aug. 12, Ukrainian President
Victor Yushchenko joined the leaders of four other former Soviet states
in Tbilisi to show solidarity with Georgia and its embattled president,
Mikheil Saakashvili. Yushchenko told the crowd that had assembled in
Tbilisi’s central square: "You will never be left alone! . . . We
have come to reaffirm your sovereignty, your independence, your
territorial integrity. These are our values. Independent Georgia is
and independent Georgia will always be!"
The following day, President Yushchenko boldly imposed severe
restrictions on the movement of Russian military units in
Ukraine. Specifically, he directed that Russian warships, warplanes,
or other military units give 72 hours’ notice before moving within
Ukrainian territory. The order also applies to ships of the Russian
Black Sea Fleet seeking to reenter their home base at Sevastopol. The
Russian Foreign Ministry attacked the measures as a "serious, new
anti-Russian step."
Ukrainian officials claimed that the restrictions were not a direct
result of the Russian military intervention in Georgia. Instead, they
maintain that they had long sought to regulate more effectively Russian
operations at the Sevastopol base, but that Moscow had repeatedly
delayed commencing talks on the issue by arguing that it had no plan
to employ the Black Sea Fleet in foreign military operations.
Nevertheless, the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry had stated at the onset
of the war that they would not necessarily allow Russian warships to
return to Sevastopol if they supported military operations against
Georgia. "We have information confirmed by our specialists that
several vessels of the Black Sea Fleet left Sevastopol and either made
their way or were making their way toward the territory of Georgia,"
Ukraine Foreign Minister Volodymyr Ohryzko explained while in Georgia
on Aug. 10. "Obviously, if this is confirmed we will have to reconsider
the conditions under which these vessels would be able to be stationed
on the territory of Ukraine."
On Aug. 13, moreover, the Ukrainian Security Council issued a statement
declaring that the presence of foreign warships in its waters "poses a
potential threat to Ukraine’s national security, particularly if parts
of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet are used against third countries." The
Ukrainian government has long insisted it will not renew Russia’s
lease regarding Sevastopol when it expires on May 28, 2017.
For their part, Russian officials denounced the Ukrainian government
for siding with Saakashvili, who Moscow holds responsible for starting
the war and committing war crimes against Russian citizens in South
Ossetia. After the Georgian War began, Sergei Shoigu, Russia’s
minister for emergency situations, expressed indignation that,
"One week before these events, we send a column of humanitarian
aid to Ukraine to help flood victims and the next we find they’re
offering military aid, arms for the destruction of civilians." One
month prior to the invasion, Ukrainian troops participated in a large,
multinational military exercise in Georgia, "Immediate Response 2008"
which also involved Azeri, Armenian and American soldiers.
After the war ended in an overwhelming Russian military victory,
former Georgian President Eduard Shevardnadze, who as the last Soviet
foreign minister helped dismantle the Soviet Union — a development
that Putin called the "greatest geopolitical catastrophe" of the
20th century — warned that "Ukraine most likely’" would be the next
country to experience increased Russian military pressure to abandon
foreign and defense policies opposed by Moscow.
There are certainly many disturbing parallels in the situations Ukraine
and Georgia find themselves with respect to Moscow. Pro-Western
governments came to power following popular revolutions in both
countries — in Georgia in 2003 and Ukraine in 2004. Along with
Georgia, the Ukrainian government is seeking to join NATO. At this
April’s NATO summit in Bucharest, the alliance’s communique said that
both countries "will become NATO members" eventually. The Georgian
and Ukrainian governments also have collaborated to pursue energy
transit routes linking the Caspian Sea to Europe that bypass Russia.
Unfortunately, Ukraine shares some of Georgia’s vulnerabilities as
well. The Ukrainian region of Crimea has a majority Russian-speaking
population. Some of its members would like to join Russia. The
peninsula also hosts an important naval base that Russia does not want
to relinquish. The Kremlin might be able to instigate a pro-Russian
uprising in the Crimea in which the insurgents, following the South
Ossetian precedent, would appeal for Russian military intervention
to protect them from Kiev.
Various Russian leaders have suggested that, if Ukraine actually joins
NATO or attempts to expel the Russian Black Sea Fleet from Sevastopol,
then Russia might annex the Crimea. After the Bucharest summit,
Putin told a news conference that, "The appearance on our borders of a
powerful military bloc . . . will be considered by Russia as a direct
threat to our country’s security." Army Gen. Yury Baluyevsky, chief of
the Russian General Staff, said that the entry of Ukraine or Georgia
into NATO would lead Moscow to "undoubtedly take measures to ensure
its security near the state border. These will be both military and
other measures." Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov likewise said Moscow
"will do everything possible to prevent the accession of Ukraine and
Georgia to NATO." These statements appear aimed at stoking tensions
with Ukraine to exacerbate the country’s internal differences and
reinforce West European reluctance to allow Ukrainian entry into NATO.
Nevertheless, there are certain major differences between Georgia and
Ukraine. First, the Ukrainian armed forces are much stronger than those
of Georgia. Whereas Georgia’s prewar military had approximately 37,000
soldiers under arms, the Ukrainian military numbers over 200,000. The
Russian armed forces is still five times larger, but would find
a war with Ukraine, with a population — which, though divided
about NATO membership, would presumably rally to defend Ukraine’s
territorial integrity — some 10 times larger than that of Georgia,
a much greater challenge.
In addition, the United States and some other NATO countries have
belatedly sought to reinforce their political-military position
in the former Soviet bloc. The Bush administration appears to have
accepted Saakashvili’s warning that the weak U.S. response to the
Russian intervention was creating a situation in which "America is
losing the whole region" to Russia.
After days of supporting the Georgian position with nothing but
rhetoric, President Bush announced on Aug. 13 that the U.S. military
would conduct a relief operation in Georgia. Whatever humanitarian
assistance it might provide the Georgian people would pale in
significance to the deployment’s symbolic importance as reaffirming
Washington’s continuing role and interests in Russia’s neighborhood.
The announcement that NATO would hold a special meeting on the
conflict, as well as the long-awaited consummation of a Polish-American
deal on basing U.S. missile interceptors in Poland, also signaled
that Washington and some of its allies were now determined to shore
up their presence in the region to dissuade further Russian predations.
Richard Weitz is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and a World
Politics Review contributing editor.