April 25, 2007
Does Putin have Georgia on his mind?
Yesterday I had lunch with Mikheil Saakashvili, the president of Georgia. Saakashvili is one of the most media-friendly heads-of-state I have ever come across. He is fluent in millions of languages and seems to enjoy the company of journalists - there were three FT people there yesterday, as well as a smattering of presidential aides.
"Misha" was on jovial form. (The dining room of the Ritz is a convivial spot) But there is no disguising the pressure that he and Georgia are under. Having an angry and paranoid Russia as your neighbour does not make for a relaxing life. Back in March, there was a helicopter attack on government buildings in Georgia’s Kodori gorge - which the Georgians assume was the work of the Russians. The Russians claim the Georgians attacked their own buildings to make Russia look bad.
Saakashvili claims that he is doing his utmost not to goad Russia and says that he is determined not to say provocative things in public. But since the Georgians are obsessed by the Russian threat, they find it hard to keep off the subject.
When somebody around the table expressed the opinion that Vladimir Putin would try to find an excuse not to step down as Russian president next year, Saakashvili mused - "Well he would need some sort of crisis to justify doing that. I wonder where he could find that?" Then he laughed darkly. The Georgians clearly reckon that the Russians are itching to manufacture a crisis with Georgia - and the continuing controversies over the Russian-backed breakaway provinces of South Ossetia and Abkhazia are an obvious potential source of trouble.
And while Saakashvili is doubtless sincere in his desire to avoid doing anything on a day-to-day basis that will provoke the Kremlin, there is one Georgian policy that the Russians regard as a standing affront - and that is Georgia’s unshakeable determination to join Nato. The Georgians hope that they can achieve their ambition by 2009. But having yet another part of the old Soviet Union join Nato will feed Russian fears of encirclement.
Saakashvili reckons that the Kremlin is already feeling paranoid about political developments in western Europe. In the last two years, Vladimir Putin has lost three firm friends - Gerhard Schroder in Germany, Silvio Berlusconi in Italy, and now Jacques Chirac in France. The Georgians reckon that Nicolas Sarkozy, who seems likely to succeed Chirac next month, is very sound on Russia and a firm friend of Georgia.
But if Georgia really does join Nato, the US and the western Europeans may one day have to consider just how far their friendship extends. Nato is based around the mutual defence guarantee of Article Five. If the Russians were to launch a helicopter-gunship attack on Georgia - once the Georgians were actually Nato members - would we all rush to the defence of Georgia, even at the risk of a military confrontation with Russia? Or would the other Nato members decide that, in the last resort, this is "a far-off country of which we know little."
I suppose Russia would not attack if it knew NATO was behind it. And that is the point. The same logic applies to the NATO membership of the Baltic states. Although the logic may seem somewhat frail after the Russian general threatened Poland and Czechia with retaliation should they join the US ballistic missile defence system.
Interesting to compare the developments in Georgia with what has been rumoured about the latest events concerning Transdniestria. Voronin vowed to aspire for the EU membership…
Posted by: Tomáš Ruta | April 26th, 2007 at 12:49 am | Report this commentIt is South Ossetia, not Ossettia
Actually it is Abkhazia that is the really tricky breakaway province
(Saakashvili campaigned in S Ossetia during the presidential election
and Georgian officials go there frequently. They would be killed if they
tried that in Abkhazia)
Exactly the same argument could have been made about the Baltic states’
Posted by: edwardlucas | April 26th, 2007 at 12:17 pm | Report this commentNato membership. Russia is much more likely to intervene in a security
“grey zone” where we have signalled that we don’t really care. Baltic
Nato membership has been a startling success
Europeans are so paranoid about Russia that they just blankly refuse to see what actually are the politicians they admire.
Saakashvili is, in fact, hysterical and helpless nothing, who is trying to cover his economic incompetence by blaming russia for Georgia being in ruins. In USSR Georgia was the richest republic, georgians lived in villas and had more cars than any other nation of the country. Now, due to the sequence of paranoid idiots governing the country, georgian people have no food, no work, no fuel, no money, little future. Georgia was housing some of the best colleges and research institutions in USSR; now it is a land of decay. The best in the world monkey zoo and research center in Sukhumi is destroyed. Travel industry is ruined. Food and wine production and trade is thrown back to stone age. They first had to sell some of their best wine-making land to Americans, then they have sold their energy assets to Russia, now they are facing invasion of Chinese immigrants who are flooding to the republic; still georgians live no better.
Little Georgian governemnt is doing to improve country’s trade and economy. Instead, they are inventing conspiracy theories with Russia in the center of their fears against Georgia to explain their total, profound incompetence of making people’s life better which is far greater than even incompetence of their best friends, administration of George W.Bush.
“The problem with French is that they don’t have the word for enterpreneur” - said George W.Bush.
“To stay in power, Putin will need a crisis. Where this crisis might happen?” - sighs Saakashvili.
Look in the mirror, stupid. If there’s anyone who is the cause of economic crisis, it’s you. Your crisis, Mr.Saakashvili, is totally, profoundly and exclusively self made.
Russia is not going to conquer you, “freedom fighter”. Why don’t you stop whining and complaining start helping your people to make some money for their living. Maybe then the need for enemies will disappear.
Posted by: Seva Snape | April 27th, 2007 at 9:17 am | Report this comment“Exactly the same argument could have been made about the Baltic states’
Nato membership. Russia is much more likely to intervene in a security
‘grey zone’ where we have signalled that we don’t really care. Baltic
Nato membership has been a startling success ”
I just LOVE this twist. Have you people forgotten than:
1. When Gorbachev was surrending USSR zone of influence, Westen leaders were swearing on their mother’s grave that NATO won’t get expansion to the East. Where are those promises? Are Western people only capable of keeping their promises under guns?
2. “Free” Baltic SStates, eSStonia the first among among them, certainly feel threat from Russia, that’s why they destroy memorials erected to Russian soldiers, and instead march Zonderkommaden on their streets.
I guess Germany is too shy of Jewish lobby to do SS veterans parades on their territory, they now at least lounge for the show in Estonia.
The problem for you is, the world remembers that it has been Polish and Baltic people who were happily exterminating jews during WWII, and although I am not too fond of jews, that certainly shows that there is no moral high ground for the worst critics of Russia in Europe. In fact, they are just slaves who are happy to bark on whoever their current master’s finger’s pointing at. The value of that anger and that loyalty is zero, do not bet on it in hard times.
Double standards, centuries-long fobias, not restraining your satellites won’t get you anywhere nice, Europe. Those who are keen on spitting on old masters will spit on new masters as soon as circumstances will require.
/EOM
Posted by: Seva Snape | April 29th, 2007 at 4:42 am | Report this commentSeva, why Estonia and other Baltic states want to join NATO?? Probably because they are afraid of Russia in the longer term?? Russia probably doesn’t deserve all of the blame people put on it, but these critisisms are justified at least in some cases.
Posted by: Chen | April 29th, 2007 at 12:31 pm | Report this commentAbkhazia and Pridnestrovie want to join Russia, but politicians in these regoins are extra corrupt, they steal the wealth of the people. So its not really against Russia, but why Russia supports these corrupt people.
Ukraine’s economy and democracy is not in the best shape, but in 15 years it may surpass Russia in terms of economic development. Like Poland or Chech Republic where economic conditions are already better than in Russia.
The world will be better if NATO show more firmness on the qualification of membership in terms of Baltic runaway wives from the “bear hug”of Russian bear,which will force them to cultivate their strength from internal instead of touching onthe bear’s sensituve nerve.
Posted by: alan | April 29th, 2007 at 4:40 pm | Report this comment“Why Estonia and other Baltic states want to join NATO??”
Because they want to hide behind Europe’s back to express their venom in:
- removing monuments
- insulting their former “big brother”
- humiliating and depriving in rights Russian minority
I am sorry, but Estonia’s barking on the elehpant from behind the corner is futile, because Russia is not threatening Estonia short term or long term - EVEN and ESPECIALLY because Estonia has got it independence from Russia’s hands, not from hands of Brussels or Paris or London.
It is a lie that Russia “invaded” Estonia. In fact, Russia gave Estonia independence - TWICE.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Estonia
In 1918 Estonia became independent FIRST TIME IN 13,000 year old HISTORY as the result of empire collapse. USSR did not took anything in 1940, it just reinstated status quo and took back from Estonia independence that they have got accidentally, that they did not have since the end of the Ice Age. To be on the side of historical truth, USSR did not conquer anything, Stalin simply re-instated Empire’s former province, since ESTONIA DID NOT HAVE INDEPENDENCE EVER BEFORE 1918.
May I remind you that Russia defeated Sweden in the Great Northern War in 1721, and under the Treaty of Nystad, Russian rule was imposed on what later became modern Estonia. Estonia was Russian territory for 200 years before 1918.
HOWEVER, if that historical fact is unacceptable to Estonians, fine - they have got independence second time from USSR - I would emphasize, USSR gave independence to Estonia in 1991 VOLUNTARILY.
When USSR was falling apart, Yeltzin said to national leaders: “take as much sovereignty as you can”. And Estonians took it, and USSR peacefully let them go, althoug of course it was not pleasant that they are unwilling to stay.
So, why coimplain now? Who is threatening Estonia? Does Russia deploys military on the borders? Does Russia threatens to conquer them?
The problem with Estonia is twofold:
1. By surrendering to new Big Brother Estonia does not affirm its independence, it is actually loosing it. Independence and freedom is something you deserve and earn by yourself. Justified independence would result only from coming to peaceful terms to their former masters, not from finding its new master.
2. Removing monuments of Soviet soldiers, and calling them “liberators” with quotes and occupation without quotes, Estonia effectively claims that it was on a side of Nazi Germany in WWII. This is, alone, the stance that is making Estonia a defeated enemy. In this capacity, there can be no more talk about “occupation”, or “reparation”, - Hitler lost WWII and Russia has won it. If Estonia is erecting monuments to Waffen SS soldiers, then Russia has a right to disregard anti-Russian sentiment, why should we take it from pro-Nazi neighbor state.
I hope that logic will penetrate the minds of idiots who remove Russian soldiers’ graves now.
For you information, among those 800 people arrested in Tallinn last night, there were plenty of Estonians and majority of Russians were teenagers, not old Russian people. This simpy means that - if you are stupid, you call the trouble upon yourself. Estonia has hatred where there was mere disatisfaction and unease.
If you spit in the face of the person, do not blame him if you are hit back. That’s why Jesus advised not to hit back. It’s actually quite simple - as much as you can, make a small step forward, it’s much better than big step backward.
Posted by: Seva Snape | May 1st, 2007 at 6:22 am | Report this comment“the Russian general threatened Poland and Czechia with retaliation should they join the US ballistic missile defence system.”
What a language. Russian general did not make any threats. A threat is an intention to harm; Russia does not have an intention to harm Poland or Czech Republic; Russia only has an intention to disable this system in case of military action. Therefore, Russian general simply pointed out that if anti-missile system is installed, Russian military will have to find the means to overcome this and it may harm territory of dislocation. It is simply a fact of strategy, and it is not Russia who increases instability, but whoever installs this anti-missile system on the territory makes this territory vulnerable, because of course this anti-missile system is the military target. The bad thing for Poles and Czechs, there are plenty of ways to destroy these installations, but none of them are harmless to their hosts.
Posted by: Seva Snape | May 1st, 2007 at 6:37 am | Report this commentSeva,
You’re obviously very interested and knowledgeable on this topic. I can’t really bring anything to the debate on the question of the Caucasus nor on Russia’s current attitude and policies (hidden or public) towards its close neighbours. But I might be able to add something interesting about Estonia. As a student in Russia (post 98 crash), I visited Estonia and what struck me then was the contract between the people’s reactions to my speaking in English or attempting to speak in my basic Russian. While I clearly wasn’t a native Russian speaker, the only fact I was attempting to speak it, seemed to offend the shopkeepers and other locals. This episode illustrates to me quite well the tensions between the Russian population in Estonia (I believe about 25%) and the Estonians. I understand your point the removal of Russian soldiers statues - but I also appreciate the mistrust the Estonian population might have towards Russia. I’m sure you’ll be aware of the policies of the USSR to “Russify” Estonia (and other parts of the Soviet empire) by both deporting Estonians to other parts of the empire and by relocating Russians to Estonia. (In case you don’t believe me, please do check the same Wikipedia link you conveniently provided - as it points out that Russification in Estonia started even before the USSR, in 1889)
With pretty much a century under a Russia/USSR that was trying to eradicate your language and culture, and even though I agree with your point, I think the Estonians are entitled to the benefit of the doubt for now. Of course, they will need to fight against the discrimination their Russian population is a victim of and make sure it is not ostracised. But I would think that Estonia is better equipped to do this as part of the EU - which although it is far from perfect, has achieved tremendous success in guaranteeing human rights to its citizens and preventing wars.
Posted by: French_in_London | May 1st, 2007 at 3:27 pm | Report this commentDear French Canadian,
It is not true that Russian neigbors do not like Russia. South Ossetia can be Russian tomorrow, all of the citizens would be happy to have Russian passports, if only Russia would give them out. It is not true that Georgians people do not like Russia either, although this discusson is slightly offtopic. The same thing about Ukraine - do you know why Ukraine does not allow second citizenship? Because if it would, tomorrow 75% of population would apply for Russian passport, and the entire independence of 40-million “prospective NATO member” would become a largest joke in history.
As far as eSStonia is concerned, of course they hate Russia because Stalin has conquered them first in 1939 and then in 1944, after Nazi liberated them in 1940. eSstonia was the only country who did not have Resistance - indeed, what Nazi did wrong to them exterminating the Jews, that’s hardly a crime against eSStonia.
Nazi did not kill eSStonians, on the contrary, 20th division of Grenadiers SS (1 estonian) was created in January 1944 from various small Waffen-SS groups. It was battling in eSStonia, then in Poland (Bzeg), then in Silezia.
Now the former eSstonian prime minister is writing in WSJ: “Red Army did not remove svastikas from our buildings, they removed estonian flags. We did remove svastikas ourselves.” Indeed, and here’s another quote for eSSstonia new masters made by one of eSStonian nationalists some time ago: “Britain and the rest of Europe must first apologise for the bombing of Tallinn Opera Theater, and then we maybe listen to their human rights lectures.”
Clearly, small nation of eSStonia has an overwhelming inferiority complex, they did not expect ever to have an independence, and when they accidentally got it during the fall of Russian empire in 1918, they were so keen on it, they they were ready to sell their soul to Devil himself to keep it.
Removing the graves of Russian soldiers in the center of Tallinn was probably part of the deal.
Europe - Russia is not taking Estonia back (yet), but for now it is a very good idea not to back the monument removal with hypoctisy deserving better cause.
The message is: not every disliker of whoever you dislike is your friend. And Russia is not your enemy.
Posted by: Seva Snape | May 5th, 2007 at 6:29 pm | Report this commentEstonia President Toomas Hendrik Ilves vetoed removal of the monument despite the fact that his family emigrated to Sweden in 1944 running away from advancing Red Army troops. Toomas spend all his life abroad, and returned to Estonia only after it declared independence.
Ansip, on the contrary, was born and lived all his life in Tartu, where he was a member of the Communist Party, and even began to make political career in Tartu Communist Party Committee. Ansip was involved in KGB repressions against student demonstration in 1988 (students demonstrated on Anniversary of Peace Treaty between Estonia and Russian Federation).
Ansip’s opponents clearly remember his communist past - former Tartu Mayor Roman Mugur said when surrendering his port to Ansip: “Unlike you, I don’t have a chance to become shrewd politician - I don’t have communist party fuctioner experience during Soviet period”.
Clearly, Ansip is trying to do his outmost by proving that he is not a Soviet Communist Party member - communist wouldn’t probably commit such an atrocity as moving the bones of fallen and calling them “drunken maradeurs shot by their own troops”. (Actually, communicsts are very much able to do anything, only qietly, without public scandal.)
Now the world must clearly see that Ansip is not a communist. He is simply.. you can find the word yourselves.
Posted by: Seva Snape | May 8th, 2007 at 10:44 am | Report this commentLet’s face Saakashvili has proven himself to be another blood thirsty despot who will do anything to stay in power. We all know the recent events in poor Georgia. So Saakashvili will do anything to prove the Russians so as to stay in power. In that case, he will make it a big mockery of NATO and EU if indeed Georgian joins those two (which I dont see happening till as early at 2010 atleast). And joining those blocks doesnt not mean that South Ossetia and Abkhazia will suddenly roll down on the ground. Another thing we should also bear in mind is that neither NATO nor Russia want to get into direct confrontation with each other especially over a desperately poor and resourceless country like Georgia. So Georgia joining NATO would be more symbolic and political than anything (atleast in the long term)which could even be reversed( if it happened) considering the population (not politician of Georgia) actually prefer to ally themselves with their Russian cousin.
Posted by: Julius | January 1st, 2008 at 6:29 pm | Report this commentBaltic states were incorporated into USSR by force in 1940! Stalin and Hitler divided their spheres of influence and those countries were in Soviet “zone”. Until 1941 Soviet-German co-operation was quite good. For Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania Soviet army was an occupying force. It is the fact and Russian lies will not change it.
Posted by: XYZ | May 1st, 2008 at 10:40 am | Report this commentSoviet troops also assisted German invasion of Poland in 1939. Poles in Soviet-occupied Poland were thrown out from their homes and sent to labour camps or distant places like Kazakhstan. Thousands of Polish officers, policemen and intelligentsia were murdered by Soviet authorities. Russians are bad source of historical knowledge because they were and are fed with government-censored version of history.