Informazione
Georgia and the West: Goebbels Would Have Been Happy
1) Georgia and the West: Goebbels Would Have Been Happy
Elena Ponomareva
"...Operation Storm and Operation Flash launched by the
Croatian army in May-August, 1995 against the
unrecognized Republic of Serpska Krajina were
particularly similar to the Georgian offensive in
South Ossetia... On August 9, the Georgian Fuhrer gave
a 10-minute interview to CNN, which opened an obviously
synchronized anti-Russian campaign in the Western
media..."
2) Russia's ambassador to NATO: Georgian President is a war criminal
3) South Ossetia: The War Began!
Andrei Areshev
"...It is symbolic that Tbilisi launched the aggression
on the anniversary of the fall of the Republic of
Serbian Krajina..."
All following articles were posted by Rick Rozoff on the lists:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato
http://lists.topica.com/lists/ANTINATO/read
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/yugoslaviainfo
--- 1 ---
http://en.fondsk.ru/article.php?id=1539
Strategic Culture Foundation
August 12, 2008
Georgia and the West: Goebbels Would Have Been Happy
Elena Ponomareva
The war in South Ossetia is a war of medieval atrocity
unleashed by a country whose culture is based on
Orthodox Christianity, a country claiming to be "a
young democracy" and seeing itself as part of "humane"
Europe.
The aggression launched by the current Georgian regime
and its puppeteers is marked by extraordinary cruelty
and cynical lies. Tbilisi would have never dared to do
what it did without the support of the US.
Even in Ancient Greece, there was an understanding
that wars can be fair or unfair. The civilized West,
part of which Georgia is trying to be, is obsessed by
human rights and believes itself to be superior to the
Greeks, but this does not prevent some (Georgia) from
perpetrating genocide and others (Europe and the US)
from encouraging the aggressor.
The analysis of the way the aggression began - without
a formal declaration of war – and of the overall
conduct of the Georgian leadership makes one ask a
number of questions.
One of them is: can a crazy fanatic be regarded as a
human being? The answer is – definitely not! The
crimes committed in South Ossetia – the killings of
women, children, and senior citizens, the deliberate
extermination of civilians – are instances of inhuman
conduct.
Specialists in ethical anthropology (Boris Didenko)
either explain this type of behavior by brain disease
or attribute it to the specifics of the conduct of
super-aggressive human species. In the latter case,
their intentions simply cannot be changed. In the
Russian language, such individuals are called non-men.
These are monstrous creatures more dangerous than any
wild beasts.
The protracted standoff in South Ossetia is something
much greater than just a regional conflict.
Nor has it ever been exclusively a conflict between
Georgia and South Ossetia.
It also has axiological, moral, and geopolitical
dimensions.
The unexpectedness and unjustifiable atrocity of the
current war, the careful planning of its military and
informational offensives show clearly that one of the
objectives was to provoke Russia's inadequate
response.
Moscow was expected to act inadequately, and those who
planned the aggression calculated the options open to
Russia.
Option 1: Russia's nonintervention and a withdrawal of
the peacekeepers (or the limitation of their activity
to the defense of their checkpoints).
By the way, this mode of behavior was typical for
peacekeeping forces of various levels throughout the
conflict in Yugoslavia.
Operation Storm and Operation Flash launched by the
Croatian army in May-August, 1995 against the
unrecognized Republic of Serpska Krajina were
particularly similar to the Georgian offensive in
South Ossetia.
One of the results of the above operations was the
total (and, as I firmly believe, deliberate) demise of
the entire UN system of peacekeeping and region
security measures. The world literally watched the
flight of 250,000 Serb civilians and the bombardment
of refugee convoys by Croatian warplanes.
The Serb population in the region decreased by 90.7%
following the Croatian offensive which was silently
OKed by the international community. (1)
Confident of the US support, Saakashvili's regime
hoped to achieve a similar result in South Ossetia.
Croatia practically turned into a mono-ethnic state.
No matter what had been promised, at that time Serbs
saw no help from either the Serbian Republic or
Belgrade. It is well-known what happened to the Pale
and Belgrade leaders later – betrayal is never
rewarded by happiness.
Russia chose to act otherwise.
In the horrible days of the tragedy, Russians not only
truly fulfilled their peacekeeping obligations, but –
above all – they also did not betray their countrymen
in South Ossetia. This means a lot.
Option 2: desired by the US instigators of the war and
the Georgian aggressor: Russia's direct involvement in
an armed conflict with Georgia. The failure of the
expectation made Saakshvili change his plans on the
first day of the war.
On August 9, the Georgian Fuhrer gave a 10-minute
interview to CNN, which opened an obviously
synchronized anti-Russian campaign in the Western
media.
Currently, the main theme is that Russia used all of
its military might against tiny Georgia.
Having such dedicated followers could make Nazi
propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels happy.
As for Saakashvili, he has learned by heart not only
Goebbels's notorious commandment "A lie repeated 100
times becomes the truth", but also the ninth
comandment of national socialism which said "Do what
must be done in the name of the New Gemany without
shame! " (2).
In the case of Saakashvili, it could read the same but
with "the New Georgia" instead.
Over the past several days, the independent and
objective Western media have been launching an all-out
mankurtization campaign.
The term mankurt was introduced into modern languages
by well-know Soviet-era novelist Chinghiz Aitmatov in
his The Day Lasts More Than a Hundred Years.
According to an ancient Turkic myth, a fresh raw camel
hide would be put as a cap on the thoroughly shaven
head of a captive meant to be turned into a slave.
The slave with his hands tied and with a large wooden
stock around his neck preventing him from reaching his
head would be left in a desert for several days.
Once the hide would start drying it would shrink and
bind to the head, thus causing intolerable sufferings
further strengthened by thirst. In a while the victim
either died or lost the memory of the past life and
became a perfect slave having no independent will and
totally subdued by its master.
In the modern world, the complex procedure of
suppressing human will and ability to think and to
analyze has become extremely simple and is known as
brainwashing.
Judging by the dirty lies about the war waged by the
Georgian leadership against civilians and Russian
peacekeepers in South Ossetia, the biased Western
media and political leaders of the Euro-Atlantic
civilization regard their own citizens as mankurts.
The global success of brainwashing during the
Croatian, Bosnian, Kosovo, Chechen, Iraqi, Crimean,
Transdnistrian and other crises is renowned. The
aggression of mankurts was invariably directed at the
nations designated by the masters - Serbs, Russians,
Iraqis. What could prevent Georgia from resorting to
the familiar technology?
Here is an example: the interview given to CNN by
Russian envoy to the UN Security Council V. Churkin,
in which he condemned the barbarian conduct of the
Georgian aggressor, was aired with a caption saying
that Russia was bombing Georgian towns, and the title
remained on the screen throughout the broadcast.
German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer would have
explained the current policies adopted by Western
media as follows: "invariably, the source of lies is
the intention to dominate others by suppressing their
will in order to reaffirm one's own. Consequently,
lies as such stem from injustice, greed, and anger".
Western journalists who never visited South Ossetia
and used the footage from Russian media consistently
avoided mentioning the following appalling figures:
2,000 people – over 15% of the population of South
Ossetia – had been killed in less than 24 hours. The
international community so preoccupied with human
rights issues does not seem to be concerned about the
people trapped without water, electric power, and food
under the ruins of Tskhinvali.
Why is it that Russia is the only country to supply
humanitarian aid to South Ossetia? What has happened
to your hearts, humane Europeans? Have you forgotten
how to use Internet? Do you no longer have satellite
TV? Are you really so afraid of alternative
information sources?
***
To an extent, my criticism of the Western media and
their audiences applies to Russian news agencies and
TV channels as well. We must be doing a fairly poor
job if it is so easy to portray Russia as the
aggressor and the suppressor of the Caucasus!
It is common knowledge that whoever has information
has power. In the case of Russia, the issue is
extremely serious: its national security and the
protection of its national interests are impossible
without informational security, which must be promoted
by everyone here from the President to a provincial
newspaper journalist. Anyhow, we are people, not
mankurts!
____________________
(1) Z. Lilic. Prospects for Peace and Cooperation.
Serbia, Belgrade, 1996, #29, p. 7.
(2) Thus Spoke Goebbels. Selected Papers of the Reich
Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda.
//Goebbels J. Die ausgewählte Reden und Artikel. -
http://hedrook.vho.org/download/goebbels.rar
--- 2 ---
http://www.ruvr.ru/main.php?lng=eng&q=30745&cid=45&p=09.08.2008
Voice of Russia
August 9, 2008
Georgian President is a war criminal
Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili is a war
criminal who organized ethnic cleansing and genocide
against civilians in South Ossetia.
Russia's ambassador to NATO Dmitri Rogozin said that
the International Court of Justice in The Hague could
accuse him of committing these crimes.
--- 3 ---
http://en.fondsk.ru/article.php?id=1530
Strategic Culture Foundation (Russia)
August 9, 2008
South Ossetia: The War Began!
Andrei Areshev
On the night of August 7, Georgian forces launched an
attack on Tskhinvali, which Tbilisi cynically
described as an effort to restore the constitutional
order.
Just hours earlier, Saakashvili declared a ceasefire
in the conflict zone, but the move was only a
propaganda maneuver disguising the plan for a
large-scale offensive. The timing is carefully chosen
— the attention worldwide is focused on the opening of
the Olympic Games, Russian Prime Minister V. Putin is
in Beijing, and Russian President D. Medvedev is on a
short vacation.
Georgian forces are acting with extreme ferocity.
A total devastation of the Tskhinvali downtown which
came under Grad missile, artillery, mortar, and
machinegun fire has been reported.
Dozens of blasts shatter the city every minute.
Tens of armored vehicles and thousands of soldiers
moved into the conflict zone.
Russian Peacekeeping Force Deputy Commander V. Ivanov
said that the positions of the peacekeepers were not
directly targeted or hit and that they continue to
watch the situation in the region. However, the
Ossetian side and Russian journalists say that the
peacekeepers' headquarters came under fire.
The offensive has already left tens if not hundreds of
people dead.
Nevertheless, it appears that the activity of the
peacekeepers remains limited to monitoring the
situation.
Their inaction helps the aggressor — the Georgian side
states that the Russian peacekeepers are not
intervening in the conflict. The army of South Ossetia
returned fire, but it has no potential comparable to
that of the Georgian forces. Several Ossetian villages
have already been seized and there is a possibility
that the Zar highway linking the Republic to Russia
will be blocked.
The statement made by Mathew Bryza in connection with
the events is remarkably cynical — cunningly siding
with Georgia and interpreting Moscow's position in the
manner of a downright hooligan, he blamed the
escalation on South Ossetia.
Earlier Condolezza Rice said in Tbilisi that the US
was entirely on Georgia's side in the conflict, thus
leaving no doubts concerning the US position.
US State Department spokesman Gonzalo Gallegos says
the US demands that Moscow exert pressure on the
leadership of South Ossetia in order to achieve a
ceasefire in the conflict zone. At the same time, the
Georgian side is no more than advised to exercise
restraint.
It is symbolic that Tbilisi launched the aggression on
the anniversary of the fall of the Republic of Serbian
Krajina.
Its demise became a prologue to the next phase of the
Balkan war - to the war in Kosovo, the NATO strikes on
Serbia, and the humiliation and partition of the
country. It has been said many times that the West is
reusing the Balkan scenario in the Caucasus, and that
this time Russia is planned to play the role of
Serbia.
Belgrade politicians who said 13 years ago that
selling out their countrymen in Croatia and Bosnia
would preclude Western aggression now pretend they
were unaware that Serbia's turn would come after that
ofthe Serbs in Croatia and Bosnia.
Is Moscow capable to learn at least anything from the
recent past?
In 1995, the UN "peacekeepers" opened the way for the
Croatian army which was killing Serbs, and these days
we see Russian and Ossetian peacekeepers helplessly
watching Georgian artillery hammer residential
quarters in Tskhinvali.
In the Caucasus, the consequences of such helplessness
are going to be catastrophic — there will be no
respect for a weak country unable to normalize the
situation at its border and to protect its citizens.
The situation can spin out of control and evolve to
conditions under which the federal authorities will be
unable to control not only the activities of informal
leaders and the mobs of their followers, but even
those of the heads of the Republics of the North
Caucasus who — in case the escalation continues - will
start acting independently and attempt to somehow
establish control over the process.
North Ossetian President Taymuraz Mamsurov already
said that hundreds of volunteers are on their way to
South Ossetia. He said: "We cannot stop them."
People from other Republics of the North Caucasus and
from Abkhazia are ready to do the same. As of 4 a.m.
August 8, the border guards in North Ossetia did not
report Russian forces crossing the border.
The Georgian aggression deals a heavy blow to Russia's
positions in the North Caucasus. In case it is
"backed" by several terrorist acts (the blast at a
beach in Sochi was a wakeup call), more than just the
2014 Olympiad will be at stake. The entire system of
administration in Russia can be rendered shaky by
several precisely targeted strikes, the result being a
direct threat to the existence of the Russian state.
Sadly, the warnings about the long-term negative
consequences of the passivity of Russian diplomacy in
dealing with the issue of the unrecognized Republics
have had no effect despite being reiterated for years.
The obvious truth that the Georgian authority so
heavily armed by the West is not going to play games
and some day will go all the way to the end was simply
ignored. As in 1992 and 1993, it is Russia who will
have to address the resulting problems, the difference
being that today's Georgian army is something much
more serious than the gangs led by Kitovani and
Ioseliani.
So far Moscow has reacted to Georgia's aggressive
intentions solely by uncertain calls for peace and
invitations to sign an agreement not to use force,
thus practically making the job easier for Tbilisi.
Hopes that "things will somehow settle down" and that
Moscow's non-recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia
will delay Georgia's NATO integration — which was a
decided matter - have not materialized.
Tbilisi openly ridiculed such expectations and
remained fully aware of its tasks and of the support
of its allies. Unfortunately, Russia did not provide
equally decisive support to its friends in the
Caucasus.
At the moment, only urgent measures can remedy the
situation. Russia should immediately break diplomatic
relations with Georgia, and, in case the aggression
continues, deliver airstrikes on the Georgian forces
in South Osssetia (including the Liakhv corridor which
is Georgia's main strategic recourse in the de-facto
Republic).
Only a prompt and resolute response can arrest the
aggression and also prevent similar developments in
Abkhazia, which would destabilize the Caucasus
irreversibly.
Statements like "we will not just stand by" and "we
have an adequate response" are no longer enough.
As the informational aspect of the resolute response,
Russia should state that it is opening an
anti-terrorist operation aimed at countering the act
of state terrorism and at protecting the lives of
civilians.
Following the return to the status quo — this time
ensured by force — Russia should immediately form a
defense alliance with South Ossetia and Abkhazia and
the Russian parliament should establish the status of
the two Republics as associated subjects within the
Russian Federation.
1) Georgia and the West: Goebbels Would Have Been Happy
Elena Ponomareva
"...Operation Storm and Operation Flash launched by the
Croatian army in May-August, 1995 against the
unrecognized Republic of Serpska Krajina were
particularly similar to the Georgian offensive in
South Ossetia... On August 9, the Georgian Fuhrer gave
a 10-minute interview to CNN, which opened an obviously
synchronized anti-Russian campaign in the Western
media..."
2) Russia's ambassador to NATO: Georgian President is a war criminal
3) South Ossetia: The War Began!
Andrei Areshev
"...It is symbolic that Tbilisi launched the aggression
on the anniversary of the fall of the Republic of
Serbian Krajina..."
All following articles were posted by Rick Rozoff on the lists:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato
http://lists.topica.com/lists/ANTINATO/read
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/yugoslaviainfo
--- 1 ---
http://en.fondsk.ru/article.php?id=1539
Strategic Culture Foundation
August 12, 2008
Georgia and the West: Goebbels Would Have Been Happy
Elena Ponomareva
The war in South Ossetia is a war of medieval atrocity
unleashed by a country whose culture is based on
Orthodox Christianity, a country claiming to be "a
young democracy" and seeing itself as part of "humane"
Europe.
The aggression launched by the current Georgian regime
and its puppeteers is marked by extraordinary cruelty
and cynical lies. Tbilisi would have never dared to do
what it did without the support of the US.
Even in Ancient Greece, there was an understanding
that wars can be fair or unfair. The civilized West,
part of which Georgia is trying to be, is obsessed by
human rights and believes itself to be superior to the
Greeks, but this does not prevent some (Georgia) from
perpetrating genocide and others (Europe and the US)
from encouraging the aggressor.
The analysis of the way the aggression began - without
a formal declaration of war – and of the overall
conduct of the Georgian leadership makes one ask a
number of questions.
One of them is: can a crazy fanatic be regarded as a
human being? The answer is – definitely not! The
crimes committed in South Ossetia – the killings of
women, children, and senior citizens, the deliberate
extermination of civilians – are instances of inhuman
conduct.
Specialists in ethical anthropology (Boris Didenko)
either explain this type of behavior by brain disease
or attribute it to the specifics of the conduct of
super-aggressive human species. In the latter case,
their intentions simply cannot be changed. In the
Russian language, such individuals are called non-men.
These are monstrous creatures more dangerous than any
wild beasts.
The protracted standoff in South Ossetia is something
much greater than just a regional conflict.
Nor has it ever been exclusively a conflict between
Georgia and South Ossetia.
It also has axiological, moral, and geopolitical
dimensions.
The unexpectedness and unjustifiable atrocity of the
current war, the careful planning of its military and
informational offensives show clearly that one of the
objectives was to provoke Russia's inadequate
response.
Moscow was expected to act inadequately, and those who
planned the aggression calculated the options open to
Russia.
Option 1: Russia's nonintervention and a withdrawal of
the peacekeepers (or the limitation of their activity
to the defense of their checkpoints).
By the way, this mode of behavior was typical for
peacekeeping forces of various levels throughout the
conflict in Yugoslavia.
Operation Storm and Operation Flash launched by the
Croatian army in May-August, 1995 against the
unrecognized Republic of Serpska Krajina were
particularly similar to the Georgian offensive in
South Ossetia.
One of the results of the above operations was the
total (and, as I firmly believe, deliberate) demise of
the entire UN system of peacekeeping and region
security measures. The world literally watched the
flight of 250,000 Serb civilians and the bombardment
of refugee convoys by Croatian warplanes.
The Serb population in the region decreased by 90.7%
following the Croatian offensive which was silently
OKed by the international community. (1)
Confident of the US support, Saakashvili's regime
hoped to achieve a similar result in South Ossetia.
Croatia practically turned into a mono-ethnic state.
No matter what had been promised, at that time Serbs
saw no help from either the Serbian Republic or
Belgrade. It is well-known what happened to the Pale
and Belgrade leaders later – betrayal is never
rewarded by happiness.
Russia chose to act otherwise.
In the horrible days of the tragedy, Russians not only
truly fulfilled their peacekeeping obligations, but –
above all – they also did not betray their countrymen
in South Ossetia. This means a lot.
Option 2: desired by the US instigators of the war and
the Georgian aggressor: Russia's direct involvement in
an armed conflict with Georgia. The failure of the
expectation made Saakshvili change his plans on the
first day of the war.
On August 9, the Georgian Fuhrer gave a 10-minute
interview to CNN, which opened an obviously
synchronized anti-Russian campaign in the Western
media.
Currently, the main theme is that Russia used all of
its military might against tiny Georgia.
Having such dedicated followers could make Nazi
propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels happy.
As for Saakashvili, he has learned by heart not only
Goebbels's notorious commandment "A lie repeated 100
times becomes the truth", but also the ninth
comandment of national socialism which said "Do what
must be done in the name of the New Gemany without
shame! " (2).
In the case of Saakashvili, it could read the same but
with "the New Georgia" instead.
Over the past several days, the independent and
objective Western media have been launching an all-out
mankurtization campaign.
The term mankurt was introduced into modern languages
by well-know Soviet-era novelist Chinghiz Aitmatov in
his The Day Lasts More Than a Hundred Years.
According to an ancient Turkic myth, a fresh raw camel
hide would be put as a cap on the thoroughly shaven
head of a captive meant to be turned into a slave.
The slave with his hands tied and with a large wooden
stock around his neck preventing him from reaching his
head would be left in a desert for several days.
Once the hide would start drying it would shrink and
bind to the head, thus causing intolerable sufferings
further strengthened by thirst. In a while the victim
either died or lost the memory of the past life and
became a perfect slave having no independent will and
totally subdued by its master.
In the modern world, the complex procedure of
suppressing human will and ability to think and to
analyze has become extremely simple and is known as
brainwashing.
Judging by the dirty lies about the war waged by the
Georgian leadership against civilians and Russian
peacekeepers in South Ossetia, the biased Western
media and political leaders of the Euro-Atlantic
civilization regard their own citizens as mankurts.
The global success of brainwashing during the
Croatian, Bosnian, Kosovo, Chechen, Iraqi, Crimean,
Transdnistrian and other crises is renowned. The
aggression of mankurts was invariably directed at the
nations designated by the masters - Serbs, Russians,
Iraqis. What could prevent Georgia from resorting to
the familiar technology?
Here is an example: the interview given to CNN by
Russian envoy to the UN Security Council V. Churkin,
in which he condemned the barbarian conduct of the
Georgian aggressor, was aired with a caption saying
that Russia was bombing Georgian towns, and the title
remained on the screen throughout the broadcast.
German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer would have
explained the current policies adopted by Western
media as follows: "invariably, the source of lies is
the intention to dominate others by suppressing their
will in order to reaffirm one's own. Consequently,
lies as such stem from injustice, greed, and anger".
Western journalists who never visited South Ossetia
and used the footage from Russian media consistently
avoided mentioning the following appalling figures:
2,000 people – over 15% of the population of South
Ossetia – had been killed in less than 24 hours. The
international community so preoccupied with human
rights issues does not seem to be concerned about the
people trapped without water, electric power, and food
under the ruins of Tskhinvali.
Why is it that Russia is the only country to supply
humanitarian aid to South Ossetia? What has happened
to your hearts, humane Europeans? Have you forgotten
how to use Internet? Do you no longer have satellite
TV? Are you really so afraid of alternative
information sources?
***
To an extent, my criticism of the Western media and
their audiences applies to Russian news agencies and
TV channels as well. We must be doing a fairly poor
job if it is so easy to portray Russia as the
aggressor and the suppressor of the Caucasus!
It is common knowledge that whoever has information
has power. In the case of Russia, the issue is
extremely serious: its national security and the
protection of its national interests are impossible
without informational security, which must be promoted
by everyone here from the President to a provincial
newspaper journalist. Anyhow, we are people, not
mankurts!
____________________
(1) Z. Lilic. Prospects for Peace and Cooperation.
Serbia, Belgrade, 1996, #29, p. 7.
(2) Thus Spoke Goebbels. Selected Papers of the Reich
Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda.
//Goebbels J. Die ausgewählte Reden und Artikel. -
http://hedrook.vho.org/download/goebbels.rar
--- 2 ---
http://www.ruvr.ru/main.php?lng=eng&q=30745&cid=45&p=09.08.2008
Voice of Russia
August 9, 2008
Georgian President is a war criminal
Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili is a war
criminal who organized ethnic cleansing and genocide
against civilians in South Ossetia.
Russia's ambassador to NATO Dmitri Rogozin said that
the International Court of Justice in The Hague could
accuse him of committing these crimes.
--- 3 ---
http://en.fondsk.ru/article.php?id=1530
Strategic Culture Foundation (Russia)
August 9, 2008
South Ossetia: The War Began!
Andrei Areshev
On the night of August 7, Georgian forces launched an
attack on Tskhinvali, which Tbilisi cynically
described as an effort to restore the constitutional
order.
Just hours earlier, Saakashvili declared a ceasefire
in the conflict zone, but the move was only a
propaganda maneuver disguising the plan for a
large-scale offensive. The timing is carefully chosen
— the attention worldwide is focused on the opening of
the Olympic Games, Russian Prime Minister V. Putin is
in Beijing, and Russian President D. Medvedev is on a
short vacation.
Georgian forces are acting with extreme ferocity.
A total devastation of the Tskhinvali downtown which
came under Grad missile, artillery, mortar, and
machinegun fire has been reported.
Dozens of blasts shatter the city every minute.
Tens of armored vehicles and thousands of soldiers
moved into the conflict zone.
Russian Peacekeeping Force Deputy Commander V. Ivanov
said that the positions of the peacekeepers were not
directly targeted or hit and that they continue to
watch the situation in the region. However, the
Ossetian side and Russian journalists say that the
peacekeepers' headquarters came under fire.
The offensive has already left tens if not hundreds of
people dead.
Nevertheless, it appears that the activity of the
peacekeepers remains limited to monitoring the
situation.
Their inaction helps the aggressor — the Georgian side
states that the Russian peacekeepers are not
intervening in the conflict. The army of South Ossetia
returned fire, but it has no potential comparable to
that of the Georgian forces. Several Ossetian villages
have already been seized and there is a possibility
that the Zar highway linking the Republic to Russia
will be blocked.
The statement made by Mathew Bryza in connection with
the events is remarkably cynical — cunningly siding
with Georgia and interpreting Moscow's position in the
manner of a downright hooligan, he blamed the
escalation on South Ossetia.
Earlier Condolezza Rice said in Tbilisi that the US
was entirely on Georgia's side in the conflict, thus
leaving no doubts concerning the US position.
US State Department spokesman Gonzalo Gallegos says
the US demands that Moscow exert pressure on the
leadership of South Ossetia in order to achieve a
ceasefire in the conflict zone. At the same time, the
Georgian side is no more than advised to exercise
restraint.
It is symbolic that Tbilisi launched the aggression on
the anniversary of the fall of the Republic of Serbian
Krajina.
Its demise became a prologue to the next phase of the
Balkan war - to the war in Kosovo, the NATO strikes on
Serbia, and the humiliation and partition of the
country. It has been said many times that the West is
reusing the Balkan scenario in the Caucasus, and that
this time Russia is planned to play the role of
Serbia.
Belgrade politicians who said 13 years ago that
selling out their countrymen in Croatia and Bosnia
would preclude Western aggression now pretend they
were unaware that Serbia's turn would come after that
ofthe Serbs in Croatia and Bosnia.
Is Moscow capable to learn at least anything from the
recent past?
In 1995, the UN "peacekeepers" opened the way for the
Croatian army which was killing Serbs, and these days
we see Russian and Ossetian peacekeepers helplessly
watching Georgian artillery hammer residential
quarters in Tskhinvali.
In the Caucasus, the consequences of such helplessness
are going to be catastrophic — there will be no
respect for a weak country unable to normalize the
situation at its border and to protect its citizens.
The situation can spin out of control and evolve to
conditions under which the federal authorities will be
unable to control not only the activities of informal
leaders and the mobs of their followers, but even
those of the heads of the Republics of the North
Caucasus who — in case the escalation continues - will
start acting independently and attempt to somehow
establish control over the process.
North Ossetian President Taymuraz Mamsurov already
said that hundreds of volunteers are on their way to
South Ossetia. He said: "We cannot stop them."
People from other Republics of the North Caucasus and
from Abkhazia are ready to do the same. As of 4 a.m.
August 8, the border guards in North Ossetia did not
report Russian forces crossing the border.
The Georgian aggression deals a heavy blow to Russia's
positions in the North Caucasus. In case it is
"backed" by several terrorist acts (the blast at a
beach in Sochi was a wakeup call), more than just the
2014 Olympiad will be at stake. The entire system of
administration in Russia can be rendered shaky by
several precisely targeted strikes, the result being a
direct threat to the existence of the Russian state.
Sadly, the warnings about the long-term negative
consequences of the passivity of Russian diplomacy in
dealing with the issue of the unrecognized Republics
have had no effect despite being reiterated for years.
The obvious truth that the Georgian authority so
heavily armed by the West is not going to play games
and some day will go all the way to the end was simply
ignored. As in 1992 and 1993, it is Russia who will
have to address the resulting problems, the difference
being that today's Georgian army is something much
more serious than the gangs led by Kitovani and
Ioseliani.
So far Moscow has reacted to Georgia's aggressive
intentions solely by uncertain calls for peace and
invitations to sign an agreement not to use force,
thus practically making the job easier for Tbilisi.
Hopes that "things will somehow settle down" and that
Moscow's non-recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia
will delay Georgia's NATO integration — which was a
decided matter - have not materialized.
Tbilisi openly ridiculed such expectations and
remained fully aware of its tasks and of the support
of its allies. Unfortunately, Russia did not provide
equally decisive support to its friends in the
Caucasus.
At the moment, only urgent measures can remedy the
situation. Russia should immediately break diplomatic
relations with Georgia, and, in case the aggression
continues, deliver airstrikes on the Georgian forces
in South Osssetia (including the Liakhv corridor which
is Georgia's main strategic recourse in the de-facto
Republic).
Only a prompt and resolute response can arrest the
aggression and also prevent similar developments in
Abkhazia, which would destabilize the Caucasus
irreversibly.
Statements like "we will not just stand by" and "we
have an adequate response" are no longer enough.
As the informational aspect of the resolute response,
Russia should state that it is opening an
anti-terrorist operation aimed at countering the act
of state terrorism and at protecting the lives of
civilians.
Following the return to the status quo — this time
ensured by force — Russia should immediately form a
defense alliance with South Ossetia and Abkhazia and
the Russian parliament should establish the status of
the two Republics as associated subjects within the
Russian Federation.
Auf Deutsch: »Srebrenica ist Teil einer größeren Tragödie«
Radovan Karadzic wird vor UN-Tribunal wegen Völkermord angeklagt.
Serbophobie macht fairen Prozeß in Den Haag unmöglich.
Ein Gespräch mit Phillip Corwin
Von Cathrin Schütz
junge Welt (Berlin) - 31.07.2008 - www.jungewelt.de
PDF: https://www.cnj.it/documentazione/jw-2008-07-31.pdf
---
http://www.workers.org/2008/world/karadzic_0814/
U.N. official tells truth behind Bosnian Serb leader's arrest
Published Aug 11, 2008 7:17 PM
At the end of July the Bosnian Serb President Radovan Karadzic was
taken from Belgrade and placed in the Scheveningen detention center
near The Hague, Netherlands, where the International Criminal
Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia charged him with war crimes,
including "genocide," during the 1991-1995 civil war in Bosnia.
Those who only learn their news from the corporate media might not
realize that the ICTY was created not by the United Nations but by
NATO; that it is not an impartial court but has been directed almost
exclusively against Serbs; and that it was incapable of convicting
its most famous defendant, President Slobodan Milosevic of
Yugoslavia, who died in custody under suspicious circumstances after
demolishing the prosecution's case. They would also not learn that
German and U.S. interference in Yugoslavia, with the intention of
destroying the remaining socialist-leaning state in Eastern Europe,
had provoked and prolonged the civil war in Bosnia, leading to
thousands of additional deaths. For a different view of that
history, see: www.workers.org/2006/world/milosevic/.
Any international court that failed to put the U.S. and German
leaders on trial—those who ordered and carried out not only the 1999
war against Yugoslavia, but 10 years of aggression that finally
dismantled that multinational country—cannot be taken seriously as
an unbiased court. It is an imperialist political tool.
Below we publish excerpts from the telling remarks of U.S. citizen
Phillip Corwin, taken from an interview by Cathrin Schütz in the
German daily newspaper Junge Welt on July 31. (jungewelt.de) In the
spring and summer of 1995 Corwin was the "Civil Affairs Coordinator
and Delegate of the Special Representative for the UN Secretary
General for Bosnia and Herzegovina," and has written a book about
his experience.
Cathrin Schütz: Richard Holbrooke, Paddy Ashdown and many other
Western officials once involved with the Yugoslav crisis unanimously
call the arrest of Radovan Karadzic the capture of one of the most
brutal war criminals in contemporary history. What was your reaction
to his capture and statements like Holbrooke's: "Karadzic would have
been a good Nazi"?
Phillip Corwin: Holbrooke and Ashdown used the wars in former
Yugoslavia to advance their own careers. Phrases like "one of the
most brutal" and "good Nazi" are purely emotional, and only remind
us of the terrible biases those men held, and the crippling damage
they did as so-called diplomats. Even now, they contribute to the
Serbophobia that makes a fair trail in The Hague almost impossible.
In any criminal proceeding, the question of intent is paramount.
From my contacts with Bosnian Serb officials, including Dr.
Karadzic, I was convinced that the general intent of the Bosnian
Serb leadership was to protect Serbs, not to kill Muslims or Croats
or any other ethnic group.
CS: The main allegation is his alleged responsibility for genocide
of Bosnian Muslims in the town of Srebrenica in July 1995. At the
time Srebrenica fell to the Bosnian Serb army, you were the highest
ranking United Nations civilian official in Bosnia-Herzegovina. What
had happened?
PC: First, one has to realize that the tragedy of Srebrenica was
part of a larger tragedy. ... What happened in Srebrenica was not a
single large massacre of Muslims by Serbs, but rather a series of
very bloody attacks and counterattacks over a three-year period,
which reached a crescendo in 1995.
And the number of Muslim dead in the last battle of Srebrenica, as
BBC reporter Jonathan Rooper has pointed out, was most likely in the
hundreds, not in the thousands. Moreover, it is likely that the
number of Muslim dead was probably no more than the number of Serbs
who had been killed in Srebrenica and its environs during the
preceding years by Bosnian Commander Naser Oric and his predatory
gangs.
The exaggeration of the number of missing Bosnian Muslims shows that
the official reporting was political.
In May 1995, two months before the final battle at Srebrenica, 90
percent of the Serbs living in Western Slavonia were ethnically
cleansed by the Croatian army in "Operation Flash." A month after
Srebrenica, 200,000 Serbs were ethnically cleansed from their
ancestral homes in the Krajina area of Croatia. The international
community did nothing in either case.
Srebrenica must be placed in perspective. If, indeed, 700 innocent
Muslims were massacred during the battle of Srebrenica in July 1995,
then that was a war crime and the criminals should be prosecuted.
But the difference between 700 and 8,000 is political not numerical.
CS: One media article stated that "The [Yugoslavia] Tribunal was the
child, in part, of Western governments' guilt over doing so little
to stop the war in the former Yugoslavia and its related
atrocities." Is that what you observed?
PC: I think the main reason for the destruction of Yugoslavia was
the ambition of NATO to move eastward. Although the Cold War had
ended, the Cold Warriors were still in power. Washington still felt
Russia was its biggest threat because it had so many nuclear
weapons, and Washington wanted to move up to the borders of the
former Soviet Union. ICTY was an attempt to provide a legal
framework for NATO's eastward expansion.
ICTY was not formed out of guilt. Imperialism never suffers from
guilt. ICTY was formed to continue the pressure on those in Eastern
Europe who opposed NATO expansion.
CS: Will Karadzic get a fair trial?
PC: I don't believe Dr. Karadzic can get a fair trial in The Hague.
CS: Although most of the commentators/journalists know little or
nothing about Bosnia and the Bosnian war, they all "know" that
Karadzic is a war criminal. How come?
PC: After the Vietnam War, the Pentagon knew it had to learn to
control the press. It has been very successful in doing that. During
the Yugoslav wars, the press bought the idea that NATO was
fulfilling its moral duty by opposing "Serbian racism."
-----------
Articles copyright 1995-2008 Workers World. Verbatim copying and
distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium
without royalty provided this notice is preserved.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: ww@...
Subscribe wwnews-subscribe@...
Support independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php
Radovan Karadzic wird vor UN-Tribunal wegen Völkermord angeklagt.
Serbophobie macht fairen Prozeß in Den Haag unmöglich.
Ein Gespräch mit Phillip Corwin
Von Cathrin Schütz
junge Welt (Berlin) - 31.07.2008 - www.jungewelt.de
PDF: https://www.cnj.it/documentazione/jw-2008-07-31.pdf
---
http://www.workers.org/2008/world/karadzic_0814/
U.N. official tells truth behind Bosnian Serb leader's arrest
Published Aug 11, 2008 7:17 PM
At the end of July the Bosnian Serb President Radovan Karadzic was
taken from Belgrade and placed in the Scheveningen detention center
near The Hague, Netherlands, where the International Criminal
Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia charged him with war crimes,
including "genocide," during the 1991-1995 civil war in Bosnia.
Those who only learn their news from the corporate media might not
realize that the ICTY was created not by the United Nations but by
NATO; that it is not an impartial court but has been directed almost
exclusively against Serbs; and that it was incapable of convicting
its most famous defendant, President Slobodan Milosevic of
Yugoslavia, who died in custody under suspicious circumstances after
demolishing the prosecution's case. They would also not learn that
German and U.S. interference in Yugoslavia, with the intention of
destroying the remaining socialist-leaning state in Eastern Europe,
had provoked and prolonged the civil war in Bosnia, leading to
thousands of additional deaths. For a different view of that
history, see: www.workers.org/2006/world/milosevic/.
Any international court that failed to put the U.S. and German
leaders on trial—those who ordered and carried out not only the 1999
war against Yugoslavia, but 10 years of aggression that finally
dismantled that multinational country—cannot be taken seriously as
an unbiased court. It is an imperialist political tool.
Below we publish excerpts from the telling remarks of U.S. citizen
Phillip Corwin, taken from an interview by Cathrin Schütz in the
German daily newspaper Junge Welt on July 31. (jungewelt.de) In the
spring and summer of 1995 Corwin was the "Civil Affairs Coordinator
and Delegate of the Special Representative for the UN Secretary
General for Bosnia and Herzegovina," and has written a book about
his experience.
Cathrin Schütz: Richard Holbrooke, Paddy Ashdown and many other
Western officials once involved with the Yugoslav crisis unanimously
call the arrest of Radovan Karadzic the capture of one of the most
brutal war criminals in contemporary history. What was your reaction
to his capture and statements like Holbrooke's: "Karadzic would have
been a good Nazi"?
Phillip Corwin: Holbrooke and Ashdown used the wars in former
Yugoslavia to advance their own careers. Phrases like "one of the
most brutal" and "good Nazi" are purely emotional, and only remind
us of the terrible biases those men held, and the crippling damage
they did as so-called diplomats. Even now, they contribute to the
Serbophobia that makes a fair trail in The Hague almost impossible.
In any criminal proceeding, the question of intent is paramount.
From my contacts with Bosnian Serb officials, including Dr.
Karadzic, I was convinced that the general intent of the Bosnian
Serb leadership was to protect Serbs, not to kill Muslims or Croats
or any other ethnic group.
CS: The main allegation is his alleged responsibility for genocide
of Bosnian Muslims in the town of Srebrenica in July 1995. At the
time Srebrenica fell to the Bosnian Serb army, you were the highest
ranking United Nations civilian official in Bosnia-Herzegovina. What
had happened?
PC: First, one has to realize that the tragedy of Srebrenica was
part of a larger tragedy. ... What happened in Srebrenica was not a
single large massacre of Muslims by Serbs, but rather a series of
very bloody attacks and counterattacks over a three-year period,
which reached a crescendo in 1995.
And the number of Muslim dead in the last battle of Srebrenica, as
BBC reporter Jonathan Rooper has pointed out, was most likely in the
hundreds, not in the thousands. Moreover, it is likely that the
number of Muslim dead was probably no more than the number of Serbs
who had been killed in Srebrenica and its environs during the
preceding years by Bosnian Commander Naser Oric and his predatory
gangs.
The exaggeration of the number of missing Bosnian Muslims shows that
the official reporting was political.
In May 1995, two months before the final battle at Srebrenica, 90
percent of the Serbs living in Western Slavonia were ethnically
cleansed by the Croatian army in "Operation Flash." A month after
Srebrenica, 200,000 Serbs were ethnically cleansed from their
ancestral homes in the Krajina area of Croatia. The international
community did nothing in either case.
Srebrenica must be placed in perspective. If, indeed, 700 innocent
Muslims were massacred during the battle of Srebrenica in July 1995,
then that was a war crime and the criminals should be prosecuted.
But the difference between 700 and 8,000 is political not numerical.
CS: One media article stated that "The [Yugoslavia] Tribunal was the
child, in part, of Western governments' guilt over doing so little
to stop the war in the former Yugoslavia and its related
atrocities." Is that what you observed?
PC: I think the main reason for the destruction of Yugoslavia was
the ambition of NATO to move eastward. Although the Cold War had
ended, the Cold Warriors were still in power. Washington still felt
Russia was its biggest threat because it had so many nuclear
weapons, and Washington wanted to move up to the borders of the
former Soviet Union. ICTY was an attempt to provide a legal
framework for NATO's eastward expansion.
ICTY was not formed out of guilt. Imperialism never suffers from
guilt. ICTY was formed to continue the pressure on those in Eastern
Europe who opposed NATO expansion.
CS: Will Karadzic get a fair trial?
PC: I don't believe Dr. Karadzic can get a fair trial in The Hague.
CS: Although most of the commentators/journalists know little or
nothing about Bosnia and the Bosnian war, they all "know" that
Karadzic is a war criminal. How come?
PC: After the Vietnam War, the Pentagon knew it had to learn to
control the press. It has been very successful in doing that. During
the Yugoslav wars, the press bought the idea that NATO was
fulfilling its moral duty by opposing "Serbian racism."
-----------
Articles copyright 1995-2008 Workers World. Verbatim copying and
distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium
without royalty provided this notice is preserved.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: ww@...
Subscribe wwnews-subscribe@...
Support independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php
http://www.giuliettochiesa.it/modules.php?
name=News&file=article&sid=326
QUELLA BANDIERA EUROPEA DIETRO LE SPALLE DEL BANDITO - 08/08/08
Postato il Friday, 08 August @ 22:56:34 CEST di jormi
di Giulietto Chiesa
Piero Gobetti scrisse che “quando la verità sta tutta da una parte
ogni atteggiamento salomonico è altamente tendenzioso”. Osservando la
tragedia dell'Ossetia del Sud trovo che questo aforisma vi si adatti
alla perfezione. Si cercherà, domani, di trovare spiegazioni
“salomoniche” per giustificare il massacro della popolazione civile di
una piccola comunità schiacciata dal peso della storia, come un vaso di
coccio in mezzo a vasi di ferro.
Vi sarà sicuramente qualche sepolcro imbiancato che cercherà di
distribuire uniformemente le colpe tra chi ha aggredito e chi è stato
aggredito, tra chi ha usato gli aerei e gli elicottericontro una città
di 70 mila abitanti, e chi aveva in mano solo fucili e mitragliatrici
per difendersi.
Ci sarà domani chi spiegherà che gli osseti del sud hanno provocato e
sono stati respinti. E poi, sull'onda della contr'offensiva, quasi per
forza di cose, igeorgiani sono andati a occupare ciò che, in fondo, era
loro di diritto, avendoosato gli ossetini dichiarare e applicare l'idea
del rifiuto di tornare sotto ilcontrollo di chi li massacrò la prima
volta nel 1992.
Ci sarà, posso prevedere con assoluta certezza ogni parola di questi
mascalzoni bugiardi, chi affermerà che tutta la colpa è di Mosca, che –
non contenta dell'amicizia tra Tbilisi e Washington- voleva punire il
povero presidente Saakashvili impedendogli di entrare in possesso dei
territori di Abkhazia (il prossimo obiettivo) e di Ossetia del Sud. E
così via mescolando le carte e contando sul fatto che il grande
pubblico sa a malapena, sempre che lo sappia, dove stia la Georgia, e,
meno che mai l'Ossetia del Sud.
Ma le cose non stanno affatto così, anche se il pericolo che questo
conflitto siallarghi è grande, tremendo, e chi scherza col fuoco sa che
sta facendo rischiare ai suoi cittadini molto di più di quanto essi
stessi pensino.
Giocatorid'azzardo, irresponsabili, che puntano tutte le carte sul
disastro e il sangue. Chiunque dovrebbe essere in grado di capire che
una piccola comunità, con meno di 100 mila persone, disperse in
duecento villaggi e una capitale, Tzkhinvali, che è più piccola di
Pavia, non possono avere alcun interesse ad attaccare un nemico –
questa è l'unica parola possibile alla luce di quanto staaccadendo –
che è 50 volte superiore in uomini e armi, che ha l'aviazione (e l'ha
usata ieri e oggi, mentre scrivo, con assoluta ferocia, bombardando
anchel'unica strada che collega l'Ossetia del Sud con l'Ossetia del
Nord, in territorio russo, per impedire che i civili possano rifugiarsi
dall'altra parte dellafrontiera), che non ha ostacoli di fronte a sé.
Chiunque potrebbe capire che l'Ossetia del Sud non ha rivendicazioni
territoriali e non ha quindi in mente alcuna espansione al di fuori del
suo microscopico territorio.
Chiunque potrebbe capire – qui ci vuole un minimo di sforzo
intellettuale, quanto basta per liberarsi di qualche schema mentale
inveterato – che nemmeno la Russia può avere alcun interesse a
inasprire la situazione. Certo Mosca è interessata allo status quo, con
l'Ossetia del Sud indipendente di fatto, ma senza essere costretta a
riconoscerne lo status, per evitare difficoltàinternazionali. Ma chi ha
la testa sul collo dovrebbe riconoscere che è megliouna tregua
difficile che una guerra aperta; che è meglio negoziare, anche per
anni, che uccidere a sangue freddo civili, bambini, donne.
Io sono stato a Tzkhinvali, la primavera scorsa, e adesso mi piange il
cuore a pensare a quelle vie dall'asfalto sgangherato, buie la sera, a
quelle case senza intonaco, dal riscaldamento saltuario, a quelle
scuole ancora diroccate,ma piene di gente normale, di giovani
orgogliosi che non vogliono diventare georgiani perché sono cresciuti
in guerra con la Georgia e della Georgia hanno conosciuto solo la
violenza dei tiri sporadici sui terri delle loro case. Mi chiedo: e
poi? Che ne sarà di quei giovani? Come si può pensare di tenerli a
forza in un paese che non ameranno mai, di cui non potranno mai
sentirsi cittadini? Se ne andranno, ovviamente, dopo avere contato i
loro morti, a migliaia, in Ossetia del Nord, in Russia, di cui quasi
tutti sono cittadini a tuttigli effetti, con il passaporto in tasca.
E' questo il modo di sciogliere il nodo georgiano? Lo chiederei, se
potessi, al signor Solana, che dovrebbe svolgere il ruolo di
rappresentanza dell'Europa inquesta vicenda. Che l'Europa, invece di
aiutare a risolvere, non ha fatto altroche incancrenire, ripetendo a
Tbilisi la giaculatoria che la Georgia ha diritto alla propria
integrità territoriale, e dunque ha diritto a riprendersi Ossetia del
Sud e Abkhazia. Certo – gli si è detto con untuosa ipocrisia – che non
doveva farlo con la forza. Ma, sotto sotto, gli si è fatto capire che,
se l'avesse fatto, alla fin dei conti, si sarebbe chiuso un occhio. E'
accaduto. Saakashvili non ha nemmeno cercato di nascondere la mano
armata con cui colpiva. Non ha nemmeno fatto finta. Ha detto alla
televisione che voleva “ristabilire l'ordine” nella repubblica ribelle.
Un “ordine” che non esistevadal 1992, cioè da 16 anni. Perché adesso?
Qual era l'urgenza? Forse che Tbilisi era minacciata di invasione da
parte degli ossetini?
La risposta è una sola. Saakashvili ha agito perché si è sentito
coperto da Washington, in prima istanza, essendo quella capitale la
capitale coloniale della attuale Georgia “indipendente”. E, in seconda
istanza si è sentito coperto da Bruxelles. Queste cose non si
improvvisano, come dovrebbe capire il prossimo commentatore di uno dei
qualunque telegiornali e giornali italiani.Col che si è messo al
servizio della strategia che tende a tenere la Russia sotto pressione:
in Georgia, in Ucraina, in Bielorussia, in Moldova, in Armenia, in
Azerbajgian, nei paesi baltici. Insomma lungo tutti i suoi confini
europei. Saakashvili ha un suo tornaconto: alzare la tensione per
costringere l'Europa a venire in suo sostegno, contro la Russia;
ottenere il lasciapassare per un ingresso immediato nella Nato e,
subito dopo, secondo lo schema dell'allargamento europeo e
dell'estensione dell'influenza americana sull'Europa, l'ingresso in
Europa.
Secondo piccione: chi muove Saakashvili conta anche sul fatto che
questo atteggiamento dell'Europa finirà per metterla in rotta di
collisione con la Russia. Perfetto! Con l'ingresso della Georgia nella
Nato e in Europa gli StatiUniti avranno un altro voto a loro favore in
tutti i successivi sviluppi economici, energetici e militari che
potrebbero vedere gli interessi europei collidere conquelli americani.
Javier Solana ha la capacità di sviluppare questo elementare
ragionamento? Ovviamente ce l'ha. Solo che non vuole e non può perchè
ha dietro di sé, alle sue spalle, governi che non osano mettere in
discussione la strategia statunitense, o che la condividono.
Cosa farà ora la Russia è difficile dirlo. Certo è che, con la presa
di Tzkhinvali, le forze russe d'interposizione, che sono su quei
confini interni alla Georgia,dovranno ritirarsi. Il colpo all'Ossetia
del Sud diventa cos' un colpo diretto allaRussia. Che, questo è certo,
non è più quella del 2000, al calare di Boris Eltsin e delle sue
braghe.
L'emblema di questa tragedia, che è una nuova vergogna per l'Europa, è
stato il fatto che Saakashvili ha annunciato l'attacco, dalla sua
televisione, avendo dietro le spalle, ben visibile, la bandiera
goergiana e quella blu a stelle gialle europea. Peggiore sfregio non
poteva concepire, perchè la Georgia non è l'Europa, non ancora. E meno
che mai dovrebbe esserlo dopo questo attacco che offende - o dovrebbe
offendere - tutti coloro che credono nel diritto all'autodeterminazione
dei popoli. Che è sacrosanto per chi se lo guadagna, molto meno con chi
usa quella bandiera per vendere subito dopo l'indipendenza a chi l'ha
sostenuta dietro le quinte.
Qual è la differenza con il Kosovo? Una sola: la Serbia era un
prossimo suddito riottoso e doveva essere punita. La Georgia è invece
un vassallo fedele e doveva essere premiata.
L'Ossetia del Sud questo diritto se lo è guadagnato. E non c'è spazio
per alcun atteggiamento salomonico, perchè la ragione sta tutta da una
sola parte, e io sto da quella stessa parte.
______________________________________________________________________
Saldi Estivi
Offerte di prodotti in saldo a prezzi estremamente vantaggiosi. Approfitta della grande comodità di fare acquisti da casa tua, senza nemmeno uscire, rimanere imbottigliato nel traffico e perdere tempo prezioso.
http://shopping.tiscali.it/
name=News&file=article&sid=326
QUELLA BANDIERA EUROPEA DIETRO LE SPALLE DEL BANDITO - 08/08/08
Postato il Friday, 08 August @ 22:56:34 CEST di jormi
di Giulietto Chiesa
Piero Gobetti scrisse che “quando la verità sta tutta da una parte
ogni atteggiamento salomonico è altamente tendenzioso”. Osservando la
tragedia dell'Ossetia del Sud trovo che questo aforisma vi si adatti
alla perfezione. Si cercherà, domani, di trovare spiegazioni
“salomoniche” per giustificare il massacro della popolazione civile di
una piccola comunità schiacciata dal peso della storia, come un vaso di
coccio in mezzo a vasi di ferro.
Vi sarà sicuramente qualche sepolcro imbiancato che cercherà di
distribuire uniformemente le colpe tra chi ha aggredito e chi è stato
aggredito, tra chi ha usato gli aerei e gli elicottericontro una città
di 70 mila abitanti, e chi aveva in mano solo fucili e mitragliatrici
per difendersi.
Ci sarà domani chi spiegherà che gli osseti del sud hanno provocato e
sono stati respinti. E poi, sull'onda della contr'offensiva, quasi per
forza di cose, igeorgiani sono andati a occupare ciò che, in fondo, era
loro di diritto, avendoosato gli ossetini dichiarare e applicare l'idea
del rifiuto di tornare sotto ilcontrollo di chi li massacrò la prima
volta nel 1992.
Ci sarà, posso prevedere con assoluta certezza ogni parola di questi
mascalzoni bugiardi, chi affermerà che tutta la colpa è di Mosca, che –
non contenta dell'amicizia tra Tbilisi e Washington- voleva punire il
povero presidente Saakashvili impedendogli di entrare in possesso dei
territori di Abkhazia (il prossimo obiettivo) e di Ossetia del Sud. E
così via mescolando le carte e contando sul fatto che il grande
pubblico sa a malapena, sempre che lo sappia, dove stia la Georgia, e,
meno che mai l'Ossetia del Sud.
Ma le cose non stanno affatto così, anche se il pericolo che questo
conflitto siallarghi è grande, tremendo, e chi scherza col fuoco sa che
sta facendo rischiare ai suoi cittadini molto di più di quanto essi
stessi pensino.
Giocatorid'azzardo, irresponsabili, che puntano tutte le carte sul
disastro e il sangue. Chiunque dovrebbe essere in grado di capire che
una piccola comunità, con meno di 100 mila persone, disperse in
duecento villaggi e una capitale, Tzkhinvali, che è più piccola di
Pavia, non possono avere alcun interesse ad attaccare un nemico –
questa è l'unica parola possibile alla luce di quanto staaccadendo –
che è 50 volte superiore in uomini e armi, che ha l'aviazione (e l'ha
usata ieri e oggi, mentre scrivo, con assoluta ferocia, bombardando
anchel'unica strada che collega l'Ossetia del Sud con l'Ossetia del
Nord, in territorio russo, per impedire che i civili possano rifugiarsi
dall'altra parte dellafrontiera), che non ha ostacoli di fronte a sé.
Chiunque potrebbe capire che l'Ossetia del Sud non ha rivendicazioni
territoriali e non ha quindi in mente alcuna espansione al di fuori del
suo microscopico territorio.
Chiunque potrebbe capire – qui ci vuole un minimo di sforzo
intellettuale, quanto basta per liberarsi di qualche schema mentale
inveterato – che nemmeno la Russia può avere alcun interesse a
inasprire la situazione. Certo Mosca è interessata allo status quo, con
l'Ossetia del Sud indipendente di fatto, ma senza essere costretta a
riconoscerne lo status, per evitare difficoltàinternazionali. Ma chi ha
la testa sul collo dovrebbe riconoscere che è megliouna tregua
difficile che una guerra aperta; che è meglio negoziare, anche per
anni, che uccidere a sangue freddo civili, bambini, donne.
Io sono stato a Tzkhinvali, la primavera scorsa, e adesso mi piange il
cuore a pensare a quelle vie dall'asfalto sgangherato, buie la sera, a
quelle case senza intonaco, dal riscaldamento saltuario, a quelle
scuole ancora diroccate,ma piene di gente normale, di giovani
orgogliosi che non vogliono diventare georgiani perché sono cresciuti
in guerra con la Georgia e della Georgia hanno conosciuto solo la
violenza dei tiri sporadici sui terri delle loro case. Mi chiedo: e
poi? Che ne sarà di quei giovani? Come si può pensare di tenerli a
forza in un paese che non ameranno mai, di cui non potranno mai
sentirsi cittadini? Se ne andranno, ovviamente, dopo avere contato i
loro morti, a migliaia, in Ossetia del Nord, in Russia, di cui quasi
tutti sono cittadini a tuttigli effetti, con il passaporto in tasca.
E' questo il modo di sciogliere il nodo georgiano? Lo chiederei, se
potessi, al signor Solana, che dovrebbe svolgere il ruolo di
rappresentanza dell'Europa inquesta vicenda. Che l'Europa, invece di
aiutare a risolvere, non ha fatto altroche incancrenire, ripetendo a
Tbilisi la giaculatoria che la Georgia ha diritto alla propria
integrità territoriale, e dunque ha diritto a riprendersi Ossetia del
Sud e Abkhazia. Certo – gli si è detto con untuosa ipocrisia – che non
doveva farlo con la forza. Ma, sotto sotto, gli si è fatto capire che,
se l'avesse fatto, alla fin dei conti, si sarebbe chiuso un occhio. E'
accaduto. Saakashvili non ha nemmeno cercato di nascondere la mano
armata con cui colpiva. Non ha nemmeno fatto finta. Ha detto alla
televisione che voleva “ristabilire l'ordine” nella repubblica ribelle.
Un “ordine” che non esistevadal 1992, cioè da 16 anni. Perché adesso?
Qual era l'urgenza? Forse che Tbilisi era minacciata di invasione da
parte degli ossetini?
La risposta è una sola. Saakashvili ha agito perché si è sentito
coperto da Washington, in prima istanza, essendo quella capitale la
capitale coloniale della attuale Georgia “indipendente”. E, in seconda
istanza si è sentito coperto da Bruxelles. Queste cose non si
improvvisano, come dovrebbe capire il prossimo commentatore di uno dei
qualunque telegiornali e giornali italiani.Col che si è messo al
servizio della strategia che tende a tenere la Russia sotto pressione:
in Georgia, in Ucraina, in Bielorussia, in Moldova, in Armenia, in
Azerbajgian, nei paesi baltici. Insomma lungo tutti i suoi confini
europei. Saakashvili ha un suo tornaconto: alzare la tensione per
costringere l'Europa a venire in suo sostegno, contro la Russia;
ottenere il lasciapassare per un ingresso immediato nella Nato e,
subito dopo, secondo lo schema dell'allargamento europeo e
dell'estensione dell'influenza americana sull'Europa, l'ingresso in
Europa.
Secondo piccione: chi muove Saakashvili conta anche sul fatto che
questo atteggiamento dell'Europa finirà per metterla in rotta di
collisione con la Russia. Perfetto! Con l'ingresso della Georgia nella
Nato e in Europa gli StatiUniti avranno un altro voto a loro favore in
tutti i successivi sviluppi economici, energetici e militari che
potrebbero vedere gli interessi europei collidere conquelli americani.
Javier Solana ha la capacità di sviluppare questo elementare
ragionamento? Ovviamente ce l'ha. Solo che non vuole e non può perchè
ha dietro di sé, alle sue spalle, governi che non osano mettere in
discussione la strategia statunitense, o che la condividono.
Cosa farà ora la Russia è difficile dirlo. Certo è che, con la presa
di Tzkhinvali, le forze russe d'interposizione, che sono su quei
confini interni alla Georgia,dovranno ritirarsi. Il colpo all'Ossetia
del Sud diventa cos' un colpo diretto allaRussia. Che, questo è certo,
non è più quella del 2000, al calare di Boris Eltsin e delle sue
braghe.
L'emblema di questa tragedia, che è una nuova vergogna per l'Europa, è
stato il fatto che Saakashvili ha annunciato l'attacco, dalla sua
televisione, avendo dietro le spalle, ben visibile, la bandiera
goergiana e quella blu a stelle gialle europea. Peggiore sfregio non
poteva concepire, perchè la Georgia non è l'Europa, non ancora. E meno
che mai dovrebbe esserlo dopo questo attacco che offende - o dovrebbe
offendere - tutti coloro che credono nel diritto all'autodeterminazione
dei popoli. Che è sacrosanto per chi se lo guadagna, molto meno con chi
usa quella bandiera per vendere subito dopo l'indipendenza a chi l'ha
sostenuta dietro le quinte.
Qual è la differenza con il Kosovo? Una sola: la Serbia era un
prossimo suddito riottoso e doveva essere punita. La Georgia è invece
un vassallo fedele e doveva essere premiata.
L'Ossetia del Sud questo diritto se lo è guadagnato. E non c'è spazio
per alcun atteggiamento salomonico, perchè la ragione sta tutta da una
sola parte, e io sto da quella stessa parte.
______________________________________________________________________
Saldi Estivi
Offerte di prodotti in saldo a prezzi estremamente vantaggiosi. Approfitta della grande comodità di fare acquisti da casa tua, senza nemmeno uscire, rimanere imbottigliato nel traffico e perdere tempo prezioso.
http://shopping.tiscali.it/
http://www.ilmanifesto.it/Quotidiano-archivio/09-Agosto-2008/art42.html
il manifesto
09 Agosto 2008
KYRGYZSTAN
Usa, diplomatici e militari con un'arsenale in salotto
Armi Nato in casa di americani: che succede a Biskek?
FABRIZIO VIELMINI
BISKEK (KYRGYZSTAN)
Un fatto più che insolito si è prodotto lunedì scorso (4 agosto) nella capitale kyrgyza. Su segnalazione degli abitanti di uno dei quartieri più disagiati della città, la milizia (come la polizia è qui chiamata) ha fatto irruzione in una casa isolata e qui ha scoperto un intero arsenale di provenienza Nato - composto da 26 fucili d'assalto M-16, quattro mitragliatori pesanti, quattro fucili da cecchino, due fucili Winchestern, sei pistole Beretta cal. 9 e circa quindicimila munizioni (inclusi proiettili traccianti) e accessori vari. Ancora più sorprendente il fatto che l'arsenale era custodito da dieci militari statunitensi e due diplomatici della locale ambasciata di Washington. Dopo l'irruzione e la coperta dell'arsenale, quest'ultima si è affrettata ad emettere un comunicato stampa in cui si precisava come la presenza della armi fosse stata concordata con la parte kyrgyza, nel quadro di esercitazioni «anti-terrorismo» (il concetto pass-partout di Washington per la sua infiltrazione delle strutture di sicurezza locali), esercitazioni da condurre insieme ai servizi d'intelligence di Biskek.
«Solo esercitazioni»
L'incidente solleva una serie d'interrogativi. Perché la milizia ha agito in modo così plateale? Screzi con i servizi segreti interni alle strutture di sicurezza?
Le domande dei media
I media locali si pongono queste e altre domande. Quanti arsenali segreti del genere vi possono ancora essere nel paese? Gli americani preparano qualche settore degli apparati di sicurezza in modo da attivarli in caso l'attuale dirigenza - ritrovatasi al potere in seguito ad una delle «rivoluzioni colorate» post-sovietiche degli scorsi anni - dovesse porre un ultimatum alla loro presenza militare nel paese, magari su pressione di Russia e Cina?
Le armi erano destinate a gruppi clandestini islamisti? Magari agli uiguri del vicino Xinjiang cinese, attivatisi proprio in questi giorni con un attacco alle guardie della frontiera sino-kyrgyza che ha causato sedidi morti? E' un'ipotesi, questa, dai fondamenti particolarmente fragili, dato che la Cia per simili operazioni ha sempre usato armi di origine sovietica al fine d'evitare connessioni dirette.
Secondo il corrispondente locale della Nezavisimaja Gazeta, G. Mihajlov, l'incidente indica in primo luogo le contraddizioni interne al regime di Kurmanbek Bakiev e le sue difficoltà nel controllo delle forze di sicurezza. L'affaire va inoltre inquadrato nell'ambito di una manovra volta ad avvelenare le relazioni del Kyrgyzstan - il quale si sta già preparando ad affrontare il secondo inverno in condizioni di crisi energetica - con Washington. La posizione di quest'ultima all'interno del paese è già abbastanza discreditata. La scorsa settimana alcune fonti locali riportavano del ritrovamento di 27 cadaveri privi degli organi interni nelle vicinanze della base.
L'ombra del «modello Kosovo»
Il tutto alla vigilia del prossimo vertice dell'Organizzazione di Cooperazione di Shanghai, fissato per il 28 agosto, un vertice in cui Mosca e Pechino potrebbero decidere di riprendere la pressione sui regimi centrasiatici al fine di porre dei limiti ben precisi all'azione degli Stati uniti nella regione.
La base delle polemiche
Dall'autunno del 2001, gli Usa utilizzano sotto copertura Nato e col pretesto delle operazioni in Afghanistan una parte dell'aeroporto della capitale kyrgyza, Manas appunto, quale base militare. E' la principale base americana in territorio ex-sovietico.
Al di là del fatto di per sé singolare dell'associazione di strutture civili con mezzi militari, che rende il principale aeroporto del paese un possibile oggetto di ritorsioni belliche, la base si sta rivelando sempre più un fattore di irritazione pubblica. Gli aerei che vi fanno scalo hanno in più occasioni riversato carichi di kerosene sulle campagne circostanti, e in almeno due occasioni sono stati sul punto di causare seri incidenti con gli apparecchi civili, evitati per miracolo.
Sullo sfondo dell'indigenza circostante (il Kyrgyzstan è uno dei paesi più poveri dell'ex-Urss), i militari statunitensi si muovono inoltre come cowboy e infiammano le autorità tradizionali di una società in via di re-islamizzazione. A fine 2006 un G.I. ha freddato, senza apparenti motivi, un civile del personale locale. Un fatto che, non essendo la situazione a tutt'oggi risolta sul piano legale, ha accentuato il risentimento di massa verso i militari di Washington. Questo si è ulteriormente inasprito negli ultimi mesi in seguito ad alcuni incidenti stradali e risse provocate dal personale militare statunitense.
La presenza della base costituisce infine un serio fattore di disturbo delle relazioni fra la fragile repubblica kyrgyza e i vicini cinesi e uzbeki, oltre che con la Russia (dalle rimesse provenienti dai kyrgyzi ivi immigrati dipende la sussistenza di buona parte della popolazione). Gli impegni militari con la Russia proibirebbero, in teoria, la presenza di militari stranieri - da cui l'escamotage dell'immunità diplomatica loro concessa.
Il Grande gioco in Asia centrale
Sito ai confini occidentali della Cina, il Kyrgyzstan è uno degli angoli più disastrati dell'ex-Urss. Priva di risorse naturali, divisa da profonde fratture geofisiche (il 94 per cento del territorio è a oltre mille metri di altitudine), etniche (i kyrgyzi costituiscono il 60% di una popolazione multietnica di cinque milioni, fra cui abbondano russi e altre popolazioni «europee» dell'ex-Urss, che pure hanno abbandonato in massa il paese, oltre che rappresentanti delle repubbliche vicine, in primo luogo uzbeki, pari a oltre il 15 per cento) e tribali, la repubblica costituisce in virtù della propria debolezza intrinseca la principale piattaforma geopolitica delle potenze esterne interessate al controllo dell'Asia centrale, in primo luogo Russia, Cina e Usa, la cui interazione viene riassunta come «nuovo Grande gioco». Nel marzo 2005, la manipolazione delle elezioni da parte dell'allora presidente Askar Akaev ha innescato una serie di proteste di massa le quali, con profonde manipolazioni da parte delle molte ong finanziate dagli Usa, sull'onda delle «rivoluzioni di velluto» ucraina e georgiana, si sono risolte con la fuga di Akaev e la sua sostituzione da parte dell'ex-primo ministro Kurmanbek Bakiev. Quest'ultimo si è limitato a sostituire i quadri di Akaev con uomini del proprio clan, lasciando irrisolti i numerosi problemi che attanagliano il paese, buona parte della popolazione del quale è costretta ad emigrare per sopravvivere.
Saldi Estivi
Offerte di prodotti in saldo a prezzi estremamente vantaggiosi. Approfitta della grande comodità di fare acquisti da casa tua, senza nemmeno uscire, rimanere imbottigliato nel traffico e perdere tempo prezioso.
