Georgia is latest US state to consider a bill that would cryptocoins to be used to pay taxes

- Two state senators in Georgia have proposed a bill that would allow citizens to pay their tax obligations in bitcoin or other cryptocoins not yet specified.

	1 of 2
The Georgia bill

The bill was introduced by senators Michael Williams and Joshua McKoon. It would allow the state Department of Revenue to accept bitcoin and other as yet unspecified cryptocoins to be used for payment of taxes. The bill was submitted on February 21.

The bill says: "The commissioner shall accept as valid payment for taxes and license fees any cryptocurrency, including but not limited to bitcoin, that uses an electronic peer-to-peer system."

Tax officials are to convert the payments into US funds within a day of receiving them and will credit the the payors' account with the amount. This would protect the state from any possible loss due to a decline in the value of bitcoin over the day. It could result in a credit if the value went up.

There is no guarantee that the bill will pass.

New Hampshire bill fails

In January of last year a bill was voted on in the New Hampshire House of Representatives that would have allowed citizens to pay their taxes using bitcoin. But on the 20th of January 2016 a vote of 264 to 74 killed the bill just over a year from when the bill was introduced. The bill was introduced by Representative Eric Schielen in January of 2015.

Opponents raised questions about exchange rate risks the state might face due to the extreme volatility of bitcoin prices. A subcommittee that studied the issue recommended the bill not be passed.

Schielen was working with those who supported the bill and he said he would submit a similar bill in two years. He said that more education and outreach was needed to pass such legislation.

The Arizona bill

The Arizona bill is sponsored by state Senator Warren Petersen and three others. It was submitted for consideration on January 9 and was then referred to the Arizona Senate Rules Committee for further consideration. The Georgia bill is modeled on the Arizona legislation.

Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies could be used to pay taxes interest and penalties that are owed to the Arizona government. As with the Georgia bill, the cryptocoins are to be converted to US dollars within 24 hours.

Arizona has approved other tech-related bills in the past. In the spring of 2017, the legislature passed laws recognizing the legality of blockchain signatures and smart contracts under state law. Governor Doug Ducey signed the bill into law last March.

It remains to be seen whether Arizona or Georgia actually manage to have the bills passed into law. According to the appended video, the Arizona Senate has passed its bill but it still has to go through the House.

Previously published in Digital Journal

NATO angered by Russian treaty with South Ossetia

A new treaty between Russia and South Ossetia merges a portion of the South Ossetian armed forces with those of Russia and also increases the economic integration of the two countries 

Coat of Arms of  South Ossetia

South Ossetia was originally an autonomous part of the Georgian Soviet Republic. However, at the time of the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1990 it declared itself independent, angering newly independent Georgia which considers both it and another independent area Abkhazia as part of its sovereign territory. Georgia has continually attempted to enforce its rule and occupy South Ossetia.

In 2008 an attack on South Ossetia and Russian peacekeepers in the area resulted in a disastrous war for Georgia. Russia recognized South Osssetia and Abkhazia both as independent states after the war. Only Venezuela, Nicaragua and Nauru of UN members recognize the independence of South Ossetia. Nauru may have done so because of Russian foreign aid but Nauru denies this.

NATO claims the treaty violates international law but then it insists every treaty entered into by South Ossetia with anyone is against international law since it regards South Ossetia as part of Georgia. The signing of this treaty follows the signing of a similar treaty with Abkhazia last year. Both countries are subsidized by Russia. As well.as further integrating the South Ossetian economy with that of Russia, it will make it easier for South Ossetians to get Russian citizenship and will also raise salaries for South Ossetian civil servants and pensions within the country.

Not only NATO but also the US was angered by the agreement. Jen Psaki, US State Department spokesperson said: "The regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia are integral parts of Georgia and we continue to support Georgia's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity,"

The treaty was signed after talks between Russian president Vladiimir  Putin and South Ossetian president Leonid Tibilov in Moscow on March 18. The treaty includes a pledge of collective security. Putin said the treaty improved the two countries' legal system and in coordination of economic development. Tibilov said: “We know the Russian Federation is the only guarantor for our people and for our republic.” South Ossetia has supported Russia in the annexation of the Crimea. There seems almost zero possibility of either Abkhazia or South Ossetia being reintegrated back into Georgia.

Sources:

http://news.yahoo.com/putin-signs-treaty-integrating-south-ossetia-russia-134209512.html

http://news.yahoo.com/russian-treaty-south-ossetia-breaks-international-law-nato-162225556.html

http://rt.com/politics/241929-russia-ossetia-treaty-alliance/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nauru

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nauru

Russia and Abkhazia sign extensive agreement on military and defense policies

Russia and Abkhazia have signed an extensive agreement on military issues and Abkhazia agreed to harmonize its foreign and defence policies with those of Russia. A Russian commander will lead a new joint force of Russian and Abkhazian troops.

The leaders of both countries, Vladimir Putin and Raul Khadzhimba, lauded the agreement: “I’m sure cooperation, unity and strategic partnerships between Russia and Abkhazia will continue to strengthen. Ties with Russia offer us full security guarantees.” Abkhazia regards itself as an independent state, The Republic of Abkhazia, but aside from Russia, only Nicaragua, Venezuela, and Nauru recognize the state. Abkhazia is also recognized by the Community for Democracy and Rights of Nations: South Ossetia, Transnistria, Nagorno-Karabakh, and Abkhazia are post-Soviet "frozen conflict" zones...These four unrecognized states maintain friendly relations with each other and form the Community for Democracy and Rights of Nations. Georgia itself regards Abkhazia as an autonomous republic within Georgia with the government in exile in Tbilsi the capital. 

Russian troops have been Abkhazia for more than 20 years, ever since Abkhazia broke away from Georgia in a bloody war for separation in 1992-93. The Georgian president Mikheil Saakashvili tried to retake South Ossetia in 2008 causing Russian intervention. While most of the fighting was in South Ossetia the Russians occupied other parts of Georgia briefly and after the conflict recognized both South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states. Georgia last summer signed a cooperation deal with the EU. Putin's recent move may be a response to this move. 

The new agreement with Abkhazia will give Abkhazian residents pensions and social benefits equal to those of Russian citizens. Many Abkhazians have Russian passports. Georgia also issues what is called a neutral passport :In the summer of 2011 the Parliament of Georgia adopted a package of legislative amendments providing for the issuance of neutral identification and travel documents to residents of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The document allows travelling abroad as well as enjoying social benefits existing in Georgia. The new neutral identification and travel documents were called "neutral passports". Russia condemned the passports because they contained Georgian codes and they were issued by the Georgian Interior Ministry. A number of states recognize the passports including Japan, Czech Republic, US, Bulgaria, Poland, Israel,and Romania among others.

 The present Georgian government that won over Saakashvili's party in 2012 is regarded as friendly toward Russia and has been attempting to repair ties. However, there were large demonstrations in the capital Tbilsi against the present treaty. Saakashvili has criticized the present Georgian government for doing whatever Russia wants. His party leader David Bakradze said: “The Georgian government has done practically nothing.” Bakradze urged Georgia to join western sanctions against Russia and walk out of political talks with Russia.

 The Russian agreement with Abkhazia may be designed to ensure that if Georgia takes a pro-western turn, Abkhazia will be defended against any renewed attempt to re-incorporate it into Georgia. The agreement specifically guarantees “protection of the state border of the Republic of Abkhazia with Georgia.”

Georgians protest prisoner abuse.

The protests arose after graphic videos were published showing guards kicking and abusing prisoners. There is an election on October 1 and this scandal could hurt the chances of re-election for the pro-Western Saakashvili government.

On Friday (Sept.21) thousands rallied to demand that top officials who were fired be charged and punished as well after a prison abuse scandal. President Saakashvili immediately tried to control the damage by firing his interior minister as well as the minister in charge of penitentiaries. He also moved some prison personnel to different prisons. However rallies went on for a third day. No doubt the opposition sees a golden opportunity to attack the government.

The main opposition party leader Bidzina Ivanishvili is cautioning his own supporters about taking the battle to the streets. The multibillionaire politician fears a government crackdown on protests could derail the electoral process and prevent the opposition from gaining a victory. If the opposition wins then Ivanishvili would become prime minister next year. Under recent reforms power has been shifted from the president to the parliament and prime minister.

The Saakashvili government claims that the opposition deliberately waited until the final weeks of the election campaign to release the videos. One of the TV channels that showed the videos is owned by Ivanishvili. Both sides say they are committed to a peaceful election process going ahead. A leading member of Invishvili's Georgian Dream coalition said:

"Elections must be held in a quiet environment. Let people express their opinion at the polls."

Many students involved in the protests have stopped protesting at least until after the vote. However many hundreds of demonstrators rallied outside the Gidani prison in the capital Tbilsi. This is the prison where the abuses were filmed.

The European Union has urged the Gerogian government to punish those involved in the abuse. Catherine Ashton, EU foreign policy head, said that she was "appalled by the shocking footage of abuses committed against inmates in Gldani prison." She continued:

"It is of vital importance that these and other incidents are thoroughly and transparently investigated and that those responsible are held to account."

A spokesperson for the UN human rights office in Geneva, Rupert Colville, urged the Georgian authorities to quickly and impartially investigate all the cases of abuse and ensure that Georgian prisons and detention centers were managed in line with international standards and human rights. In just over a week Georgians will find out whether this abuse has managed to help put the Georgian opposition in power.

Nothing is coming up Roses in Georgia

It seems that the revolutions fostered by the US around the Russian periphery are going awry. The Ukraine has already turned back towards Russia mainly because the Orange movement government was not able to improve economic conditions in the Ukraine significantly. Saakashvili in Georgia faces basically the same problem plus the fact that he lost out in his attempts to regain control of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Now it seems unlikely that they will ever rejoin Georgia however much Georgia complains about the situation. NATO may not be at all anxious to grant Georgia membership especially with Saakashvili at the helm. He himself faces mounting opposition which he is trying his best to crush.

Antiwar.com Original - http://original.antiwar.com -

Georgia: Nothing Is Coming Up Roses

Posted By Justin Raimondo

The Russo-Georgian war of 2008 provides the clearest current example of how war propaganda works – and how counter-propaganda can negate it and turn the tables on the War Party.

You’ll recall that as news of the conflict broke in the West, the war was reported as stemming from a Russian "invasion," i.e. the Russians had fired the first shots in the process of occupying a disputed region of Georgia known as South Ossetia. The headlines blared that the Russian aggressors were on the march, and all the tattered paraphernalia of the cold war was hauled out of the closet and dusted off by mainstream analysts, who divined the meaning of the Russian action ("resurgent Russia"), and proffered the proper Western response ("We’re all Georgians now," enthused John McCain). McCain leapt out ahead of the pack at the starting gun, and quickly endorsed his buddy Mikhail Saakashvili’s fanciful version of events, declaring that the US must give unconditional support to Georgia: Russia, he declared, was the aggressor, and we cannot let aggression stand.

Barack Obama initially came out with a statement urging both sides to agree to an immediate ceasefire, and for this was excoriated by McCain and the neocons, who yelped that Obama had committed the cardinal sin of "moral equivalence."

Obama and his family were on vacation at the time, in Hawaii, I believe, and hadn’t been quick enough on the draw: another example, his critics said, of how unprepared he is to take power, echoing Hillary Clinton’s infamous "Will he be ready for that 3 a.m. phone call?" ad. Properly chastised, Obama quickly corrected his error and issued another statement explicitly attributing the origins of the war to Russian "aggression."

As it turned out, Obama’s first instincts were correct, as the world learned a few weeks later and the truth came out about what events sparked the war between Georgia and Russia. As the smoke cleared and the evidence came in, the knee-jerk pro-Georgian reaction of the media was proved utterly wrong: it was Georgian forces that not only fired first, but assaulted and nearly demolished the "rebel" capital city of Tskhinvali, in which hundreds of civilians were slaughtered by US-funded, US-trained Georgian army units.

It’s a feather in the cap of Georgia’s lobby in America that they managed to obscure the truth for so long behind a barrage of overheated rhetoric and well-rehearsed dramatics worthy of a third-rate Hollywood scriptwriter. The heroic "democrat" Saakashvili vs. the neo-Stalin in the Kremlin is the narrative the Western media was pushing, but as it turns out the hero of this cold war revival is a lot closer to Stalin in temperament as well as nationality, than Putin ever dreamed.

Saakashvili has lately gone all out in his paranoia and desire for revenge, the two attributes of Stalin’s personality that have gone most remarked. To begin with, he relentlessly pushes a paranoid theory that Georgia’s democratic opposition parties are a conspiracy mounted by Russia to take over the country. And he continually vows that Georgia will retake South Ossetia and Abkhazia, the two breakaway provinces his forces attacked in 2008. Toward this revanchist end he has begun a campaign to completely militarize Georgian society.

The best place to do that is in the schools, where the Saakashvili regime has instituted mandatory "military-patriotic education" courses, the announced purpose of which is to instill a "soldierly spirit" among the nation’s youth. According to Saakashvili, Georgia is still at war, and so these "civil defense" and political indoctrination courses are necessary to defend the country against an imminent attack. A fanatic nationalism is the first recourse of tyrants, as we’ve seen in the American experience, and this is Saakashvili’s bludgeon with which he continuously beats down the opposition – even as his police are beating demonstrators in the streets.

Here is Saakashvili defending his "military-patriotic" indoctrination courses:

"We decided to introduce military-patriotic education [in schools] – although it may be called civil defense courses. So called liberals stirred noise about it, saying: ‘what a disaster it is; it’s a bad tone’. By the way, Soviet-time military courses at schools were not really good."

Yes, those Soviets sure were amateurs when it came to instilling the values of militarism and fanatic nationalism, not to mention suppressing national minorities. We Georgians will show them how it’s done. "Our country faces real challenges," Saakashvili intoned at a recent televised meeting with Tbilisi teachers and schoolchildren. He likened Georgia to Israel, a nation surrounded on all sides by enemies and thoroughly militarized. In Israel, they "are prepared when there are missile attacks."

Unfortunately for Saakashvili, the main danger to his continued rule doesn’t come from the slim-to-nonexistent threat of Russian missile attacks. His real worry is the political attacks emanating from his own impoverished, war-weary, disillusioned and increasingly desperate countrymen, who are chafing under his increasingly repressive regime.

"Unfortunately, we do not live in Switzerland and Holland," Saakashvili avers, continuing his tirade against the hated "liberals," "and there is one unfriendly country in our neighborhood. So, Georgia needs all these [civil defense or military-patriotic courses] and there is nothing militaristic in it… Georgia needs to defend itself. We do not attack anyone. But 20% of our territory is occupied."

But of course Georgia did attack the South Ossetian capital city of Tskhinvali, directly firing on civilian quarters and killing and wounding thousands. Four Russian peacekeepers, posted there under the terms of a UN agreement, were also killed. No doubt Saakashvili’s "military patriotic" courses, which are supposed to cover Georgian military history, will omit this little detail.

The rabid nationalist Saakashvili, whose virulent militarism is crippling Georgia economically, has decided to turn his country into a launching pad for NATO’s military operations, recently offering to host resupply bases for the NATO effort in Afghanistan. The Georgians have long campaigned for NATO membership – a cause championed by McCain and by the ever-energetic Georgian lobby in Washington. The same gang that championed NATO expansion in the immediate post-Soviet era – and won – are now poised to extend the long hand of the West deep into the steppes of Central Asia.

The selling of the Afghan war as a multilateral effort is intimately tied up with the momentum for NATO expansion, and Saakashvili’s offer of bases could gain him entry over the opposition of some NATO members – or, at the very least, some sort of preliminary status short of full membership. And then one could always make the argument that if Albania can join, well then why not Georgia – or Azerbaijan, or any of the other post-Soviet Central Asian kleptocracies that have sprung up around the Russian periphery?

Of the so-called colored revolutions that the US government actively encouraged and supported with overt funding and covert aid, Georgia’s was the exemplar cited as a model for the others. In the end, however, this US-supported "revolution" turned into the dictatorship of a near megalomaniac, the would-be Napoleon of the Caucasus, who represses his own people while posing as a great liberator. There’s a lesson in there, somewhere.

The U.S. trains Georgian troops to serve in Afghanistan

This certainly does not get front page coverage in US news media! This is typical of the US trying to spread the pain of Afghanistan around. No doubt the Georgian troops are funded by the US government rather than the Georgian govt. The US also provides the Georgian army with arms and other equipment. Georgia was also a member of the coalition of the billing in Iraq but its 2000 troops had to be rushed back to Georgia during the conflict with Russia. The US is trying to have Georgia become part of NATO. This type of action on Russia's doorstep is bound to create friction with Russia.

This is from thenews.

US military trains Georgian troops for Afghanistan mission



Tuesday, October 27, 2009
TBILISI: Georgian forces on Monday launched a joint training exercise with the US military ahead of the deployment of hundreds of Georgian troops next spring in Afghanistan, the defence ministry said. US military cooperation with pro-Western Georgia has strained ties between the United States and Russia, which last year fought a five-day war with Georgia.

“The exercises are aimed at training Georgian servicemen to be deployed within the framework of the ISAF (International Security Assistance Force),” Georgian defence ministry spokeswoman Salome Makharadze told AFP.

“The exercises will last for two weeks and involve a total of 840 servicemen, 420 Georgians and the same number of Americans,” she added. She said the 420 Georgian troops will leave for Afghanistan next spring and serve under US command.

A company of Georgian servicemen is also to be sent to Afghanistan next month to serve under French command, Makharadze said. She could not specify how many Georgian troops would take part, but a company typically consists of 100-200 servicemen.

The US embassy said in a statement that the exercise, called Immediate Response, “is specifically designed to enhance Georgia’s ability to conduct joint counter-insurgency operations in Afghanistan together with US forces.”

Moscow has accused Washington of meddling in the region and of rearming Georgia. More than 100,000 foreign troops, most of them Americans, are stationed in Afghanistan, fighting an increasingly bloody insurgency being waged by the Taliban and its allies. About 2,000 Georgian troops were deployed with US forces in Iraq from August 2003 but were rushed back to Georgia in August last year for the war with Russia over the breakaway region of South Ossetia.

Obama calls Georgian Leader Saakashvili

This is from Reuters.
Eat your heart out Arroyo (Philippines) . Obama did not bother to call Medvedev, instead Medvedev called him. This may or may not be a bad sign as far as relations with Russia are concerned. It seems that some European countries are not too eager for Georgia to join NATO. Perhaps Obama might take a little less hostile stance to Russia but we will see. Obama has doubts about the missile defence system as well it seems. )Obama has not bothered to call India either.

Obama calls Georgian leader Saakashvili
Tue Nov 18, 2008 3:49pm IST
TBILISI (Reuters) - U.S. President-elect Barack Obama has called Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili to assure Moscow's outspoken foe of Washington's continued support, the Georgian leader's press service said on Tuesday.
Russia's chilly ties with the West cooled further after its war with Georgia in August, when Russian troops launched a massive counter-attack in support of rebels following Tbilisi's attempt to retake one of its breakaway regions by force.
The United States has led harsh Western criticism over Russia's speedy recognition of Georgia's breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia and what it sees as Moscow's disproportionate use of force during the five-day war.
Democrat Obama, who defeated Republican presidential hopeful John McCain in a Nov. 4 election, called the Georgian leader on Monday, a spokesman for Saakashvili said.
"The conversation was friendly and touched upon future relations between Georgia and the U.S.," Saakashvili's press service said in a statement posted on the presidential Web site www.president.gov.ge.
"Obama underlined that he supports Georgia's territorial integrity and paid attention to the importance of continuing reforms in Georgia," it said. "Obama expressed the hope that the two leaders would meet in the near future."
Tbilisi's U.N. envoy said on Monday he expected Obama as a new U.S. leader would maintain strong U.S. support for Georgia's NATO ambitions.
Outgoing President George W. Bush had pushed for swift acceptance of Georgia and Ukraine into NATO, a position that failed to win unanimous support among European NATO members and strained ties with Russia long before its war with Georgia.
With the Bush administration's influence wavering, U.S. and European officials have said Washington is now studying whether NATO could give Georgia something short of a formal path to membership to satisfy European opposition to offering Tbilisi a so-called Membership Action Plan.
© Thomson Reuters 2008 All rights reserved

Cheney says Russian credibility at doubt after war.

This is from AFP.
Of course U.S. credibility apparently never suffers after invading Iraq etc. etc. Interesting that Nicaragua also recognised South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Probably this is pay back by the former Sandanistas for U.S. support for the contras. Maybe they will get some aid from Russia in return. Note that there is nary a word in this article about the original attack by Georgia on South Ossetia and actual killing of some peacekeepers. We have the usual flowery rhetoric about the Rose Revolution and democracy et al but then the rest of the story...
His(Cheney's) trip has also been aimed at expanding the transit of oil and gas exports to the West through pipelines across Georgia and Azerbaijan, avoiding Russia which Washington is viewing with increasing distrust.

Cheney says Russian credibility at doubt after war
15 hours ago
TBILISI (AFP) — US Vice President Dick Cheney accused Russia of having invaded Georgia on Thursday as he arrived to bolster the pro-Western government following the announcement of a billion dollar US aid package.
After talks with President Mikheil Saakashvili, Cheney said the five day war last month had cast "grave doubt" on Russia's international credibility and accused Moscow of seeking to redraw Georgia's borders.
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev will seek backing for his country's intervention at a Moscow summit of seven ex-Soviet states on Friday. Nicaragua has become the first country to follow its lead in recognising the independence of Georgian rebel regions South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
Cheney is the highest-level American official to visit the region since Georgia launched its August 7 offensive to regain control of South Ossetia region, sparking the conflict with its giant neighbour.
"Russia's actions have cast grave doubt on Russia's intentions and on its reliability as an international partner, not just in Georgia but across this region and indeed across the international system," he said.
"After your nation won its freedom in the Rose Revolution, America came to the aid of this courageous young democracy," said Cheney, referring to the 2003 uprising that brought Saakashvili to power.
"We are doing so again as you work to overcome an invasion of your sovereign territory and an illegitimate, unilateral attempt to change your country's borders by force that has been universally condemned by the free world."
Later Cheney was to visit US aid operations in Georgia and highlight the US one billion-dollar (690 million euro) package.
The United States has taken a lead role supporting Georgia since hostilities erupted over Moscow-backed rebel regions South Ossetia and Abkhazia, which Russia then recognised as independent.
Washington's relations with Moscow have plummeted as the United States has led angry western criticism of Russia's military action, its recognition of the rebel regions, and the continued presence of its troops in Georgia.
Cheney is pointedly not visiting Russia on a tour that has already taken him to Georgia's neighbour Azerbaijan, where he stressed that the security of the energy-rich region was a top concern for Washington.
His trip has also been aimed at expanding the transit of oil and gas exports to the West through pipelines across Georgia and Azerbaijan, avoiding Russia which Washington is viewing with increasing distrust.
The West has expressed outrage at Russia's military action and its recognition of the rebel regions, and NATO's chief, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, plans to visit Georgia later this month for further aid talks.
The European Union also plans an international donors conference for Georgia and the International Monetary Fund announced it would come up with a 750-million-dollar loan for Georgia, if its executive board approves.
"With our full support and the support of the entire free world, a democratic Georgia will survive, will rebuild and will thrive," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said as she announced the US aid package on Wednesday.
Bush will work with US lawmakers, who may have to approve the funds, to free up to 570 million dollars this year, with the remaining 430 million coming later, she said.
Moscow withdrew most of its forces under a French-brokered ceasefire plan, but thousands of Russian troops that Moscow terms "peacekeepers" remain in the two rebel regions and in a buffer zone.
Cheney's will head later Thursday to Ukraine where President Viktor Yushchenko has plunged the country into fresh political turmoil by pulling his
Our Ukraine party out of the ruling pro-Western coalition.

Democracy Shmuckocracy: Its all about oil stupid!

Dick Cheney vice-president chief neo-con and Big Oil connection travels to Azerbaijan and Georgia to shore up U.S. influence i.e. to buy more influence and gain control of more oil resources by playing on Georgia's and Azerbaijan's desire to be independent of Russia. As the article notes not all of Azerbaijan wants to be separate from Russia and the flames of separatism are burning in parts of that country as well as Georgia.

Dick Cheney to take fight against Russia's oil dominance to Azerbaijan
Dick Cheney, the US vice-president will arrive in the Caucasus on a mission to prevent Russia from gaining a stranglehold over Central Asia's vast reserves of energy.

By Damien McElroy in Tbilisi and Bruno Waterfield in BrusselsLast Updated: 12:36AM BST 03 Sep 2008
As he starts a tour of Georgia, Azerbaijan and Ukraine, Mr Cheney will try to allay fears that Russia's campaign in Georgia has fatally damaged a cornerstone of the West's energy policy.
That message will be particularly potent in Azerbaijan's capital Baku, once the capital of the Soviet oil industry and now a pivotal ally of the United States.
The Caucasus region, between the gas-rich Caspian Sea and Turkey, provides the only energy pathway from Central Asia to Europe that does not traverse Russia or Iran.
"If Azerbaijan tilts to Russia there goes 15 years of US energy diplomacy," said a Western diplomat in Baku. "Cheney has the history and personal clout to make this trip clearly focused on energy."
Mr Cheney's unparalleled reputation as a defender of US interests and close ties to the oil industry means the vice president is uniquely placed to deliver a tough message to Russia.
John Hannah, his national security advisor said: "The overriding priority, especially in Baku, Tbilisi and Kiev, will be the same: a clear and simple message that the United States has a deep and abiding interest in the well-being and security of this part of the world."
After European leaders bickered over how to deal with Russia at a summit on Monday, Mr Cheney will have to shore up Azerbaijan's confidence in Western support.
In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, the Georgian prime minister Lado Gurgenidze said that without efforts by Gordon Brown, the EU position would have been weaker.
"We are aware that the document perhaps would have read differently if it had not been for the efforts of the British delegation," he said.
The vulnerability of pipelines running from Azerbaijan to Turkey was dramatically illustrated by Russia's war in Georgia, when exports were halted and expatriate energy workers evacuated.
"Russia didn't need to attack the pipelines running through Georgia but by stopping the flow west it ensured that the great fears over the system have been realised," said Andrew Neff, an analyst at research firm, Global Insight. "Cheney must ensure that Azerbaijan doesn't take the wrong message from events in Georgia."
Supplies of Azeri gas are crucial to European efforts to build the 2,000 mile Nabucco pipeline through Turkey to Austria by 2013. Its inauguration would erode Russian's dominant role in energy supplies to Central and Eastern Europe.
America has been a strong proponent of the project. "Without Azeri gas, the Nabucco pipeline is dead on the drawing board," said Mr Neff, who concluded that Russia's campaign in Georgia had given it a "de facto veto" over energy flows through Georgia.
Russia has already attempted to coax Azerbaijan away from its Western backers. President Dmitry Medvedev used a visit to Baku in the spring to herald "co-operation prospects" between the two states.
Gazprom, the large Russian oil firm, has offered to pay market rates for its gas, which at a time of rising prices is more attractive than the long-term supply deal prices proposed by the West.
Ilham Aliyev, Azerbaijan's president, has been solidly pro-Western since succeeding his father in 2003.
However, despite its rapid economic growth, Azerbaijan remains vulnerable to Russia intervention in the breakaway enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh. As in the Georgian territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, separatists in Nagorno-Karabakh rely on Russian backing.
Diplomats have urged Mr Aliyev not to succumb to the short-term pressures of Russian expansionism. "It's 'don't lose sight of the long-term goal for a short-term fix'," said one official. "Ultimately Azerbaijan needs direct access to the Western market to remain independent of Russia."
Senior American conservatives have rallied behind Mr Cheney's trip, possibly his last significant act before President George W Bush's term ends in January. "The security of Georgia and Azerbaijan are vital American interests for a variety of reasons," said John Bolton, a former US ambassador to the United Nations. "Including the critical corridor they provide to get oil and natural gas out of the Caspian Basin region without transiting Russia or Iran. Europe should also understand this key point."

Moldovan separatists break off talks over Georgia.

If plebiscites were held in Transdniestria, Abkazia, or South Ossetia no doubt they all would choose either independence or joining with Russia. The example of Kosovo provides ammunition for these separatists. As with Serbia and Kosovo in the case of Georgia and South Ossetia no doubt the Georgians would claim that South Ossetia is an inseparable part of Georgian territory and also Abkazia. However, it is unlikely that Russians will let Georgian authorities regain control of either South Ossetia or Abkazia. It remains to be seen even if any arrangement can be made to have peacekeepers in the area such as was the case before the Georgian attack.

Moldovan separatists break off talks over Georgia
Dmitry ChubashenkoReuters North American News Service
Aug 12, 2008 13:52 EST
CHISINAU, Aug 12 (Reuters) - Leaders of Moldova's separatist Transdniestria region said on Tuesday they would break off all contacts with the ex-Soviet state's central government until it denounced Georgian "aggression" in South Ossetia.


Transdniestria's Russian-speaking leaders split from Moldova in 1990 in Soviet times on the grounds that the republic's Romanian-speaking majority would join neighbouring Romania.
That never happened -- but the two sides fought a brief war in 1992 and a resolution has yet to be found. Transdniestria's leader met Moldova's president in April for the first time since 2001, but the talks produced few results.
"Transdniestria hereby declares a moratorium on contacts (with Moldova) until the Moldovan side issues a decisive, unconditional denunciation of Georgia's aggression," the separatist region's Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
It accused Moldova of behaving like Georgia by trying to "change the format of talks, reduce Russia's role to a minimum and create conditions for the use of force to solve the conflict".
Moldova's Foreign Ministry had earlier endorsed a European Union statement noting the "worsening situation in South Ossetia". Moldovan President Vladimir Voronin, on holiday, has yet to comment on events in Georgia.
Georgia sent troops into South Ossetia last week to try to retake the territory, but Russia, which backs the separatists, responded with a military incursion into Georgia proper.
A six-point peace plan for South Ossetia proposed by the EU and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe called for troops to withdraw to pre-conflict areas and a pledge to renounce the use of force.
Transdniestria, like the Georgian regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, broke away as the Soviet Union was near to collapse. None of the three has international recognition.
Like Georgia, Moldova proposes broad autonomy for its rebel region, but Transdniestria's leaders say they will settle for nothing less than independence.
The region's voters have overwhelmingly backed independence in a referendum, as well as the idea of joining Russia one day. (Writing by Ron Popeski, editing by Meg Clothier)
Source: Reuters North American News Service

Gorbachev: A Path to Peace in the Caucasus

Gorbachev naturally analyses the situation from a primarily pro-Russian point of view. However, his remarks make much sense to me. In particular he emphasizes the provocative nature of Georgia's military attempt to simply take back South Ossetia. Gorbachev is also probalby correct that Georgia thought it could get away with this because it had the support of the U.S. and NATO. After all Israel has helped arm and train the Georgian army and so has the United States. The United States also supported Georgia's bid to join NATO. The U.S. simply dismisses Russian objections to anything that the U.S. wants to do. A prime example is the Missile Defence system in Eastern Europe. There is no doubt that the Cold War is warming up again. Cheney will be happy.

A Path to Peace in the CaucasusBy Mikhail Gorbachev12/08/08 "Washington Post -- - MOSCOW -- The past week's events in South Ossetia are bound to shock and pain anyone. Already, thousands of people have died, tens of thousands have been turned into refugees, and towns and villages lie in ruins. Nothing can justify this loss of life and destruction. It is a warning to all.The roots of this tragedy lie in the decision of Georgia's separatist leaders in 1991 to abolish South Ossetian autonomy. This turned out to be a time bomb for Georgia's territorial integrity. Each time successive Georgian leaders tried to impose their will by force -- both in South Ossetia and in Abkhazia, where the issues of autonomy are similar -- it only made the situation worse. New wounds aggravated old injuries.Nevertheless, it was still possible to find a political solution. For some time, relative calm was maintained in South Ossetia. The peacekeeping force composed of Russians, Georgians and Ossetians fulfilled its mission, and ordinary Ossetians and Georgians, who live close to each other, found at least some common ground.Through all these years, Russia has continued to recognize Georgia's territorial integrity. Clearly, the only way to solve the South Ossetian problem on that basis is through peaceful means. Indeed, in a civilized world, there is no other way.The Georgian leadership flouted this key principle.What happened on the night of Aug. 7 is beyond comprehension. The Georgian military attacked the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali with multiple rocket launchers designed to devastate large areas. Russia had to respond. To accuse it of aggression against "small, defenseless Georgia" is not just hypocritical but shows a lack of humanity.Mounting a military assault against innocents was a reckless decision whose tragic consequences, for thousands of people of different nationalities, are now clear. The Georgian leadership could do this only with the perceived support and encouragement of a much more powerful force. Georgian armed forces were trained by hundreds of U.S. instructors, and its sophisticated military equipment was bought in a number of countries. This, coupled with the promise of NATO membership, emboldened Georgian leaders into thinking that they could get away with a "blitzkrieg" in South Ossetia.In other words, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili was expecting unconditional support from the West, and the West had given him reason to think he would have it. Now that the Georgian military assault has been routed, both the Georgian government and its supporters should rethink their position.Hostilities must cease as soon as possible, and urgent steps must be taken to help the victims -- the humanitarian catastrophe, regretfully, received very little coverage in Western media this weekend -- and to rebuild the devastated towns and villages. It is equally important to start thinking about ways to solve the underlying problem, which is among the most painful and challenging issues in the Caucasus -- a region that should be approached with the greatest care.When the problems of South Ossetia and Abkhazia first flared up, I proposed that they be settled through a federation that would grant broad autonomy to the two republics. This idea was dismissed, particularly by the Georgians. Attitudes gradually shifted, but after last week, it will be much more difficult to strike a deal even on such a basis.Old grievances are a heavy burden. Healing is a long process that requires patience and dialogue, with non-use of force an indispensable precondition. It took decades to bring to an end similar conflicts in Europe and elsewhere, and other long-standing issues are still smoldering. In addition to patience, this situation requires wisdom.Small nations of the Caucasus do have a history of living together. It has been demonstrated that a lasting peace is possible, that tolerance and cooperation can create conditions for normal life and development. Nothing is more important than that.The region's political leaders need to realize this. Instead of flexing military muscle, they should devote their efforts to building the groundwork for durable peace.Over the past few days, some Western nations have taken positions, particularly in the U.N. Security Council, that have been far from balanced. As a result, the Security Council was not able to act effectively from the very start of this conflict. By declaring the Caucasus, a region that is thousands of miles from the American continent, a sphere of its "national interest," the United States made a serious blunder. Of course, peace in the Caucasus is in everyone's interest. But it is simply common sense to recognize that Russia is rooted there by common geography and centuries of history. Russia is not seeking territorial expansion, but it has legitimate interests in this region.The international community's long-term aim could be to create a sub-regional system of security and cooperation that would make any provocation, and the very possibility of crises such as this one, impossible. Building this type of system would be challenging and could only be accomplished with the cooperation of the region's countries themselves. Nations outside the region could perhaps help, too -- but only if they take a fair and objective stance. A lesson from recent events is that geopolitical games are dangerous anywhere, not just in the Caucasus.The writer was the last president of the Soviet Union. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1990 and is president of the Gorbachev Foundation, a Moscow think tank. A version of this article, in Russian, will be published in the Rossiyskaya Gazeta newspaper tomorrow.© 2008 The Washington Post Company

Georgia: US training gives Georgia military advantage

This is from the Telegraph.
While the U.S. training and equipment may give the Georgians an advantage, Georgia is still a pygmy facing a Goliath. Georgia no doubt hoped that taking back the capital of South Ossetia would strengthen its hand in any peace talks. However the result has been not only considerable losses to the Ossetians but also bombing of Georgian military bases inside Georgia proper and also it seems other destruction. The rockets coming from mobile vehicles are not accurate at all.
Now apparently the Russians have a firm hold on South Ossetia and the Georgians have withdrawn. They have nothing for their efforts except perhaps to exacerbate already tense relations between the U.S. and Russia. Russia is not likely to give much in the peace talks. It will insist that Goergia leave South Ossetia and Abkazia alone.

Georgia: US training gives Georgia military advantage
The problem the Russians face in South Ossetia is that their peacekeepers have had to make the transition overnight to what is, in effect, a war-fighting force.

By Allan Mallinson, Defence Historian Last Updated: 12:11AM BST 10 Aug 2008

The Russians lack of enough force to deploy decisively from the outset has forced them to over-rely on artillery especially the multi-barrelled rocket launcher Photo: REUTERS
While they are not operating like Scandinavian peace forces in light blue berets, the transition will not have been smooth.
Ironically, as former peacekeepers, they may be inflicting far more civilian casualties than would a force that had been training and planning for combat operations.
Not least, this is because they did not have enough force to deploy overwhelmingly and therefore decisively from the outset – which might have overawed the Georgians without a shot.
This has forced them to over-rely on artillery, one of the least discriminating weapons systems, especially the multi-barrelled rocket launcher.
Nor has the speed with which the fighting developed helped the civilian population either to evacuate the combat zones, or take effective cover.
The Russians will no doubt justify their use of air power beyond Ossetia as defensive action in depth and draw comparisons with the United Nations' use of ground-attack aircraft in Bosnia during the peacekeeping mandate; but it will also be in some measure an attempt to overwhelm the Georgians psychologically, and with the only means to hand.
The reinforcements being sent by Moscow will be special forces – more subtle, more highly trained than the troops already on the ground. However sinister their deployment sounds, they should be welcomed for their professionalism. Despite the money pumped into the army by Vladimir Putin, the quality of its regular officers is a problem. Despite South Ossetia's semi-autonomous status, the Georgian army is operating on essentially interior lines of communication, while the Russians are deployed at the end of a very long line indeed. On paper, Georgian forces number some 18,000, but there are probably fewer than 12,000 effective combat troops, which is why the contingent in Iraq is being recalled.
The Georgians, though outnumbered, in the shorter term have several advantages. They are not badly equipped. The former Soviet T72, for example, their main battle tank, is a reasonable match for the Russians' T90. The army has been American-trained, and increasingly American-equipped, for the past 10 years, and strongly focused on Nato admission: there will be some capable commanders and staff officers, therefore.
It is a strange irony to note that their troops have seen action, against Chechen rebels, but fighting alongside the Russians.

Georgia fighting undermines markets (Russian)

This is from Reuters.
Imagine what would happen if Georgia were already part of NATO. If that were the case then other world markets might be down on this news as well. Not too much coverage of this in the West. Everyone is busy with the opening of the Olympics in China!

Georgia fighting undermines markets
Fri Aug 8, 2008 6:35am EDTBy Peter AppsLONDON, Aug 8 (Reuters) - Heavy fighting between Georgia and separatists -- and Russian threats of a "response" -- undermined Russian assets and broader emerging markets on Friday, with a stronger dollar also hitting currencies.Georgian troops and warplanes pounded separatist forces around the capital of its breakaway South Ossetia region, and Georgia accused Russian jets of bombing its territory.Benchmark emerging equities were down 0.91 percent by 1000 GMT, with Russian stocks among the greatest losers, down 2.89 percent -- a move also attributed in part to a weaker oil price and broader global equity sell-off."The military conflict is obviously adding to negative sentiment, not just for Russia but for emerging markets in general," said emerging market strategist Nigel Rendell at Royal Bank of Canada. "If it is still continuing after the weekend I think we will see further weakness."Russian President Vladimir Putin said the Georgian leadership had resorted to "very aggressive actions", saying some Russian peacekeepers were among the casualties and that would "incur a response".The rouble weakened around 20 kopecks against the basket of 0.55 dollar and 0.45 euros, although analysts said this was in part due to a sharp retreat in the euro after dovish European Central bank comments on Thursday.But investor sentiment in Russia is already dented by sharp falls in oil and commodity prices during July as well as worries over a battle for control of oil giant BP's local joint-venture and an attack by Putin on coalminer Mechel. So a clash with the West over Georgia is seen as bad news.Russian stocks are down 22 percent this year."There is now a very serious risk of mass equity sales on the Russian market," said Sobinbank head of market analysis Alexander Razauvaev, advising against short-term positions in an increasingly volatile market. The cost of insuring Russian debt in the credit default swaps market increased slightly to 106 basis points from Thursday's 102.Georgia has little in the way of traded international instruments except for its $500 million Eurobond launched earlier this year, which is relatively illiquid. Ratings agency Fitch warned on Thursday before overnight fighting that an escalation to all out conflict could hurt its creditworthiness.
© Thomson Reuters 2008. All rights reserved. Users may download and print extracts of content from this website for their own personal and non-commercial use only.

Pat Buchanan: Should We Fight for South Ossetia?

Bush' support for extending NATO to the borders of Russia is quite provocative. Imagine the reaction if Russia joined a security arrangement with Canada and Mexico guaranteeing that Russia would intervene if either was threatened by any other country. The U.S. could face Russians on their doorstep. When the USSR intervened in Cuba and a Marxist regime "threatened" in Grenada and Nicaragua the USA itself intervened to roll back this influence in its sphere of influence. The U.S. still has a trade embargo against Cuba. So the Russians on the other hand are supposed to stand by and watch while NATO an organisation designed originally to protect members against attacks from Russia(USSR)recruits members on its borders and in countries that were originally part of the USSR. Why Bush wants a new Cold War is hard to fathom. As Buchanan points out the US military with a humungous budget is strained to the limits already. Many European countries are wary of the expansion since Russia supplies a lot of their natural gas among other things. The Missile Defence system plans have already miffed Russia. Now Bush is at it again.


Should We Fight for South Ossetia?
by Patrick J. Buchanan
Posted: 04/01/2008

In echo of Warren Harding's "A Return to Normalcy" speech of 1920,
George Bush last week declared, "Normalcy is returning back to Iraq."

The term seemed a mite ironic. For, as Bush spoke, Iraqis were dying
in the hundreds in the bloodiest fighting in months in Basra, the
Shia militias of Moqtada al Sadr were engaging Iraqi and U.S. troops
in Sadr City, and mortar shells were dropping into the Green Zone.

One begins to understand why Gen. Petraeus wants a "pause" in the
pullout of U.S. forces, and why Bush agrees. This will leave more
U.S. troops in Iraq on Inauguration Day 2009, than on Election Day
2006, when the country voted the Democrats into power to bring a
swift end to the war.

A day before Bush went to the U.S. Air Force Museum in Dayton, Ohio,
to speak of normalcy returning to Iraq, he was led down into "the
Tank," a secure room at the Pentagon, to be briefed on the crisis
facing the U.S. Army and Marine Corps because of the constant
redeployments to Afghanistan and Iraq.

As The Associated Press' Robert Burns reported, the Joint Chiefs
"laid out their concerns about the health of the U.S. force." First
among them is "that U.S. forces are being worn thin, compromising the
Pentagon's ability to handle crises elsewhere in the world. ... The
U.S. has about 31,000 troops in Afghanistan and 156,000 in Iraq."

"Five plus years in Iraq," the generals and admirals told Bush,
"could create severe, long-term problems, particularly for the Army
and Marine Corps."

In short, the two long wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are wearing down
U.S. ground forces of fewer than 700,000, one in every six of them
women, to such an extent U.S. commanders called Bush and Dick Cheney
to a secret meeting to awaken them to the strategic and morale crisis.

This is serious business. With the Taliban revived and the violence
in Iraq rising toward pre-surge levels, the Joint Chiefs are telling
the commander in chief that the U.S. Army and Marine Corps are worn
out.

Crunch time is coming. And what is President Bush doing?

He is flying to Bucharest, Romania, to persuade Europe to bring
Ukraine and Georgia into NATO, which means a U.S. commitment to treat
any Russian attack on Kiev or Tbilisi like an attack on Kansas or
Texas.

Article V of the NATO treaty declares that "an armed attack against
one or more (allies) shall be considered an attack against them all."
Added language makes clear that the commitment to assist an ally is
not unconditional. Rather, each signatory will assist the ally under
attack with "such action as it deems necessary, including the use of
armed force."

Yet, it was understood during the Cold War that if a NATO ally like
Norway, West Germany or Turkey, which bordered on the Soviet Union or
Warsaw Pact, were attacked, America would come to its defense.

Can any sane man believe the United States should go to war with a
nuclear-armed Russia over Stalin's birthplace, Georgia?

Two provinces of Georgia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia, have seceded,
with the backing of Russia. And there are 10 million Russian-speaking
Ukrainians in the east of that country, and Moscow and Kiev are at
odds over which is sovereign on the Crimean Peninsula.

To bring Ukraine and Georgia into NATO would put America in the
middle of these quarrels. We could be dragged into a confrontation
with Russia over Abkhazia, or South Ossetia, or who owns Sebastopol.
To bring these ex-republics of the Soviet Union into NATO would be an
affront to Moscow not unlike 19th century Britain bringing the
Confederate state of South Carolina under the protection of the
British Empire.

How would Lincoln's Union have reacted to that?

With a weary army and no NATO ally willing to fight beside us, how
could we defend Georgia if Tbilisi, once in NATO, defied Moscow and
invaded Abkhazia and South Ossetia -- and Russia bombed the Georgian
army and capital? Would we declare war? Would we send the 82nd
Airborne into the Pankisi Gorge?

Fortunately, Germany is prepared to veto any Bush attempt to put
Ukraine or Georgia on a fast track into NATO. But President Bush is
no longer the problem. John McCain is.

As Anatol Lieven writes in the Financial Times, McCain supports a
restoration of Georgian rule over Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and
NATO membership for Georgia and Ukraine. He wants to throw Russia out
of the G-8 -- and talks flippantly of bombing Iran.

Says McCain, "I would institute a policy called 'rogue state
rollback.' I would arm, train, equip, both from without and from
within, forces that would eventually overthrow the governments and
install free and democratically elected governments."

Wonderful. A Second Crusade for Global Democracy. But with the Joint
Chiefs warning of a war-weary Army and Marine Corps, who will fight
all the new wars the neocons and their new champion have in store for
us?

Bush backs ambitions of Ukraine and Georgia to become NATO

This is from CNN. NATO stands for North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. It was part of the Cold War against the USSR. Now after an Orwellian change in its geographical membership it is being used by the U.S. to start a new Cold War by surrounding Russia with NATO states that will help advance U.S. policies.
Of course NATO is now a global surrogate for U.S. power acting on behalf of the U.S. and its interests in Afghanistan! As with NATO mission in Afghanistan where the public in contributing countries often have large majorities against the mission, Ukrainians do not want to join NATO. It makes no difference.

Bush stirs controversy over NATO membership

Bush backs ambitions of Ukraine and Georgia to become NATO members

He told Ukranian president "the U.S. strongly supports your request"

Russia opposes Ukraine's accession warning it would cause a "deep crisis"

France and Germany are also believed to be skeptical about the move

By CNN's European Political Editor Robin Oakley
(CNN) -- President George W. Bush has not wasted any time stirring the pot on his latest visit to Europe for the NATO Summit starting in Bucharest, Romania, Wednesday.

With less than ten months to go in office, Bush is looking to add some luster to a foreign policy legacy seen by many as little short of disastrous. His latest initiative is to give a hefty push to the ambitions of two former Soviet Union states, Ukraine and Georgia, to become members of NATO.

Stopping off in the Ukrainian capital of Kiev for talks with President Viktor Yuschenko, Bush declared that he was strongly behind the two countries' bids to join NATO, for which the first step would be admission to a "MAP" or Membership Action Plan.

He told Yuschenko at a joint media facility that "the U.S. strongly supports your request" and added that he would argue forcefully in Bucharest for that to come about.

The only snag for Bush in his latest ambition is that his eagerness to welcome the former Soviet Republics into NATO is not shared by several of the other 25 members of NATO. It is also bitterly resented by Russia, whose President Putin he will be meeting for the last time face to face in the Russian ski town of Sochi on Sunday. (In May Putin gives way to Dimitry Medvedev, whose Prime Minister he will become).

Almost as Bush was reiterating his support for Ukraine and its leader, Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Grigory Karasin warned that Ukraine's accession into NATO would cause a "deep crisis" in Kiev's relations with Moscow. He added that any incorporation of Ukraine into the alliance would also badly hurt Russia's relations with the West.

Putin has already warned that if Ukraine were to join NATO and later to join Poland and the Czech Republic in housing installations for America's planned Missile Defense program in Europe then he would be forced to target short range rockets on Russia's neighbor.

But it is not just Russia which has doubts about the two countries in its "near abroad" joining the NATO alliance. Germany's Chancellor Angela Merkel has indicated her reservations and on Tuesday French Prime Minister Francois Fillon made plain that France opposes allowing Ukraine and Georgia into NATO.

In an interview with the French radio station, France Inter, Fillon declared:

"We are opposed to the entry of Georgia and Ukraine because we think that it is not a good answer to the balance of power within Europe and between Europe and Russia."

There is a deep division in NATO's ranks on the question of enlargement further east. Bush said in Kiev that he believed that membership for Ukraine and Georgia was in the interests of the Alliance as well as the countries themselves.

But a number of NATO countries disagree. They do not believe it is in their interests at this stage to further anger Russia, which has already been infuriated by the plans for the U.S. Missile Defence installations in Poland and the Czech Republic.

Others say that is too timorous an approach and one which can be explained by EU countries, which make up the bulk of NATO's membership, being dependent on Russia for more than 40 percent of their energy supplies. They say that to allow Russian threats to deter NATO from offering MAP status to Ukraine and Georgia would be handing Russia a veto on Alliance membership.

Georgia's President Mikhail Saakashvili says that denying the two countries the chance to move towards NATO membership would be "appeasement" of Moscow.

Supporters of Ukraine's membership like the U.S. president point out that Kiev has backed every one of NATO's military initiatives in recent years, for example in Kosovo and Afghanistan, without being a member of the Alliance. Opponents note that opinion polls show a majority of the citizens in Ukraine opposed to NATO membership.

Yuschenko said at the meeting with Bush that support had risen from 17 percent to nearly 40 percent, before his government had even begun to make the case for Ukraine joining the Alliance.

With other NATO members already simmering over the Missile Defence plan and over criticisms by U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates of other nations' efforts in Afghanistan, Bush has certainly ensured a lively debate in Bucharest.







Find this article at:
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/04/01/ukraine.analysis/?iref=mpstoryview






© 2008 Cable News Network.

Black Roses: Georgia's Reformers Fall Out

THis is from Mark Almond's blog. The article is very long. I have posted only a small portion. The article shows how events in Georgia have been manipulated in the West and how people power is in effect promoted by western interests and often involves leaders who are quite corrupt. Now the leaders are at each other's throats. Georgia as a great success story hardly fits the reality.



Black Roses: Georgia’s Reformers Fall Out -

Georgia’s Transition from ‘People Power’ to Caucasian Cockpit

by

Mark Almond


Introduction:

“Georgia has made stunning progress in carrying out substantial economic, judicial and state reforms… that should allow Georgia to become a prosperous liberal market economy and a fully-fledged democracy governed by human rights and the rule of law. Georgia has set an example for the whole region and beyond.”

Council of Europe rapporteurs Matyas Eorsi & Kastriot Islami
(13 September 2007)[1]

“The style of Saakashvili’s governance … has made dishonesty, injustice and oppression a way of life. Everyday repression, demolition of houses and churches, robbery, ‘kulakization’, and
murders, I would stress, murders, have become common practice for the authorities.”

Ex-Defence Minister Irakli Okruashvili
(25th September, 2007)[2]


On Friday 2nd November, 2007, the centre of the Georgian capital, Tbilisi, was occupied a huge crowd demanding the resignation of President Mikheil Saakashvili.[3] It was exactly four years since Saakashvili had cried foul about Georgia’s parliamentary elections and set in train the protests which brought him to power on 23rd November, 2003. While Western media have largely ignored the tail-spin in the popularity of Georgia’s arch-populist, the waves of criticism and protest denouncing the erstwhile hero of the so-called “Rose Revolution” take place against the sensitive geo-strategic backdrop of Georgia’s dispute with Russia over the status of its breakaway regions, Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Whether the protests peter out or achieve their stated goal of forcing early elections, the myth of People Power has been tarnished once more by the reality of the power struggles and back-stabbing among yesteryear’s “reformers”.

The current crisis in Georgia began when the two leading figures in the “Rose Revolution”, Mikheil Saakashvili and Irakli Okruashvili had a spectacular falling out. Having served as Prosecutor-General purging supporters of the ousted president Eduard Shevardnadze and then as Defence Minister, Irakli Okruashvili, dramatically left Saakashvili’s government in November, 2006. After ten months of public silence, on 25th September, 2007, Mr Okruashvili announced he was launching a “Movement for a United Georgia”.

At the press conference launching his challenge to President Saakashvili, Okruashvili declared, “I want to tell you… recent developments in the country, the fascist tendencies and the steps taken by the authorities against the Georgian state, have made us [the new political party] come together before the public in this team…” Then he declared, “The style of Saakashvili’s governance, which has gone beyond the limits, has made dishonesty, injustice and oppression a way of life. Everyday repression, demolition of houses and churches, robbery, ‘kulakization’, and murders, I would stress, murders, have become common practice for the authorities.”[4]

Such as the shock effect that it was only two days later, after launching his new opposition party with this litany of charges against his former long-time political ally and personal friend, President Mikheil Saakashvili, that Irakli Okruashvili was arrested and taken to Tbilisi’s notorious Isolator Number 7, the scene of well-documented torture of political prisoners since 1991. After he had recanted his charges against the President but confessed to his own crimes in a video session with interrogators but without his lawyer present, Mr Okruashvili posted bail of US$6 million and was released.[5]

At the same time as the former top two of Georgia’s “Rose Revolution” in 2003 were at each others’ throats making blood curdling threats and accusations, events in Burma were being reported with same kind of naïve enthusiasm for “People Power” which has left a bitter taste in the mouths of impoverished and oppressed Georgians. They have twice experienced coups d’etat (in 1991 and 2003) lauded in the West as expressions of the will of the people. Even as Okruashvili and Saakashvili traded accusations of murder and treason in Tbilisi, Georgia’s revolution in 2003 was actually been cited as a model by Western media for the saffron-robed monks of Burma protesting against the military government there.[6]

Only people bewitched by the myth of “People Power” could think that given Georgia’s disillusionment any good come from another coloured-coded revolution endorsed by the same journalists and “human rights” activists who have praised Georgia as a model for change. Many of the Western groups who funded and trained the so-called “rose revolutionaries” in Georgia in 2003 have been behind the scenes of the “saffron revolution” in Burma. If Burma’s military rulers should go the way of Eduard Shevardnadze will Burma fall through the floor into the same politics of corruption, drugs smuggling and backstabbing which have pock-marked Georgia’s tragic post-Soviet history.

Proponents of “People Power” from the Caucasus to South-East Asia ignore the poverty, oppression, disease and death which have followed events like the “Rose Revolution.” Western media like The Economist and so-called human rights watchdogs like the Council of Europe have a lamentable record of fellow travelling with successive corrupt and cruel regimes in Tbilisi since 1991. It is not too much to say that there isn’t any bad situation which the nexus of Western intelligence agencies, media and human rights agencies cannot make worse, while singing their own praises as the proponents of a new dawn of human happiness.

The infighting and mutual accusations of crime, corruption and killings among the Rose Revolutionaries is the starkest case yet of the reality of a post-People Power country contrasting with the myth peddled abroad in the Western media. No journalists who painted a rosy picture of the new rulers of Georgia has yet come forward to correct, let alone apologise for their myth-making under the guise of reporting.


When friends fall out: Mikheil Sakashvili & Irakli Okruashvili

“Georgia has produced strong leaders. Stalin, Beria, Gamsakhurdia. Even Shevardnadze, before he got addicted to power. They looked beyond Georgia. My husband does the same;
he fits in the tradition. This country needs a strong hand. It is incredibly important that
respect for authority returns... I think my husband is the right person to frighten people.”

Sandra Roeloffs aka Mrs. Mikheil Saakashvili[7]

“After the revolution, the spring cleaning… Every week has brought fresh arrests of the great and not so good… The whole country is being treated to this televised humiliation, directed personally by the new prosecutor-general… He is also planning further arrests.”

Tim Whewell, “Newsnight”, BBC2 (8th April, 2004)

“This is what official Tbilisi is like nowadays: American workaholic management, West-orientated management, no political unpredictability so typical of the Kremlin”!

Anna Politvkovskaya[8]

They were buddies. Blood brothers. Soul-mates in the fight for democracy against corruption. Every authoritative voice – The Economist, New York Times, the BBC, even the martyred Anna Politkovskaya – assured us that Mikheil Saakashvili and Irakli Okruashvili were the best and brightest hopes for an end to the post-Soviet quagmire of corruption and political in-fighting. So how did it all go wrong?

Readers can be forgiven not knowing that it has all gone wrong. For instance, the BBC reporters who filed successive upbeat stories about the Saakashvili-Okruashvili double have fallen strangely silent when it comes to accounting for their spectacular bust-up.

BBC2’s Newsnight’s Tim Whewell used never to tire of telling us about Irakli Okruashvili’s dynamism as prosecutor: “another day, more arrests” which “doesn’t leave the chief corruption buster with much time for his wife and daughter.” Considering the prosecutor and the president , he assured viewers less than four years ago – admittedly an age ago in media memory – they were “the youngest, most photogenic government in the world…” Apparently photogenic equalled public spirited in Whewell-speak.[9]

In America, too, regime-friendly journalists emphasised the new order’s youth as if it equalled a moral quality. Saakashvili’s regime was a kind of Camelot in the Caucasus according to the Washington Post’s Peter Baker who gushed about the new class ruling Georgia in 2004: “Saakashvili has built the former Soviet Union's first generation of leaders outside the historically Western-oriented Baltic republics, a team whose members look like him -- in their thirties, Western-educated, untainted by the old system.” Taking his argument from Saakashvili himself, Baker quoted the new President , "Absence of experience is an asset in itself. Because what kind of experience was it? Experience at being corrupt. Experience at being part of the old system that didn't work."[10] Georgians have a long history of gulling gullible journalists. After all fellow traveling was invented by hacks hanging on Stalin’s every word, but any anthropologist or sociologist would point out that young people are the most socialised to the dominant system. It is all they have known. In this case it is all their parents and grandparents knew and served. Far from representing an automatic break with Soviet behavioural norms in Georgia, Saakashvili and his generation exemplified the way Sovietised Georgians operated within a patronage system dominated by a distant all-powerful boss. Shevardnadze saw the sun rise in Moscow “where Lenin lies”, Saakashvili sees the sun rise in the West in Washington. Both Shevardnadze and his erstwhile apprentice know how to utter the slogans of the patron while running their satrapy as usual. Sadly, Georgians expect that, and are certainly adapted to mouthing grand principles while doing dirty deals.

Georgia: The rewards of sending troops to Iraq

This is from Harper's. This shows that human rights and the rule of law can be overlooked as long as Georgia goes along with US policy in Iraq and lends a helping hand. It never hurts to have a good lobbyist either!

Georgia Provides Troops for Iraq; Gets a Free Pass on Human Rights?
DEPARTMENT Washington Babylon
BY Ken Silverstein
PUBLISHED July 10, 2007
Guess which Eastern European country will soon have the third largest military force in Iraq? That same country is strongly pro-NATO and has on retainer a Washington lobbyist who was a leading advocate for the war in Iraq? Now guess which country is getting a free ride from the Bush Administration—and the media—on human rights and democracy?

The answer is Georgia. Ever since the “Rose Revolution” of 2003 that toppled Eduard Shevardnadze, the former Soviet official, the Bush Administration has maintained close ties to the government in Georgia. The media, too, has been sympathetic to President Mikhail Saakashvili, who is generally portrayed as a spunky leader who is creating a Western-style state bound by the rule of law.

That portrait, though, is far from accurate. In 2005, Human Rights Watch released a report that described “the ongoing impunity for torture, a problem that persists despite some government measures taken to combat it.” In another report last year, “Undue Punishment: Abuses against Prisoners in Georgia”,” Human Rights Watch found that many prisoners “live in severely overcrowded, filthy, and poorly-ventilated cells. In the last two years, the prison population has nearly doubled due to the routine use of pretrial detention, even for nonviolent offences.” (Incidentally, there were 16,911 convictions in Georgia last year and just 37 acquittals, a rate that even an old Soviet-era prosecutor would have had a hard time matching.)

This year, the U.S. State Department’s own human rights report says of Georgia, “The government’s human rights record improved in some areas during the year, although serious problems remained . . . [T]here were some reports of deaths due to excessive use of force by law enforcement officers, cases of torture and mistreatment of detainees, increased abuse of prisoners, impunity, [and] continued overuse of pretrial detention for less serious offenses.”

Consider court proceedings now under way against Maia Topuria, a 41-year-old mother of three who along with 12 other defendants is now on trial for allegedly attempting to overthrow the government. In an echo of the Communist era, the judge has closed the courtroom to the public, the media and foreign observers. The defendants, who are members of the political opposition, are held in cages in the courtroom (except for one, who was released after providing an incriminating statement against the others).

The evidence, to put it mildly, is weak. When they were originally arrested, the defendants were accused of participating in a May 24, 2006 meeting where they were said to have plotted the government’s overthrow. When one of the defendants proved that he was out of the country on that day, the government changed the date of the alleged plot to May 4. When another defendant proved he was at a cardiac clinic on that day, the government suggested he sneaked out to attend the coup meeting, though four doctors at the clinic have said it that would have been impossible for him to have done so unnoticed.

The government has offered as evidence a handwritten statement implicating the defendants from a witness who claimed he provided it in September of 2006 after he heard of the plot. But when questioned by a defense attorney in court, the witness could not even define numerous words from his original statement. (He defined “dispute” as “a TV debate,” “imitation” as an “attempt,” and said that he no longer knew what “spontaneous” meant but he did when he wrote his original statement.)

“The government doesn’t want any public scrutiny of the case because there is no case,” Melinda Sarafa, an American lawyer who is representing Topuria, told me. “Every day I’m in court I wish the media were there because the situation is so preposterous.” Sarafa says that Georgia is moving towards a “super-executive” style of government with no meaningful checks and balances, and charges that other than the State Department report, she can find “no other affirmative efforts by the Bush Administration to express concerns about identifiable instances of human rights violations.”

The Bush Administration could probably stop the farcical trial if it complained to the government, but since Saakashvili is “pro-Western” it doesn’t utter a peep of protest. Its silence might have something to do with the fact that Georgia recently announced it would increase its troops in Iraq from 850 to 2,000. After South Korea pulls its troops out, as it has announced, that will leave Georgia, a nation of about 4.5 million people, with the third largest contingent in Iraq after the United States and Great Britain.

Georgia’s cause in Washington is probably also helped by its lobbyist, Randy Scheunemann, a former advisor to Donald Rumsfeld who helped draft the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998. A week after the 9/11 attacks Scheunemann joined with a group of conservatives who sent a letter to President Bush calling for Saddam Hussein’s overthrow, and in 2002 he became the founding president of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq; now he’s helping former Soviet Bloc states win business there.

It’s ironic that the Bush Administration criticizes Russia for backsliding on democracy but says nothing about similar types of problems in Georgia and other former Soviet states that have undergone pro-Western revolutions. The media faithfully echoes the charges on Russia but has generally failed to explore the situation elsewhere in Eastern Europe.