Comments on: Russia Puts on a Brave Face

By: Aleks

Aleks — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 00:02:39 +0000

“Or perhaps, archon, the right of tiny countries propped up by Moscow to be “independent”? ”

Goose, kettle, gander, black.

Not like Kosovo at all then? Please stop, my kidneys are hurting from laughing so much!

Maybe Russia’s recognition actually draws a line under unilateral recognitions of territories outside the 1975 Helsinki Final Act (though this would have to be stated publically by the West and Russia). The West thought it could get away with Kosovo scott free because no one was powerful enough to face them down, but it is no longer a ‘unique’ (at least as a single) event. There is now a large element of doubt over repeating the same ‘unique’ policy in any future crises. Or, will it only occur where there are boots on ground and can be backed physically up??? There’s also the question of not insignificant $$$ subsidy and open ended commitment.

There’s still all to play for.

By: Oldschool Boy

Oldschool Boy — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 18:15:42 +0000

Bakinets, everything Nazarbaev said is post-factum and is rather politician’s “bla-bla-bla”. He rebukes West for letting Saakashvilli start the war. For you it may imply support to Russia, but you will not find even a word that would unequivocally put him factually backing Russia in their attempt to break Georgia apart. Believe me, he will never support Abkhazian and S Ossetia independence. Humanitarian aid is not political support.
It is not just Nazarbaev’s position, as far as I understand China is strongly against any separatism. I think another bad news for Russia after this war is that they lose their leadership in Shanghai organization to China who gained more simpathy from Central Asian republics for its firm stance not to support A & SO independence.

By: Bakinets

Bakinets — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 15:16:42 +0000

Noah & Oldschool — It’s nice to think that Nazarbayev would take a position that reflected some sympathy for the Georgian side, but it’s just not true. (Not recognizing Abkhzia and S Ossetia doesn’t count because no one will do this.) These are Nazza’s formal statements, cut and pasted from the Kremlin website. I don’t see how he could be much less full-throated in his support.

“I am amazed that the West simply ignored the fact that Georgian armed forces attacked the peaceful city of Tskhinvali. Therefore my assessment is as follows: I think that it originally started with this. And Russia’s response could either be to keep silent, or to protect their people and so on. I believe that all subsequent steps taken by Russia have been designed to stop the bloodshed of ordinary residents of this long-suffering city. Of course there are many refugees, many homeless. Guided by our bilateral agreement on friendship and cooperation between Kazakhstan and Russia we have provided humanitarian aid: 100 tonnes have already been sent. We will continue to provide assistance together with you. Of course, there was loss of life on the Georgian side – war is war.”

By: Oldschool Boy

Oldschool Boy — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 07:13:18 +0000

I think Asian Times missinterpreted Nazarbaev’s statements. As far as I know Nazarbaev would never say something that would make him or Kazakhstan to be committed in anything that would involve taking sides in a conflict.
I think his words were rather: “OK, year, we support Russia, that Georgia must not have attacked South Osetia, and that Russia did good beating them back.” Simply because what happened that happened. However he said clearly that Kazakhstan is not supporting Abhazia and South Osetia independence. He would never commit to stay shoulder to shoulder with somebody in something other countries would condemn.

By: Duncan Kinder

Duncan Kinder — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 04:29:18 +0000

Venezuela appears to be supporting Russia: "Seizing on other issues with the United States, Mr. Chávez reiterated an invitation to the Russian Navy to visit Venezuela and said his government would buy a long-range missile system from Russia to complement its Russian-made Sukhoi fighter jets."

By: archon

archon — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 04:57:08 +0000

There’s a recent op-ed in the Moscow Times which accuses Putin of keeping South Ossetia afloat, for use as a cat’s paw. But if Putin is willing to shell out the dough, and they are pleased to accept, on what basis do we say “This shall not be!”?

By: Matt K.

Matt K. — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 02:06:25 +0000

Or perhaps, archon, the right of tiny countries propped up by Moscow to be “independent”?

By: archon

archon — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 22:01:11 +0000

The diplomatic brouhaha will blow over. What, after all, is involved here? The “right” of a small country to trace its borders around “territories” where it is despised, and over which it has not exercised political or military control for many years? The shattering of the illusion that great powers will allow their essential interests to be governed by the “consensus” of the “international community”? Perhaps we’re the ones who need to step back and ask ourselves how we got tangled up in this ethnic hatchet fight, and reflect long and hard on whether we really need to wrestle with the bear in his own den.

By: noah tucker

noah tucker — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:27:20 +0000

Actually, this is only a slightly more middle of the road way to spin the conference towards the Russian side. Russia came to the conference asking the whole organization to reckognize Abkhazian and Ossetian independance… and given that Kazakhstan–unlike China, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan–has no potentially breakaway or autonomous region, this still amounts to doing only a fraction of what the Russian delegation actualy wanted from them.

By: Dick Durata

Dick Durata — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 19:32:41 +0000

Oops, screwed up the link. I'll try again: Kazakhstan has wholeheartedly endorsed Russia's actions in Georgia.