The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) has declared itself satisfied with the presidential run-off vote in Ukraine, and has urged Yulia Tymoshenko to concede defeat, which so far she has refused to do, Reuters reports.
Update: political analysts in Ukraine and Russia are speculating that Tymoshenko will "bargain" to retain her post as prime minister in a new government.
As the 70th anniversary of the signing of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact approaches, the Russian authorities appear to be set on finding justifications for the atrocities that were committed by Stalin's regime. They are persisting with their plan to bring in a law that will impose criminal liability on anyone - whether individual, group or state authority - who attempts to draw a parallel between the crimes of Nazism and those of Stalinism. At Maidan, Halya Coynash examines the background to the law, and the cynical assumptions that inevitably underlie it. In particular, the proposed legislation represents a deliberate misreading of the PACE resolution:
Read it all.It is difficult of late to rid oneself of the feeling that the Russian authorities are trying to shout down half the world. Mr Koperov’s point of view regarding the recent OSCE Parliamentary Assembly Resolution “Divided Europe Reunited” (hereafter the Resolution) is repeated by Russia’s Council of the Federation which “strongly condemns attempts to give a biased interpretation of historical facts”. The following is clearly prompted by the Resolution:
“they are resorting to active efforts to reconsider the real reasons for the War and to place blame for the beginning of the War equally on the USSR and Hitler’s Germany and at the same time to absolve those who abetted the Nazis and committed crimes on the territory of countries occupied by the Nazis”.
It would be worth seeking an assessment of the Council’s following conclusions from both political analysts and psychiatrists however there is something else which is even more staggering. There is absolutely nothing in the Resolution which even remotely warrants such an accusation. The Resolution states that:
“in the 20th century, European countries experienced two major totalitarian regimes, the Nazi and the Stalinist, which brought along genocide, violations of human rights and freedoms, war crimes and crimes against humanity.”
It only recalls “the initiative of the European Parliament to proclaim 23 August, when the Ribbentrop –Molotov pact was signed 70 years ago, as a Europe-wide Day of Remembrance for Victims of Stalinism and Nazism, in order to preserve the memory of the victims of mass deportations and exterminations”
Do we have a situation like the statements once made in the Soviet Union about the novel “Doctor Zhivago” – “I haven’t read it but I know that it’s disgusting anti-Soviet propaganda”? Hardly likely: the Resolution is put succinctly and it is difficult to imagine that nobody is following the bemused reactions from various organizations, including Memorial, which have already publicly pointed out the bizarre misreading.
I suspect they were counting on something else. They assumed that the Resolution would not be read and that people would simply be indignant at entirely fabricated disrespect for the soldiers of the Red Army. People would be right to feel indignation – were there even a modicum of truth in the allegations. There is not.
Russia has launched its large-scale military exercises in the North Caucasus, which will last until July 6. According to the Russian defence ministry the military manoeuvres will involve approximately 8,500 personnel, up to 200 battle tanks, 450 armoured vehicles and 250 artillery systems of various types. General Vladimir Boldyrev, commander of Russia's land forces, has announced that the Russian troops deployed in South Ossetia and Abkhazia will also take part in the exercises.
Georgia's deputy foreign minister, Davit Jalagania, has protested about the holding of the exercises, saying that "against the background of the explosive situation 'they] will only contribute to further tensions."
Meanwhile, the OSCE mission in Georgia has today wrapped up its operations there - seventeen years after it was established with an initial mandate to facilitate settlement of the South Ossetian conflict, Civil Georgia reports.
On June 16, following Russia's veto, UNOMIG also ceased its activities in Georgia, including the occupied region of Abkhazia.
During talks with Finland's President Halonen in Helsinki on April 20, and also in a speech he gave at Helsinki University the same day, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev outlined shadowy proposals for a "new European security structure" which would also involve energy-related considerations. The proposals would be discussed at a prospective summit forum in Helsinki, to be called "Helsinki-plus".
In her blog, the Finnish centre-right politician, OSCE advisor and human rights campaigner Nina Suomalainen comments on Medvedev's proposals, and wonders what they may actually involve [my tr.]:
Hat tip: FinRosForumDid Russia's so-called Helsinki-plus initiative take a step forward in Helsinki, or not? Finland's chairmanship of the OSCE and the OSCE meeting that was held in Helsinki in December last year stuck closely to the line that the current structures are a good basis for agreement on European security issues.
This week, President Medvedev raised the issue again. For Russia is not very pleased with the OSCE, which it feels pays too much attention to questions of human rights. The holding of free elections has also been another of the OSCE's preoccupations, and Russia cannot ignore the fact the elections brought about a change of government in Georgia and Ukraine.
However, it is not really clear how President Halonen viewed the matter, except to say that Finland would provide help with regard to the meeting place, and "everything else". Foreign Minister Stubb, however, seemed skeptical, and reiterated the OSCE's approach: No new structures are required.
Russia's Helsinki-plus idea doesn't really have much precision or clarity, and in spite of efforts that have been made, its content is still not understood. One guesses that it is mainly a proposal for a review of the security question mainly from Russia's own standpoint, leaving aside all the nonsense about democracy. So it is probable that Helsinki-plus will be on our tables for a long time, and that at some stage it will emerge in the form of a real initiative, as a concession to Russia. Medvedev's comments and the "maybes" of the Finns fit together like a nose on a head.
Another issue that is creeping up is the Baltic Sea gas pipeline. On the positive side, the opportunity for Finns to make land deals in Russia were high on the meeting's agenda. Though it sounded - rightly or wrongly - a little as though this was the first that Russia had heard of it. Now it will have to really think about how to react to it.
At the BBC, William Horsley writes that some kind of turning-point or watershed in Russia's relations with the West appears to be approaching, and points to the upcoming 45th Munich Security Conference as the next arena where some new moves will be made.
In Forbes magazine, Georgian-American writer Melik Kaylan looks at the recent post-US election "media noise" on the Georgia conflict, prominent examples of which include the curiously belated November 6 New York Times article by C.J. Chivers and Ellen Barry, and the BBC's November 8 report, both of which sought to propagate the message that Georgia had invaded first. As Moscow continues its expensive media campaign aimed at undermining Georgia's international reputation, Kaylan pours some much-needed cold water on some of the wilder speculations that are currently doing the rounds as a result:
In addition, Kaylan notes:If Georgia invaded first, Russia was provoked, Russia could not but respond, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili is a trigger-happy maniac, we should back off from confrontation with Moscow, this is no incipient or even full-fledged Cold War casus belli to test Obama, he can press the refresh button and the new world will pop up as a tabula rasa.
In the G.W. era this would fall under "faith-based" as opposed to "reality-based" reasoning. The Times and BBC can lay out their dream narrative all they want, but it's unlikely that Obama--as sober and intentional a politician as it's possible to wake up to with a hangover--will buy into it. Biden certainly won't.
Either way, they won't have a choice as Ex-President Putin and President Dmitry Medvedev ply their brutalist imperial course. Medvedev made his sentiments clear when he delivered his Moscow State of the Union speech sans any single reference to the U.S. election results. Meaning: Russia acts unilaterally no matter what happens elsewhere.
And Georgia? I have publicly defended Georgia's actions in this space, and others and I count Georgian President Saakashvili as a personal friend. Nothing has changed. Here's the real continuum of events, as I can best decipher them, that led to Aug. 7 and Aug. 8 when the hostilities escalated into full blown conflict.
First off, I cannot dispute the OSCE and the Times reports that the Georgian attack resulted in civilian casualties. I certainly never thought the Georgians carried out precise bombardments and I don't think they're capable of it. Neither are the Russkies.
I also believe the Georgians radically upped the confrontation--in effect, they attacked first. But they did so because they knew about the column of Russian tanks coming in through the Roki Tunnel that connects North and South Ossetia, that is, connects Russian territory to the breakaway region. A Russian invasion was in progress. The Times report addresses this glancingly toward the end:
"Neither Georgia nor its Western allies have as yet provided conclusive evidence that Russia was invading the country or that the situation for Georgians in the Ossetian zone was so dire that a large-scale military attack was necessary, as Mr. Saakashvili insists.
"Georgia has released telephone intercepts indicating that a Russian armored column apparently entered the enclave from Russia early on the Aug. 7, which would be a violation of the peacekeeping rules. Georgia said the column marked the beginning of an invasion. But the intercepts did not show the column's size, composition or mission, and there has not been evidence that it was engaged with Georgian forces until many hours after the Georgian bombardment; Russia insists it was simply a routine logistics train or troop rotation."
This is disingenuous. It makes no sense that the Russkies had some 200 fully armed, fueled tanks halfway into Georgia within two days, as a spontaneous and unplanned response to aggression. They're not that efficient. Both sides knew what was going down.
The Georgians were always way down on the list of priorities for a fumble-prone White House. Saakashvili was never Washington's irreplaceable ally, at any rate never enough to keep the Russians at bay. Putin knew it. It may be a brave new post-Bush world, but he still knows it.
In Georgia the Kremlin currently appears to be trying to use the same weapon of disinformation it has employed in Chechnya and the North Caucasus, arranging provocations - often dangerous ones, involving loss of life - in order to put blame on other parties in such a clumsy way that the credibility of the operation is severely reduced. Most recently these efforts have been aimed against the OSCE and its monitors. On October 3, an explosion in the South Ossetian town of Tskhinvali killed at least 11 people, including Russian soldiers, and South Ossetian sources lost no time in putting the blame on the OSCE itself - the accusations were at once circulated by Russian media, prompting the outrage of the Head of the OSCE Mission to Georgia, Terhi Hakala:
She pointed out that spreading of disinformation about the OSCE mission "may be taken as a signal of unwillingness on the part of those responsible to work constructively."
"The spreading of untruthful propaganda about the Mission - which includes several previous entirely false accounts connected with OSCE staff and premises - is a serious matter, endangers OSCE personnel," she added.
The French government appears to be trying to negotiate a private bilateral foreign policy deal of its own with Russia. A report from Sochi, where the French prime minister Francois Fillon has had talks with Putin, points out that
The new French line seems to be that if the provisions of the Medvedev-Sarkozy deal - which has already been condemned by the U.S., amoong others - are carried out, then there is nothing to prevent France from pursuing trade and energy deals which were held up because of the Georgia crisis. However, statements by Fillon suggest that France's efforts to resume "business as usual" with Moscow - a goal earnestly desired by Putin and the Russian leadership - go further than a deal between the two countries:Fillon flew to Sochi at a time when the European Union is reviewing ties with Russia. The EU condemned Moscow's intervention in Georgia, launched last month to crush Tbilisi's attempt to retake two pro-Moscow regions.
We wanted this meeting to take place at the original time because it's very important to strengthen the partnership between the European Union and Russia, and France and Russia," Fillon told Putin at their first meeting late on Friday.It looks as though more dissension within the ranks of the European Union may now arise because of this, as several nations, including Britain, Poland, the Czech Republic and the Baltic States have stated their opposition to such "partnership-strengthening" until Russian forces have withdrawn to the positions of before August 7, and the issue of EU and OSCE monitors' access to Abkhazia and South Ossetia - which are being illegally annexed by Russia - has been settled. Neither of these conditions looks likely to be fulfilled in the near future.
Kommersant points out that the chances of success for the updated agreement that was brokered by Nicolas Sarkozy and signed by both parties to the conflict on Monday look slim, to say the least. For one thing, there is a total divergence between the way in which the agreement is viewed by Moscow and Tbilisi, to the extent where it is possible to talk of two different documents having been signed. The Georgian government signed a document which stipulated that the proposed international observers will operate not only in the so-called "buffer zones" established by Russian forces, but also on the territory of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. But Russia insists that a huge contingent of its regular armed forces will have sole responsibility for security in these Georgian provinces.
Another apparently unbridgeable gap between the two sides is the fact that Moscow intends to insist that South Ossetia and Abkhazia should take part in the regional talks that will begin in Geneva on October 15. This is categorically opposed by Tbilisi. Russia will also demand that Abkhazia be represented at the next meeting of the UN Security Council, and will use its influence to have the meeting moved to an alternative location in Europe if visas are not made available to Abkhazian representatives - a step that would effectively be a hijacking by Moscow of the UN's authority.
AFP and BBC say that ahead of Monday's EU emergency meeting Russia has called for more OSCE monitors to be sent to Georgia. It needs to be recalled that what Russia is currently doing in Georgia is essentially a large-scale, multi-layered spetsnaz operation, in which actions on the ground are combined with propaganda that is interwoven with sudden and apparently unpredictable switches of "policy", designed to confuse and distract. At the same time as Medvedev's call for extra monitors (relayed in a statement and also by Medvedev to Britain's Gordon Brown) went out, Der Spiegel published the news that OSCE monitors have accused Georgia of triggering the crisis on August 7. As Russia is a member of the OSCE, the release of these two pieces of news at the same time is probably no accident.
Update: The Spiegel claim has been rejected by an OSCE official:
The German weekly Der Spiegel separately reported that OSCE observers were blaming Georgia, whose bid to join NATO is championed by the United States, for triggering the crisis in a series of unofficial reports presented to the German government.
However, OSCE spokesman Martin Nesirky later rejected the claim, saying "none of" its regular reports distributed to 56 members through diplomatic channels "contains information of the kind mentioned in the Der Spiegel story."
I am in Vienna now at the OSCE meeting. The day was really horrible as the Russian official delegation kept labelling us terrorists. One “political technologist from the Kremlin’s public chamber even insulted me in public…As an honorary member of the RCFS, I protest against the behaviour of the Russian authorities, which is surely counter-productive, and will only serve to increase antipathy between Russia and the West.
Their behaviour is so absurdly stupid that all the delegations here are expressing their indignation. Except the Spanish who want “to make the balance” and not “offend their Russian friends”. I am coping with it although it really hurts.
Formed in 2009, the Archive Team (not to be confused with the archive.org Archive-It Team) is a rogue archivist collective dedicated to saving copies of rapidly dying or deleted websites for the sake of history and digital heritage. The group is 100% composed of volunteers and interested parties, and has expanded into a large amount of related projects for saving online and digital history.
