Conflicto entre Rusia y Georgia

[Carlos Martín]

EE.UU. DEMANDA UNA RETIRADA DE LAS TROPAS RUSAS DE GEORGIA

11/09/2008 11:07 WASHINGTON, September 11 (RIA Novosti) - The United States has demanded Russia abide by the terms of the South Ossetia ceasefire plan and pull its troops out of Georgia.

"These guys [Russia leaders] are at every turn trying to wiggle out of a commitment they made and that their president put his name to," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said. "They need to get out of Georgia and they need to stop finding excuses to do that."

He also said Washington was "extremely concerned" by Russian statements that thousands of regular troops would be based in South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

"That, of course, would be a violation of the cease-fire that they signed in August," McCormack said. "Russia and their government and troops need to abide by their commitments, bottom line."

Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov said Wednesday that about 3,800 service personnel would be based in each republic, a move Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said was legal since Russia recognized South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states.

"With the signing and ratification of the treaty we initialed today, the troops will be there on an international-legal basis," Lavrov told journalists later Wednesday. "These are not peacekeepers, this is a military contingent whose number is defined by the Defense Ministry in consultation with its partners in South Ossetia and Abkhazia."

McCormack also criticized Russia over problems getting humanitarian aid to some villages near the South Ossetian capital, Tskhinvali.

"We are also very concerned by Russian restrictions on the flow of humanitarian aid, which also contravenes the ceasefire agreement," he said. "The Russian checkpoint at Karaleti continues to turn back shipments of humanitarian assistance that is trying to reach the villages south of Tskhinvali."

"We strongly urge Russia to allow the free flow of humanitarian assistance to all areas of Georgia," the spokesman concluded.

Russia's strained relations with the United States and the European Union since the conflict in Georgia - heightened by Russia's recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia - have descended into tit-for-tat accusations over whether Moscow and Tbilisi are upholding their obligations under the peace deal brokered by French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

[alex atella]

Estimado Iris:

Sé que no está previsto el ingreso de Rusia a la UE.

No sé si has tenido oportunidad de leer mis post, también estoy al tanto del problema de corrupción que tienen.

Justamente, el problema de corrupción tiene una naturaleza esencialmente gubernamental y de su calidad institucional.

Este tema, parece secundario para muchos foristas y no lo es. La corrupción es un indicador cualitativo de la democracia imperante y afecta directamente todos los proyectos gubernamentales, incluyendo aquellos de naturaleza militar. Es el elemento que hace que el dinero, de por sí exiguo para afrontar un reto como USA, rinda además mucho menos.

Justamente por eso señalaba uno de los motivos más importantes para su NO INGRESO

''Integrarse supone derechos pero también obligaciones.
Para eso es necesario aceptar controles externos de órganos supra nacionales. Los mandatarios pierden discrecionalidad en sus decisiones y no pueden enriquecerse tan fácilmente.''

Los funcionarios rusos pueden decir que quieren el ingreso pero la pérdida de discrecionalidad hace que prefieran seguir en esta senda.

En síntesis, coincido con tu posición.
También coincido con la apreciación de que tal vez, Georgia sea una moneda de cambio de algo por venir próximamente.

Hace uno o dos días me había quedado reflexionando sobre algo parecido en Irak. Si bien, en lo personal aborresco el régimen que imperaba y creo que el conflicto interno hubiera ocurrido de todos modos, comencé a pensar que tal vez siempre estuvo en la mira Irán y que este objetivo requería de otro primario 'menor'. Este objetivo primario, tal vez (y realmente no lo sé) sería Irak. Tan sólo una plataforma y un proveedor seguro.

[edgar_nuevo]

Luisfer, Iris, Alex_Stella, Yorktown. todos:


Estaba leyendo la prensa electrónica por ahí y miren lo que conseguí. Parece que el fenómeno de la Corrupción es un mal también del "1er. Mundo"

Nuevo escándalo de corrupción entre funcionarios del gobierno de Bush




Por: YVKE Mundial
Fecha de publicación: 12/09/08


12 de septiembre de 2008.- El inspector general del Departamento del Interior presentó el jueves informes después de una extensa investigación de dos años, detallando cómo varios funcionarios de la oficina encargada del manejo de regalías petroleras participaron en actos de corrupción en el manejo de contratos, conflicto de interés al trabajar para el gobierno y prestar servicios remunerados a empresas privadas a la vez, aceptar regalos (incluyendo viajes para jugar golf, para esquiar, cenas y más) y hasta relaciones sexuales con empleados de algunas de las empresas petroleras más grandes del país.
...


Fuente: http://www.aporrea.org/internacionales/n120509.html


¿Qué Cosas No?

[Carlos Martín]

US military trained Georgian commandos
By Charles Clover in Moscow and Demetri Sevastopulo in Washington | FT.com

The US military provided combat training to 80 Georgian special forces commandos only months prior to Georgia's army assault in South Ossetia in August.

The revelation, based on recruitment documents and interviews with US military trainers obtained by the Financial Times, could add fuel to accusations by Vlad­imir Putin, Russian prime minister, last month that the US had "orchestrated" the war in the Georgian enclave.

The training was provided by senior US soldiers and two military contractors. There is no evidence that the contractors or the Pentagon, which hired them, knew that the commandos they were training were likely be used in the assault on South Ossetia.

A US army spokesman said the goal of the programme was to train the commandos for duty in Afghanistan as part of Nato-led International Security Assist­ance Force. The programme, however, highlights the often unintended consequences of US "train and equip" programmes in foreign countries.

The contractors - MPRI and American Systems, both based in Virginia - recruited a 15-man team of former special forces soldiers to train the Georgians at the Vashlijvari special forces base on the outskirts of Tbilisi, part of a programme run by the US defence department.

MPRI was hired by the Pentagon in 1995 to train the Croatian military prior to their invasion of the ethnically-Serbian Krajina region, which led to the displacement of 200,000 refugees and was one of the worst incidents of ethnic cleansing in the Balkan wars. MPRI denies any wrongdoing.

US training of the Georgian army is a big flashpoint between Washington and Moscow. Mr Putin said on CNN on August 29: "It is not just that the American side could not restrain the Georgian leadership from this criminal act [of intervening in South Ossetia]. The American side in effect armed and trained the Georgian army."

The first phase of the special forces training was held between January and April this year, concentrating on "basic special forces skills" said an American Systems employee interviewed by phone from the US army's Fort Bragg.

The US military official familiar with the programme said the Pentagon hired the military contracting firms to help supplement its own trainers because of a lack of manpower.

The second 70-day phase was set to begin on August 11, a few days after war broke out in South Ossetia. The trainers arrived on August 3, four days before the conflict flared on August 7. "They would have only seen the inside of a hotel room," quipped one former contractor. Neither MPRI nor American Systems would speak at length to the FT about the programme.

American Systems di­rected questions to the US army's Security Assistance Training Management Organisation (Satmo) at Fort Bragg, part of the US Army's Special Warfare Center School. Satmo sends trainers, mainly special forces but also contractors, to countries such as Yemen, Colombia and the Philippines. Satmo trainers generally work with forces involved in counter-insurgencies, counter-terrorism or civil wars. A Satmo spokesman declined to comment.

One US military official familiar with the programme said it emerged from a Georgian offer to the US in December 2006 to send commandos to Afghanistan to work alongside American special operations forces.

According to this person, the US told Georgia that the offer should be made through Nato, which welcomed the offer but informed Georgia that its forces would need additional training to meet the military alliance's standards.

While the programme is not classified, there is a lack of transparency surrounding it, though US military officials said the lack of publicity was not part of an effort to keep the programme secret. Other US military training programmes in Georgia have their own websites and photo galleries.

A US European Command spokesman confirmed the existence of the programme only after reviewing an e-mail sent by MPRI recruiters that was obtained by the FT. According to the e-mail, which did not mention Nato operations, former US special operations forces would receive $2,000 ($1,150, 1,400) a week plus costs as trainers. "We can confirm the pro­gramme exists, but due to its nature and training ob­jectives we do not discuss specifics to ensure the integrity of the programme and force protection of the trainers and participants," he said.

James Appathurai, Nato's spokesman in Brussels, said: "Georgia has made an offer to provide forces to Isaf in the last two years. But until now these Georgian forces have not joined the Isaf mission." An official at a senior Nato member state said it was understood that the forces had been trained by the US, but that the forces had not passed a certification process under which all potential members of the Isaf mission are vetted.

[Carlos Martín]

GEORGIA PERTENECERÁ A LA OTAN

TBILISI, September 12 (Itar-Tass) -- NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer told the Georgian television company Rustavi 2 on Friday that Georgia would certainly become a NATO member country but he could not say when exactly that might happen.

He said that NATO’s Bucharest summit of this April supported the Georgian admission to NATO, and foreign ministers of the alliance would evaluate the Georgian compliance with terms for joining the NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP) this December.

De Hoop Scheffer gave an evasive answer to the question whether Georgia could have been spared aggression if the Bucharest summit had approved the Georgian affiliation to MAP. It’s difficult to say whether the events could have been avoided, he said.

NATO condemns the Russian actions against Georgia, and Abkhazia and South Ossetia are part of the Georgian territory, he said, adding that the Russian recognition of independent Abkhazia and South Ossetia was illegal.

NATO does not want a new cold war and does not shut the door on Russia, he said.

NATO supports the territorial integrity of Georgia, and alliance ministers condemned the Russian actions as regards Georgia at the urgent session in August, he said. In his words, Russia must comply with the ceasefire agreement and withdraw forces to the positions that existed until August 7, he remarked.

De Hoop Scheffer gave the interview prior to the Tbilisi visit of September 15.

The North Atlantic Council (NAC) will visit Georgia on 15-16 September 2008. In Tbilisi the Permanent Representatives of the 26 NATO Nations and the Secretary General of the Alliance will hold meetings with President Saakashvili, Prime Minister Gurgenidze and other members of the government. There will also be the inaugural meeting of the NATO-Georgia Commission, the NATO website said.

The NAC will also meet with Georgian parliamentarians from both government and opposition, representatives of international organizations and NGOs. During their stay in Georgia members of the NAC and the Secretary General will also travel to Gori and engage in other outreach activities.

[Carlos Martín]

RUSIA CONSIDERA INTOLERABLE LA ADMISION DE GEORGIA EN OTAN

Medvedev condemns Georgia NATO promise
Reuters | Saturday, 13 September 2008

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev says NATO's promise to extend membership to Georgia was unjust, humiliating and intolerable to Moscow.

Briefing Russia experts, Medvedev compared Georgia's attack last month on its rebel, pro-Russian enclave of South Ossetia to the al Qaeda attacks on the United States which killed nearly 3,000 people on September 11, 2001.

He said Russia - which responded by sending troops and tanks deep into Georgia and routing it in a five-day war -- would have acted just as decisively if the former Soviet republic had already had a roadmap for NATO membership instead of just a promise of future entry.

"NATO won't become stronger this way, global tensions won't be reduced. What if Georgia had a NATO membership action plan? I would not wait for a second in making the decision I made at that time. What would the consequences be? They could be much worse," he said.

NATO's treaty provides for member states mutually to defend each other against aggression. The membership action plan does not provide the same protection, but members may nevertheless feel obliged to intervene.

Georgian membership would be a destabilizing factor, both for the Western military alliance and for the volatile Caucasus region, Medvedev said in an impassioned presentation to the annual meeting of the Valdai Club, which groups journalists and Russia analysts.

"The situation is not fair to Russia, it is humiliating to Russia and we are not going to tolerate this any longer."

He said Georgia's attack on South Ossetia and the West's failure to back Russia had exposed as an illusion any lingering belief in Russia that the world was a just place.

"The world has changed. Almost immediately after the events in the Caucasus it occurred to me that August 8 was for us almost what 9/11 was for the United States.

"The United States and the whole of humanity drew many lessons from September 11, 2001. I would like to see August 8, 2008 result in many useful lessons as well."

Respect for international law, a more effective global security system and a shift away from US dominance of international diplomacy were among the goals he listed.

Medvedev, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and many other Russian officials have publicly accused Washington of emboldening Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili to attack the breakaway region of South Ossetia last month.

Russia responded by sending in its tanks to "muzzle Saakashvili". Hundreds died and tens of thousands were displaced in the five-day war.

Saakashvili set his sights on war after a visit by "Russia's very close partner" US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Medvedev said.

"Washington was giving Georgia the sense that Russia would not interfere, we didn't have the will or capacity," he added.

"These foreign policy failures by the United States and Georgia will be studied in foreign policy text books. In the case of Georgia it was also a crime."

The Russian president balanced his remarks by saying he did not believe the Caucasus crisis had caused a faultline in relations between Russia and the West, which would lead to another long period of confrontation.

"We don't need this," he said.

"We don't want to become a militarized country behind an iron curtain - it's a bore, I've been there."

[Carlos Martín]

EL PENTAGONO EVALUARÁ LAS NECESIDADES MILITARES DE GEORGIA

By STEVE GUTTERMAN, Associated Press Writer

TBILISI, Georgia - In a delicate mission, a U.S. Defense Department team is coming to assess Georgia's military needs after its war with Russia, a show of support that is certain to stoke Moscow's anger.

American help in rebuilding Georgia's armed forces, regardless of the scale, could harden lines in the standoff between Moscow and Washington over the future of this pro-Western nation that straddles a key pipeline route from the oil fields of Central Asia.

Russia has withdrawn most of the troops who drove deep into Georgia after repelling a Georgian offensive against separatist South Ossetia. But the Kremlin says it plans a long-term military presence in South Ossetia and another breakaway region, Abkhazia.

The U.S. has focused publicly on economic aid for recovery and reconstruction of Georgia.

But the Pentagon announced this week that it would send a team to examine the Georgian military's "legitimate needs." It did not say the U.S. would rebuild Georgia's forces, but said Georgia "should have the ability to defend itself and to deter renewed aggression."

The announcement came hours after Russia said that for the foreseeable future, it would keep nearly 8,000 soldiers in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, which it has recognized as independent nations.

Major U.S. military aid to Georgia could raise a potentially explosive prospect: Two Russian-controlled regions facing off against an American-armed government in an area roiling with tension.

But proponents of a robust U.S. program to aid Georgia's military argue that anything less might encourage an assertive Kremlin to use force — or the threat of force — to get its way in other parts of its traditional sphere of influence. They say a capable Georgian military facing a powerful Russian presence could make for a less volatile atmosphere.

If Russia controls Abkhazia and South Ossetia "and leaves significant forces there, a Georgian incursion into either of those areas would become militarily unthinkable," Robert Hamilton, a defense analyst and regional expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, wrote last week.

He said that would leave Georgia's armed forces with the job of protecting the territory under its control, "a mission that they are certainly capable of fulfilling if the U.S. assists."

Still, Russia is highly unlikely to accept assurances of a purely defensive U.S. and Georgian intent, so any American military aid could heighten tensions.

Thousands of Georgian soldiers previously received training from the U.S. military, mostly for service in Iraq, where Georgia's 2,000-man contingent was the third-largest in the American-led coalition. Russia cried foul when U.S. planes flew the Georgians home during the fighting.

An unstated purpose of that U.S. training was to send a signal to Russia. But Hamilton said the U.S. avoided training the Georgians in areas "seen as too provocative," such as the use of artillery, armor and attack aviation.

What the U.S. might provide now is far from clear.

Bush administration officials told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday that any arms buildup would be undertaken carefully, and the military has declined to give details about the assessment mission.

A Defense Department spokeswoman, Lt. Col. Elizabeth Hibner, said Friday that the team had not yet arrived in Georgia but would travel here soon.

Georgian officials insist they say that are in no rush to rebuild.

"We don't expect to get anything from the U.S., we haven't got anything recently from the U.S. and we will not be getting any large-scale hardware or military material assistance from the U.S.," President Mikhail Saakashvili told The Associated Press in an interview Thursday.

Saakashvili claimed Georgia's military is largely intact, but critics say that is wishful thinking.

Georgia has not publicly put numbers on military equipment losses, but they include many armored vehicles and eight Georgian navy vessels, including their tiny navy's flagship.

Georgy Tavdgeridze, a Georgian defense analyst and adviser to an opposition political party, said he believes Russian claims that 65 Georgian tanks were seized are roughly accurate, but that the number of Georgian tanks destroyed was far smaller.

Speaking to AP in Poti recently, Georgian Defense Minister David Kezerashvili said what Georgia needs is not restoration of lost tanks but an overhaul of its military, focusing on defensive weapons and training of officers for a defensive war.

"There is practically no officer corps that can conduct combat operations," he said.

[chronos]

Los provocadores más amarillos jamás conocidos , los más gallitos del corral, quieren meter miedo a Rusia de boquilla, saben que Rusia esta vez no se va a doblegar, pero se ven en la necesidad de abrir la boca. Papá Bush tiene que darle salida al stock armamentístico que tiene, y tiene que liarla donde haga falta.

Para justificar la guerra contra España en Cuba, no dudó en eliminar a sus propios soldados. ¿Que no harán que no hayan hecho para encender otro fuego? ... Lo que haga falta seguramente.

Pero los rusos no son Sadam, ni el barbas iraní, ni los talibanes, así que esta vez se andarán con ojo, y Europa también. Que saquen el pecho que quieran, pero el rabo, lo tienen entre las piernas.

[Yorktown]

Que colección de clichés falsos, de mentiras, y de prejuicios. Esto de la ESO no ha dado ningun resultado, una pena.

[Txechu]

Hoy Rusia podría estar ingresando a la UE. Más no. ¿El motivo?

No le interesa.

P.D. Georgia de momento ha sido un peón, para algo más gordo que sucederá no tardando mucho y que por lo que Rusia guardará silencio y no moverá ficha. Saludos.

¿Irán tal ves? Por mi mejor que mejor y así se termina de buena ves con ese lio y otras excusas proesta causa.

Vamos a hacer una cuenta atrás para ver quién entra antes, si Georgia o Ucrania en la OTAN o Irán en la OCS.

Saludos a tod@s

[Txechu]

Editado por repetición.

Saludos a tod@s

[alex atella]

Estimado Edgar...

Casos de corrupción vas a encontrar en todo el mundo. Lo llamativo, es que se publiquen mientras el mismo gobierno está en funciones.
En la Argentina, verás en los diarios un aporte de dinero de tu Lider a la campaña presidencial. Es dinero negro. Quien lo traía entró y salió del país sin dificultades. Hoy forma parte de un juicio en MIAMI. En la Argentina o en Venezuela nadie será procesado por esto hasta que alguno de los jefes políticos sea reemplazado (en el mejor de los casos)

Estimado Txechu
Lógico. El bienestar de los ciudadanos rusos no le interesa a sus dirigentes. Además, como menciono en el post anterior, no conviene en una autocracia ingresar a un mercado integrado con otras naciones. El presupuesto ruso, por subdesarrollada que sea la economía, alcanza para llevar a la riqueza a sus funcionarios. ¿Por qué meter auditores de órganos supranacionales? ¿Por qué ceñirse a estándares razonables? ¿Por qué llamar a compras y licitaciones transparentes? Mejor estar en una pais donde nadie controla nada. Eso facilita la corrupción. Esta se vería complicada en un bloque como la UE o cualquier otro con pretensiones serias.
Integrarse es cumplir estándares. Es complejo, tedioso, lleva mucho tiempo. Se deben hacer consistentes las políticas monetarias, cambiarias, tributarias, industriales, laborales, aduaneras. Se debe transparentar los procesos de compras.
¡No!, eso es muy peligroso. Rusia no ingresará, Argentina tampoco (más allá del nivel precario de integración actual al MercoSur) y Venezuela menos. Tampoco Nigeria.

[edgar_nuevo]

Aunque me llamen desvariado, iluminado, amaestrado, ..., "no soy monedita de oro"

¡VIVA RUSIA!
¡VIVA CHINA!
¡VIVA EL MUNDO MULTIPOLAR!
¡VIVA NORTEAMÉRICA NO INTERVENCIONISTA! -UTOPÍA-
¡VIVA LATINOAMÉRICA UNIDA!
¡VIVA VENEZUELA!
¡VIVA CHÁVEZ! Y

¡VIVA YO!

[alex atella]

Kamarrada Khrronos

Si Kamarrada Khronos. Estarr de AKuerrdo con posturra de Kamarrada.
Urropeos tenerr miedo. AmerriKanos tenerr miedo.
Russia avanzarr hacia futurro prosperro komiendo chapas de tankes rusos Oxidados Kamarrada!!
Nosotrros los rusos disponerr de la subdesarrolla más sofistikada del munda. Ser subdesarrrollo más temible que Irrán.
Poder bombardiarr Urropa con funcionarrios Kurroptos rusos y venezuelans y destruir Urropa.
Viva la Rusia Glorriosa Madrre de la Liberrtad.

[edgar_nuevo]

JAJAJAJAJAJAJA, estoy escuchando a los platters, con la pieza The magic touch, brother


Que buen vacilón. Cuando se acabará este tira y encoge a ver quien tiene los coj..es más grandes...

El punto de una actitud política sana, me decía hace muchos años, el Sociólogo Venezolano Ender Arenas es que debe haber el reconocimiento "del otro"

Por ejemplo, una vez más, reconozco el poderío de EE UU; pero por eso no dejo de reconocer la fuerza de Rusia, la fuerza de China, la fuerza de la Paz...y te prometo que voy a estudiar cronológicamente la cantidad de intervenciones de las fuerzas militares de USA en otros países, que no sean las guerras clásicas del siglo XX, WWI y WWII, tanto en América Latina, Las Antillas, Africa, Medio Oriente...y te apuesto a que son más que las rusas.

p.d. ¿Por qué los militares norteamericanos en algunos países pueden lograr inmunidad total y a cualqluier ciudadano de a pie que se crea "delincuente de la droga, el terror, etc. si puede ser llevado a EE UU?

¿Por qué no hay bases militares de otros países en los EE UU? sería interesante.

Saludos, brother.