Tweet
West and Russia to build relations despite Caucasus disagreements
Aug 26, 2010
RIA Novosti
Two years ago, on August 26, 2008, Russia recognized the independence of the
republics of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
President Dmitry Medvedev announced the decision two weeks after the end of
military action in South Ossetia. The Georgian aggression initiated by the
regime of Mikhail Saakashvili ended up with the defeat of the Georgian
troops. The aggressor was punished, the peace has been restored, Medvedev
said when meeting his French counterpart Nicolas Sarkozy. Then the two
presidents signed a cease fire document which later became known as the
Medvedev-Sarkozy plan on the settlement of the conflict. Later Georgia also
signed the document.
On night of August 8, 2008, Georgia's President Mikhail Saakashvili ordered
the bombardment of the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinval and to open fire
on peaceful citizens and the Russian peacekeepers.
In Russia people were shocked not only by the actions of the Georgian
president but also by the ways the Western mass media covered the events.
Russians, who used to respect freedom of speech as one of the main
achievements of Western civilization, witnessed a real information war
against their country. The Western media ignored the fact that it was
Saakashvili who had started the war and only then Russia brought its troops
into South Ossetia. In fact, Russia carried out a humanitarian peacekeeping
operation saving the South Ossetian people from genocide. Alexander
Konovalov, president of the Institute of strategic estimations, recalls:
I happened to be in the West right after the war started and I had the
impression that we saw two different versions of one play. They saw it
without the first act, and we saw it from the very beginning. That is why
the first impression of the people in the West was that an aggressive and
malicious Russia had attacked a small, democratic and helpless Georgia,
while our people had the impression that a strong and aggressive Georgia
attacked helpless South Ossetia.
Two years after the war, the Europeans at least know who started the war
thanks to the report published by a group of the EU experts headed by
diplomat Heidi Tagliavini. We hear from Dmitry Danilov, an expert with the
Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
First of all, Tagliavini's report made it clear for Europeans - who started
the war. In the report, the possible conclusion was made that it was
Saakashvili and Russia had to intervene after that. That is why now we do
not hear such critical statements as two years ago. The statements are well
considered and pragmatic. The EU and US say they do not want the development
of the relation with Russia to depend on the disagreements on the Caucasus
problem. This is a remarkable feature of the Western policy.
Of course, the disagreements remain. The West calls Russia's interference in
August 2008 as "disproportional" and does not recognize the independence of
the two republics. In its turn Moscow has its own point of view and is not
going to change it. At the same time both Russia and the West understand
that they should build their relations on the status quo basis.
From: A. Papazian
Aug 26, 2010
RIA Novosti
Two years ago, on August 26, 2008, Russia recognized the independence of the
republics of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
President Dmitry Medvedev announced the decision two weeks after the end of
military action in South Ossetia. The Georgian aggression initiated by the
regime of Mikhail Saakashvili ended up with the defeat of the Georgian
troops. The aggressor was punished, the peace has been restored, Medvedev
said when meeting his French counterpart Nicolas Sarkozy. Then the two
presidents signed a cease fire document which later became known as the
Medvedev-Sarkozy plan on the settlement of the conflict. Later Georgia also
signed the document.
On night of August 8, 2008, Georgia's President Mikhail Saakashvili ordered
the bombardment of the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinval and to open fire
on peaceful citizens and the Russian peacekeepers.
In Russia people were shocked not only by the actions of the Georgian
president but also by the ways the Western mass media covered the events.
Russians, who used to respect freedom of speech as one of the main
achievements of Western civilization, witnessed a real information war
against their country. The Western media ignored the fact that it was
Saakashvili who had started the war and only then Russia brought its troops
into South Ossetia. In fact, Russia carried out a humanitarian peacekeeping
operation saving the South Ossetian people from genocide. Alexander
Konovalov, president of the Institute of strategic estimations, recalls:
I happened to be in the West right after the war started and I had the
impression that we saw two different versions of one play. They saw it
without the first act, and we saw it from the very beginning. That is why
the first impression of the people in the West was that an aggressive and
malicious Russia had attacked a small, democratic and helpless Georgia,
while our people had the impression that a strong and aggressive Georgia
attacked helpless South Ossetia.
Two years after the war, the Europeans at least know who started the war
thanks to the report published by a group of the EU experts headed by
diplomat Heidi Tagliavini. We hear from Dmitry Danilov, an expert with the
Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
First of all, Tagliavini's report made it clear for Europeans - who started
the war. In the report, the possible conclusion was made that it was
Saakashvili and Russia had to intervene after that. That is why now we do
not hear such critical statements as two years ago. The statements are well
considered and pragmatic. The EU and US say they do not want the development
of the relation with Russia to depend on the disagreements on the Caucasus
problem. This is a remarkable feature of the Western policy.
Of course, the disagreements remain. The West calls Russia's interference in
August 2008 as "disproportional" and does not recognize the independence of
the two republics. In its turn Moscow has its own point of view and is not
going to change it. At the same time both Russia and the West understand
that they should build their relations on the status quo basis.
From: A. Papazian