Six days that broke one country ..
Pity Georgia's bedraggled first infantry brigade. And its second. And its hapless navy.
For the past few evenings in the foothills of the Southern Caucasus on the outskirts of Joseph Stalin's hometown of Gori, reconnaissance units of Russia's 58th army have been raking through the spoils of war at what was the Georgian army's pride and joy, a shiny new military base inaugurated only last January for the first infantry, the army engineers, and an artillery brigade.
A couple of hours to the west, in the town of Senaki, it's the same picture. A flagship military base, home to the second infantry brigade, is in Russian hands. And down on the Black Sea coast, the radars and installations for Georgia's sole naval base at Poti have been scrupulously pinpointed by the Russians and destroyed.
Gori and Senaki are not ramshackle relics of the old Red Army of the type that litter the landscape of eastern Europe. "These bases have only recently been upgraded to Nato standard," said Matthew Clements, Eurasia analyst at Jane's Information Group. "They have been operationally targeted to seriously degrade the Georgian military."
"There is a presence of our armed forces near Gori and Senaki. We make no secret of it," said the general staff in Moscow. "They are there to defuse an enormous arsenal of weapons and military hardware which have been discovered in the vicinity of Gori and Senaki without any guard whatsoever."
The "enormous arsenals" are American-made or American-supplied. American money, know-how, planning, and equipment built these bases as part of Washington's drive to bring Nato membership to a small country that is Russia's underbelly.
The American "train and equip" mission for the Georgian military is six years old. It has been destroyed in as many days. And with it, Georgia's Nato ambitions. "There are a few countries that will say 'told you so'" about the need to get Georgia into Nato," said Andrew Wilson, Russia expert at the European Council on Foreign Relations. "But many more will want to walk away from the problem. And for the next few years, Georgia will be far too busy trying to pick itself up."
If Georgia and Nato are the principal casualties of this week's ruthless display of brute power by Vladimir Putin, the consequences are bigger still, the fallout immense, if uncertain. The regional and the global balance of power looks to have tilted, against the west and in favour of the rising or resurgent players of the east.
In a seminal speech in Munich last year, Putin confidently warned the west that he would not tolerate the age of American hyperpower. Seven years in office at the time and at the height of his powers, he delivered his most anti-western tirade
Pernicious
To an audience that included John McCain, the White House contender, and Robert Gates, the US defence secretary and ex-Kremlinologist, he served notice: "What is a unipolar world? It refers to one type of situation, one centre of authority, one centre of force, one centre of decision-making. It is world in which there is one master, one sovereign. This is pernicious ... unacceptable ... impossible."
This week, he turned those words into action, demonstrating the limits of US power with his rout of Georgia. His forces roamed at will along the roads of the Southern Caucasus, beyond Russia's borders for the first time since the disastrous Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s.
From: The Groniad (UK)
Basically the regional powers have some power struggle going on there for last 10 years. Chechinya was a scene of brutality and an uncalled for conflict but here the scenario is different to some viewers.
Russia is still a military might that can face USA militarily hardware is trying to warn the others to stay apart from its way other wise they can face the same.
What is the sad part is the suffering of the civilian population. What they have done, they are innocent, why they are suffering?. I feel really sad about them but politically Russia has outsmarted the Georgia and has warned US allies to stay straight with Russia. Georgian army did not resist.
They have won this round.
...and who says we'll be staying in the ME forever!
[img_assist|nid=103941|title=.|desc=|link=none|align=left|width=|height=0]
NIL ILLEGITIMI CARBORUNDUM
Not exactly..
The Europeans are now dependent on Russia for its energy supplies. With winter approaching, Russia can easily cut off their oil and gas supplies.
The old proverb - Got us by the short and curlies comes to mind..
[img_assist|nid=103941|title=.|desc=|link=none|align=left|width=|height=0]
NIL ILLEGITIMI CARBORUNDUM
Well on the bright side, James Bond movies are going to get better.
Visit www.qatarhappening.com
[img_assist|nid=103941|title=.|desc=|link=none|align=left|width=|height=0]
NIL ILLEGITIMI CARBORUNDUM
I don't disagree with you. The current trend in the world seems to be "when in doubt, blame the states" and there's good reason for that. I just hate that the only way people seem to be able to get back at the States or assert their power is by killing innocent civilians.
Visit www.qatarhappening.com
I agree that Russia has been too aggressive. The sad thing is the loss of civilian life and the destruction of a country.
Russia has been looking for an excuse to flex its muscles and Georgia played into their hands.
The world has watched in silence really, not wishing to stoke the fire.. Even, Chancellor, Angela Merkel, has said that both sides are to blame.
One reason could be that in the past decade or so, America has been free to say and do whatever it has wanted. The world was perhasp waiting for some form of counterbalance.
Jeez it's like looking at a map from the late 70's and early 80's again isn't it. Russia is beating the pulp out of it's satellite countries, the world is focused on Iran and Iraq, and Palestine and Israel are still kicking around. Things just don't seem to change do they.
I know everyone wants to blame the US entirely in this, but really,it's as much the fault of Georgia and Russia. Georgia is a sovereign nation, it has every right to establish ties with any country in the world that it wants to, and NATO has every right in the world to court it. What nation is going to turn down top of the line military equipment and the chance to be part of a powerful world wide force?
Personally I think Russia is in the wrong here, they had NO right in this case to use military force no matter what they thought the intentions of the US were in this case.
Visit www.qatarhappening.com
Their Days are counted.. Watch out the Asian Giants ...
____________________________________________________
It Takes 72 Muscles to Frown...And Only 14 To Smile.
: ) Keep Smiling : )
The USA is really no better , when it comes to leaving |"friends" in the lurch.. Remember, Marcos, Noriega, Shah of Iran etc etc..
What i find fascinating is that these countries don't realise the main reason for the USA bringing its "shield" to Europe.. It wants to keep any future conflict as far away from North America as possible.
As Abu says.. Interesting times ahead!
Putin would return to the Cold War practice of having Russian ballistic missiles programmed to strike targets in Europe - in this case, he said, the Czech and Polish antimissile sites as well as new U.S. bases in Bulgaria and Romania.
Putin described Russia as being penned in by NATO and U.S. expansionism.
In February, he called for an end of a "unipolar world" dominated by the United States.
.
"We have brought all our heavy weapons beyond the Urals and we have reduced our military forces by 300,000, and some other steps," he said.
.
"But what do we have in return? We see that Eastern Europe is being filled with new equipment, with new military, in Romania and Bulgaria as well as radar in the Czech Republic and missile systems in Poland. So we have a question there: What is happening? What is happening is that there is the unilateral disarmament of Russia."
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070602.wputin01/BNStory/International/home
Russia's military doctrine sanctions the use of nuclear weapons "against the allies of countries having nuclear weapons if they in some way help them."
Russia's frequently stated warning that placing missile-defense elements in Poland and the Czech Republic would bring an unspecified military response.
there is a difference. Russians tend to be more bloody with their satellites. Besides, they use their allies as cards that they would put off or sell for their own benefits. Remember. They sold Serbia, Iraq, Libya. Let aside cheating their alies. eg. Egypt 1967. Egypt was able to win the war against Israel when they kicked the Russian expets and advisors ut of the country. That was in 1973.
America on the other hand is more loyal and helpful to its allies.
Take Europe for example. Counries of Warsaw treaty were actually occupied by the USSR. Where as NATO countries were more developed and they do not feelings against America.
===================================== http://www.qatarliving.com/node/58409
IMHO, the Russians and the Americans are just as bad as each other. Both want to have influence over other countries..
===================================== http://www.qatarliving.com/node/58409
angels are in Heaven.. but here in this world everyone wants to survive and not only survive, but to make as much money as they can...but the funny thing, when they become angels in heaven they don't need even one penny...
So America pulled USSR legs also to invade Afghanistan in 1980?
===================================== http://www.qatarliving.com/node/58409
"an explicit deployment of U.S. ground forces on their turf." effectively means becoming a lackey of the USA.
These countries need to stay neutral and find means of co-exist ing.
Geopolitical Diary: Countermoves to a Russian Resurgence
August 15, 2008 | 0200 GMT
Poland and the United States announced an agreement on Thursday to station elements of a U.S. ballistic missile defense (BMD) system permanently on Polish territory. As part of the deal, Poland will also be provided with Patriot air defense batteries and an as-yet-unspecified number of U.S. Army personnel.
The world is only beginning to feel the ripples from the Kremlin's decision to decisively exercise military power in Georgia. Moscow has now demonstrated that it is just as willing to use military tools as it is to use economic tools (it is the world's single largest energy producer) and political tools. In short, Russia is back as an active player on the regional stage. And, as the Polish BMD deal indicates, other states have opinions on how to deal with that. Around the world, other states are considering their options.
Most of the countries of Central Europe — and especially the strategically vulnerable Baltic states — want the same thing that Poland seems to be getting: an explicit deployment of U.S. ground forces on their turf. The idea being that Russia will think long and hard about doing something to them if U.S. forces are not only precommitted to their defense as NATO allies but already physically on station in their territory. We expect many more such deals to be worked out in the weeks and months to come as the United States and NATO essentially shift their Cold War-era deployments several hundred miles to the east.
In Western Europe, the concern is of a slightly different type. While many share the Central Europeans' concern about Russian military power, none are any longer frontline states. Their concern is more economic. Many European states — most notably, Germany — rely on Russian natural gas exports to keep their economies going. While the Central Europeans are looking for American deployments, the Western Europeans are more likely to funnel their efforts into finding alternative sources of natural gas, or alternatives to natural gas itself. Those that have the technology will also simply try to use less natural gas.
In the Arab world, the players that matter are Saudi Arabia and the other Arab Gulf states. These players see Russia primarily as an economic competitor. They also have a pre-existing hammer with which to beat the Russians. Arab oil money was essential to the development of the anti-Soviet Afghan mujahideen in the 1980s and the second Chechen insurgency in 1999. All of these states have helped crack down on those movements' ideological progeny — al Qaeda — since the 9/11 attacks. However, all retain the ability — and the money — to turn the tap back on should the United States be willing.
Iran and Turkey are more complicated. Neither of the states always sees eye to eye with the Americans, but neither particularly cares for a resurgent Russia.
Iran, Turkey and Russia border the Caucasus. And none wants to see one of the other two become ascendant. Russian domination would threaten Turkey's energy supplies. Russia's fondness for sparking separatist conflicts in its rivals would raise complications for heterogeneously populated Iran.
But, at the same time, Turkey and Iran (much less the United States) are not natural partners against Russia. The Caucasus has long been a bit of a free-for-all, with geopolitical alliances shifting irregularly. Just as Russia has political, economic and military tools to bring to bear along its entire periphery, both Iran and Turkey can do the same in the Caucasus. It is going to be a very messy region.
China has even more mixed feelings. It would dearly love to tap Central Asia's energy resources, but is concerned about clashing with pre-existing Russian interests. China is not so much threatened by Russia as it is desperate to avoid adding any more challenges to its already burgeoning list. There is a logic to China attempting to extend its influence north and west, but only if Russia is otherwise occupied. In essence, China wants to pretend that nothing has changed — unless Russia finds itself besieged by everyone else, at which point Beijing would love to take advantage.
All of these responses are potentially effective ones, but what they all have in common is that they cannot be applied overnight. It takes time to build a base and deploy troops to Poland. Shifting one's economy away from natural gas requires substantial — and expensive — restructuring. Whipping up a Third Chechen War cannot be done in a weekend. Ankara and Tehran simply figuring out their options will take weeks. And China is loath to take the lead on anything regarding Russia right now.
Russia, in contrast, has gotten its energy exports — and income — to post-Cold War highs. Its military is gunning for a fight, and politically it is once again unified. The Kremlin does not require prep time to make its next moves.
The challenge for all of those seeking to contain a Russian resurgence is as simple to state as it is complex to initiate: to do so quickly enough and with enough partners that a Russia with two free hands cannot pre-empt.
Source: Stratfor
where there is trouble you will find Americas fingerprints.
The key aspect in this article is the realization that the Americans were actually involved in "bolstering" the Georgians..
mmmm...yes I know...errrr...