Caucasus: regional fractures

aEwkVS ftltyfekwvje, [url=http://hvycqwgzfelz.com/]hvycqwgzfelz[/url], [link=http://xpelgjvbzfeu.com/]xpelgjvbzfeu[/link], http://qelrafyrtdgv.com/

I have asked Inal Khashig from Sukhumi, the editor of the local Chegemskaya Pravda independent newspaper to write for the oD Russia. He is regular writer for the IWPR. I met him recently, just few days before the war in the Abkhazian capital. He represents younger generation, his horizons are much wider than those of the present government leaders who started their careers in the Soviet times. Inal too sees no other solution to the Abkhazian conflict than creation of the independent state, recognised by the international community. I am sure he will able to write an article free of simplified proAbkhazian propaganda. Hope you'd agree with me that ordering article from Inal is not a bad idea...

I have asked Inal Khashig from Sukhumi, the editor of the local Chegemskaya Pravda independent newspaper to write for the oD Russia. He is regular writer for the IWPR. I met him recently, just few days before the war in the Abkhazian capital. He represents younger generation, his horizons are much wider than those of the present government leaders who started their careers in the Soviet times. Inal too sees no other solution to the Abkhazian conflict than creation of the independent state, recognised by the international community. I am sure he will able to write an article free of simplified proAbkhazian propaganda. Hope you'd agree with me that ordering article from Inal is not a bad idea...

Brief background

Georgia came into being (again) after the collapse of the Soviet
Union in 1991.

The states of South Ossetia and Abkhazia gained de facto independence
after the 1991-2 war, although their independence is not formally recognised in
the UN.

The majority of South Ossetians are ethnically distinct from Georgians and identify with the
people of North Ossetia. A referendum in 2006 (turnout 95%) is reported as
resulting in 99% endorsement for de facto independence. More than half
of South Ossetians are reported to have chosen a Russian passport.

Abkhazia is ethnically mixed, with only 28% Georgians.

Initiation

At present the Georgians and Ossetians accuses each other of
initiating the conflict: what is clear
that rapid escalation is taking place, and that civilians are dying and being
displaced in significant numbers.

Strategic Factors

There is an oil pipeline running through Georgia, conducting
oil from Asian wells to Europe.

The Georgian leadership has aspirations to join the EU and
NATO, which have been encouraged by those organisations.

Russia has an historical fear of encirclement, and is
opposed to having NATO bases in Georgia as well as in the Czech Republic and
Poland.

Separatist aspiration lies behind one in three of the present
conflicts happening in the world in 2008.

Implications for Policy

1
We join the calls for ceasefire and negotiations for a just
and stable peace.

2
We note again the presence of an oil interest in an area of
conflict, which underlines the urgent necessity of breaking our economies from
dependence on oil.

3
We note with regret that the expansionist policies of NATO are
one of the contributing factors.

4
We reaffirm that the will of the people is the basis of
democracy, and if it is clearly the will of the people that they should be
independent from their present state, or transfer to a different state, this
will should be allowed to be developed in a peaceful and orderly way.

5
We call on the UN to address the problem of separatism from a
systemic point of view and to draw up a legal and political framework that will
enable secessions to be negotiated peacefully.

 

Annexe - dealing with separatism in a rational way.

In 2008 there are some 36 wars and conflicts taking place on the planet. Their
causes are, roughly speaking: Separatist 14, Ideology 7, Dictator/political 9,
War on Terror 5, Corporations 2, Drugs 2, Warlordism 2, Ethnic/tribal 2.

Prevention is better than cure. At least two of the classes of conflicts - separatism and
dictators- given above are susceptible to UN action.

The development of dictators can be inhibited and remedied by means of the Index of
Human Rights in the UN, whereby countries that are sliding towards dictatorship
can be identified, exposed, and subjected to a set protocol of statutory
measures.

Approximately one third of current wars are “separatist”, arising from the desire of a group
of people to be independent of, or to have autonomy within, the state that they
are currently ruled by. These account for more than one in three of current
conflicts and wars.

Since separatism provides the pretext of such a significant causes of conflict, it
deserves detailed historical and political study. What is the outcome of these
movements? Are they on the increase? Wikipedia lists no less than 113
separatist movements worldwide. Are they all destined to turn into armed
struggles?

Clausewitz' famous aphorism was that “War is the continuation of politics by other means”.
This should be now updated to “War is the continuation of politics by
irrational and inhumane means”, but whatever form of words is used, it is clear
that politicians have a duty to agree some rules and protocols on separatism.

Democracy should have a bearing on the matter. If it is truly the will of the people of a
region that they should not be governed by their present rulers, then
politicians should give attention to their desires. Each case will have its
unique features, but these also are capable of being classified. Several
questions need to be asked.

Does the majority of the people truly seek independence or autonomy, or is it simply
the desire of an unrepresentative political group? This question can be
answered by referendum. In a repressive
state, the people might be able to petition the UN, or a regional body such as
the OSCE, directly to indicate their wishes.

Is the separate state economically capable of looking after itself? This can be a
matter for study, but in principle any people that afford to go to war can
surely afford to look after themselves in peacetime, given that war is such a
ruinously expensive business. It is sometimes the case that the secessionist
state is sitting on some natural resources that the main state wishes to enjoy.
For instance, Scotland was only granted its own assembly when its oil fields
had been substantially exploited.

Can the state defend itself? This question again contains its own answer in the
case of secessionist conflicts. Guarantees can be given by neighbouring states,
as in the case of Andorra, although this is an ambivalent state of affairs,
since the guaranteeing state is likely to be the state from which independence
is sought.

Can the new state rule itself? There are many options that lie between full
integration with a larger state and full independence. Regional assemblies,
cultural autonomy, and cantonisation are some of the options available.

These are all matters susceptible to study, discussion and negotiation. The
negotiations may well be difficult and protracted, but talk is always
preferable in human and financial terms than violent conflict. In the end, it
is in the interests of the main state to agree a degree of autonomy rather than
to wage a war that results in the end with alienation of territory and people.

There is clearly a case for the United Nations to set
up a framework for discussion and resolution of separatist aspiration, and also
to provide diplomatic and logistical help both for areas where separatist
conflict is ongoing, and where there is a clear separatist sentiment that has
not yet turned to violence.

I agree they are similar, but what about Chechnya? Putin is supporting Kosovo independence as a prelude to getting the same status for Abkhazia. But no one seems to be pointing out to him that the justifications for these states to emerge from the embrace of larger entities applies equally to Chechnya.

Georgia and Ukraine were democratic countries before "Revolution" if according to the common standard of democracy I supposed. But just because those two countries had Soviet leaders and corruptive governments, influenced by Moscow and, the West didn't want to see the Caspian oil fortune to be taken away by Russia; therefore, Revolutions happened. If these factors were real reasons, then how do we define so called "Democratic Revolution" by the Western governments and media? Could we guess the next one "Colour Revolution" or "Flower Revolution" just for fun? I would like to point "Uzbekinstan"

"The collapse of the state opened the gates to Islamist armed organisations, including bin Laden's followers, which soon modified Chechnya's secular resistance into radical fundamentalism" Notes from Loretta Napoleoni's 'Modern Jihad' 2003. Pluto Press. There is a clear link here between Chechen separatist fighters on the one hand, and foreign Mujihadeen jihadists on the other. The new international Mujihadeen are a critical element when it comes to understanding the nature of todays Islamic fundamentalists. Western diplomats are meanwhile trying to squeeze themselves off the hook over the atrocities in Beslan - but terror networks today are a direct product the West's blatant undermining of their own postwar international framework during the 'humanitarian era'. When America started bombing the former Yugoslavia, on behalf of the Bosnian muslims, it paved the way for Mujihadeen forces to move into Europe, proper. Indeed, Iran under the watchful eye of the Clintonian administration deployed 3000 to 4000 revolutionary guards (Mujihadeen) in Bosnia. European intelligence officers claimed that Bosnia had become by 1996 a 'one stop shop for Islamic militants'.

Thomas de Wall states "But the intense reaction worldwide carries a danger that the event will be assimilated into a narrative of the “global war on terror” before its significant local dimensions are fully registered. In short, an urgent lesson of Beslan is that it is time to start paying serious attention to the north Caucasus." I don't argue with the subsequent analysis about problems in Chechnya and the Russian policies and practices. In the wake of this tragedy, however, the planned deliberate and heartless attack on children and mothers, I do not see how we can avoid seeing this action as part of a global terrorism led by fascist Islamic fanatics.