"Saakashvili lied 100 percent to all of us"

[Chalchalero]

I am the first to admit when I am wrong about something, and this time will be no different. These last few weeks I have been hearing and reading rumours and accusations that Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili is a disturbed man, some referring to him as unstable and others that he is simply outright crazy. I didn't believe these reports and indeed ignored them, believing them to be the propagandistic products of the many Russian apologists both in Europe and (oddly enough) in the US.

Then yesterday I came across an interesting article on the website Speigel Online, and I realised that I had a made a terrible mistake putting my faith in this man, as it appears that he has not been altogether forthright with the world with regards to the time line of events leading up to the débâcle of last month.

The article, Russia and the West: The Cold Peace states that:

...various ministries in Berlin have started to doubt the credibility of the most problematic friend of the West. Saakashvili, contrary to his own version of events, apparently ordered the attack on South Ossetia before the Russian tanks entered the province from the north via the Roki Tunnel.

This was reported by military observers working with the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) who were in Georgia at the time. Information from tapped phone conversations involving Georgian political leaders may have also made its way into the reports, which have been leaked from OSCE headquarters in Vienna. One source who is personally familiar with the reports summarized the findings as follows: “Saakashvili lied 100 percent to all of us, the Europeans and the Americans.”

Just last week, the Georgian president told Germany’s mass-circulation Bild newspaper: “We respected the cease-fire. It wasn’t until the Russian tanks rolled into South Ossetia that we deployed our artillery.” The OSCE reports also indicate that Saakashvili attacked the civilian population while they were asleep in their beds. That could be tantamount to a war crime. “Our dialogue with Georgia has to become more critical again,” says a top Western diplomat.

The article then goes on to describe another situation that I was previously loathe to accept as feasible, i.e. the involvement of the White House in instigating Saakashvili's reckless actions.

It is not, of course, a situation that US Vice President Dick Cheney will have to concern himself with. He is due to retire soon, but Cheney is personally responsible for much of the political inheritance that goes to the next president. This Tuesday, Cheney is scheduled to travel to Georgia to show his solidarity with this frontline country. Russia’s aggression must not go unanswered, he said shortly before his departure. Observers in Washington suspect that he may have helped provoke the conflict that he now claims to be solving. One of his most experienced advisors, Joseph R. Wood, was in Tbilisi shortly before the Georgian army launched its military operation.

This was only confirmed by Cheney’s office last week. Government sources say that after the conflict erupted, Cheney urged the White House to respond by sending arms to Georgia. The president reportedly rejected the proposal, perhaps after a bit of arm-twisting. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates are determined not to send the military to yet another country in the five remaining months of the Bush administration.

Rumors are currently circulating in the US that Cheney may have sparked the crisis in Georgia as a favor to the Republican presidential candidate. There is a wealth of evidence to support such a theory. McCain’s foreign policy advisor Randy Scheunemann was a lobbyist for the Georgian government until last May. McCain is a close friend of Saakashvili. If the OSCE allegations concerning Georgia’s war plans are substantiated, it could fuel debate on the issue. In the meantime, an election campaign conducted in the shadow of an international crisis offers McCain a golden opportunity. In the hour of peril, experience is likely to garner more votes than hope. Putin has triggered what McCain urgently needs: a sense of anxiety.

So it is with great humility that I am forced to hereby apologise to any here who may have raised these points and whom I blithely dismissed out of hand and state that it appears they were actually right and I was wrong.

I remain correct on my insistence that Russia must fully implement the terms of the ceasefire worked out with Nicholas Sarkozy and fully withdraw from Georgia proper. I do not, however, believe that the Russians were entirely to blame for the events which transpired. Simply for their escalation and the Russians' demonstrated lack of faith with an agreement they signed and refused to adhere to.

They remain thugs and criminals. They are just not the only ones, apparently...

 

[kallipolis]

Putin has triggered what McCain urgently needs: a sense of anxiety.

Putin is no ones fool.

If Speigel's reasoning is to be considered viable we might well expect the Russians not to continue to add fat to the fire, by failing to fully comply with an agreement they freely entered into as the victor of this bush fire war. More sensibly Russia's interest might well be better served by retiring their forces to their pre conflict positions, in order to reduce the atmosphere of high anxiety and thereby avoid the prospect of bolstering McCain's electoral campaign.

Perhaps Putin does not share in Speigal's interpretation of events?

Other sources indicate that the Georgians were baited into a well laid trap by South Ossetian irregulars. It would appear that the Russian regular military was ready and waiting to confront the Georgian forces when they entered South Ossetian territory.

The Russian plan worked very well, when we consider that the Georgian forces did all that the Russians and South Ossetians expected of them.

The Russian forces are historically very slow in responding to any threat. We might well ask why the Russians forces were so well prepared, and responded so promptly to the Georgian military action.

Patience might well reward us with the truth. Meantime I will take Speigal's views under consideration, with a little salt to flavour my sceptical wait and see reaction to such a heavily one sided opinion.

 

[Chalchalero]

While I see the first article as feasible, the second is pure speculation and propaganda. I have a lot of doubts about what happened in Georgia and wonder if we wouldn't learn something like this but the idea that Cheney kicked this off to bolster McCain is childishly stupid.

You would have to read the actual article. The link is embedded in the title of the article above the first of the quotes. Der Spiegel is not known for speculation or rumour milling and will only write what it knows. This is not the New York Post we are talking about here.

Your reaction mirrors my immediate reaction upon first coming across this news, but when I read it on this website, and saw that they cite sources as well for the conclusions they reached, I had to accept that the possibility (particularly when it comes to Cheney, an unscrupulous man by any account) was a plausible one.

 

[MystikWizard]

Well, of course, it was initially reported in our Media that Georgia did in fact invade South Ossetia first ... however when the Russians struck back, that simple fact seemingly was swept under the rug ... and history seemed to be re-written that Big Bad Russia started the whole conflict through their invasion of Georgia. This lit up the blogosphere as many of us saw what was going on in the Media, and were upset about it.

My personal feeling was that Georgia was goaded into the attack by the U.S. , but Russia frankly knew it was coming, as they were completely prepared for the Invasion.

Then, of course, after it happens, George Bush is able to use that as an excuse to put his Missile Defense Shield up in Poland ... which was something he was pushing for for many, many months ... to which the Russians were fighting with him tooth and nail on. I think this was his last major project he wanted to go forward with, before leaving office.

He'll leave attacking Iran to McCain.

The trap was laid, the Russians took the bait, and we see the result. Now hostilities have been increased in that part of the World, as well.

Russia spoke out against NATO, but they obviously realize the ramifications of attacking Poland, which could start a War. All of NATO would gang up against Russia, and it would get very, very ugly. I think the Russians are going to suck it up, and I don't think we are going to see such an attack, but obviously tensions between us and them are at an all-time high because of this Shield. I know Putin has also accused the U.S. of instigating the Georgian attack on South Ossetia, which as I said, I would not be surprised.

 

[Chalchalero]

Putin has triggered what McCain urgently needs: a sense of anxiety.

Putin is no ones fool.

If Speigel's reasoning is to be considered viable we might well expect the Russians not to continue to add fat to the fire, by failing to fully comply with an agreement they freely entered into as the victor of this bush fire war. More sensibly Russia's interest might well be better served by retiring their forces to their pre conflict positions, in order to reduce the atmosphere of high anxiety and thereby avoid the prospect of bolstering McCain's electoral campaign.

Perhaps Putin does not share in Speigal's interpretation of events?

Other sources indicate that the Georgians were baited into a well laid trap by South Ossetian irregulars. It would appear that the Russian regular military was ready and waiting to confront the Georgian forces when they entered South Ossetian territory.

The Russian plan worked very well, when we consider that the Georgian forces did all that the Russians and South Ossetians expected of them.

The Russian forces are historically very slow in responding to any threat. We might well ask why the Russians forces were so well prepared, and responded so promptly to the Georgian military action.

Patience might well reward us with the truth. Meantime I will take Speigal's views under consideration, with a little salt to flavour my sceptical wait and see reaction to such a heavily one sided opinion.

This is not Der Spiegel's interpretation of events, but rather their simple relaying of information from a report put out by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, a 56 member-state organisation with members spanning the geographical area from Vancouver to Vladivostok. They have no agenda to support, and have no reason to lie.

Their report does still require verification, but it is interesting to note that both Georgia and Russia are member states, so they have nothing to win or lose with this report, other than an accurate reporting of the facts on the ground as they see them. As this happens to be their mandate, and ergo their job, I would tend to give their word a bit more credence on this matter than anyone else's.

As to the one-sidedness of the opinion, I do not believe that the purpose of the article was to give an exhaustive summary of events, but was rather dealing with the change in the minds of certain ministries with regards to Saakashvili's credibility on this matter.

I again urge people to actually read the article, because your responses belie the fact that you have no idea what is actually being said here, and I am not permitted to quote the entire text for you. You will actually have to do some of your own reading, helas!

 

[kallipolis]

It would be naive of me to imagine that a Spiegel article which contrives to add some muscular spice to a review that appears from sources within OSCE, should not be questioned for its apparent easy willingness to support a conspiracy theory that has been making the rounds of blogs and newspaper editorials for some weeks.

The sceptical frame of mind is always aware that those who would attempt to manipulate our understandings, will readily make use of well established media outlets and the reader's apparent easy willingness to swallow those theories that appear in an apparent declaration of truth.

Josef Goebbels said that the ideal route to a man's sense of reason, lies somewhere between what appears to be reasonable and what can be sown to create the desired result.

I would consider my self a little immature if I were to ignore the under current of opinion manipulation, now shamelessly spreading its influence through the intervention of the serious media outlets of Europe.

Some of us have learnt to read, between the lines!

 

[aab91030]

My understanding from the get-go was that Georgia initiated the conflict by attacking South Ossetia. This does not alter the fact that Russia invaded sovereign Georgian territory in a response that was completely disproportionate to the situation.

I agree that the conspiracy theory that the US somehow advised or supported Georgia's action is simply ridiculous. We would have heard something concrete about it by now, either from Saakashvili or elsewhere, much in the same way Saddam Hussein claimed that the US told him we would have "no objection" to their invading Kuwait in the early 90s.

 

[MystikWizard]

I agree that the conspiracy theory that the US somehow advised or supported Georgia's action is simply ridiculous. We would have heard something concrete about it by now, either from Saakashvili or elsewhere, much in the same way Saddam Hussein claimed that the US told him we would have "no objection" to their invading Kuwait in the early 90s.

After what we've seen from this Administration lying this country into the War in Iraq on False Pretenses ... and a False War on Terror ... you seem to think the concept that the Administration meddled in this affair is "ridiculous"?

Some people never learn.

Where as I am not saying there is solid evidence of this, I do however think the scenario is highly plausible and certainly a possibility. To immediately discount the scenario is foolish. I would not be surprised if any such evidence came out after the Administration left office.

As far as "hearing about it from elsewhere", the Russians have already openly made the accusation that the U.S. was involved. As far as Saakashvili admitting it ... you think he is going to do any such thing and turn on the U.S. if he wants to be part of NATO? He's chosen his side, and it's too late for him to plead with Russia after this. He knows where his bread is buttered.

He lost credibility with me after he initiated the attack, and then went on CNN crying about how Russia attacked his country because Georgia only "wants to be free and prosperous". We've heard that line before, and we know how that story turned out.

 

[aab91030]

Midnight77, thanks for your thoughts, but conspiracy theories advanced by oppressive regimes like Russia hold very little water with me.