Georgia on my mind...

Finally back from Georgia

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 14:54:00 +0000

I have finally managed to update my website with the last events from my trip to Georgia The 2010 update features a look at the wine production in the Racha region where the famous Kvanchkhara wine is produced. I will take you on a fantastic tour in extreme nature to Shatili, a medeval fortress in the middle of the mountains. I also attend Leo and Nana's orthodox re-marriage, an emerging tradition after decades of repression during communism. After a short visit at the local barbershop in Tkibuli, a stop in Gelati, one of Georgia's most holy places is on the program.

Enjoy!

The Munic Agreement revisited

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Wed, 05 May 2010 10:44:00 +0000

I blogged earlier in "Remember the Munich Agreement?"(October 06, 2009). that we should bear in mind this shameful agreement when we look at the international situation concerning Russia and Gerogia. Today I read an article written by Yulia Latynina (journalist Ekho Moskvy ) who makes a point in the similar direction. The artcile is strongly critical to Heidi Tagliavinis /EU's report on the Georgian war, which in principle blames the one who declares war as defence the guilty part, allthough this party only defend itself against growing agression and provocations from a more persistant agressor.

"Tagliavini has created nothing short of a revolution in global politics by introducing a new definition of war. It now turns out that wars are started by those who respond to the actions of aggressors. So, when the Red Army dropped bombs on Helsinki, that wasn’t war. But when Finland responded, it qualified as war".

"Tagliavini, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor-cum-Gazprom PR agent Gerhard Schröder did not build Europe. It was built by their fathers and grandfathers following the end of World War II. At that time, Western Europe was an alternative to the Soviet Union — an alternative to slavery and tyranny. Post-World War II Europe symbolized the importance of never again signing a Munich Agreement with a dictator".

I very much support Latynina's analysis. This is the way the Russian agression against Georgia should be viewd, and not be forgotten and implemented as some sort of new praxis, and excuse for Europe to do business as usual.

Sarkozy finally got it right

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 15:09:00 +0000

According to Pavel Felgenauer there seems to have been another political tradeoff in Paris this week, indirectly connected with the Mistral warship. Sarkozy, for the first time, publicly accepted the Russian invasion of Georgia in August 2008: “In the Georgian crisis I think he [Medvedev] defended Russian interests, when he did what he did” (www.kremlin.ru, March 2).

Change? I don’t think so.

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 21:23:00 +0000

While many of us might hope that the financial crisis will bring some serious change to Russia, my good Russian friend Oleg explained to me one evening over dinner why that won’t happen. “You see”, he said, tapping his fork on the rim of his plate, then pointing it at me, “Russian’s are extremely adaptable to misery and authoritarianism. To illustrate my point, I’ll tell you a Russian anecdote”:

In an industrial monotown in the south of Russia, they produced during the communism left shoes of a well known Russian brand. The right ones were produced in Siberia. Not to wonder, business wasn’t going too well for the factory, so one day the local apparatchik addressed the workers: “Next week you have to work seven days and get paid for four days. Any questions?” No, there was no questions. The next week, things were as bad as before, and the apparatchik addressed the workers again: “Next month you have to work seven days a week. Nobody gets paid. Any questions?” No questions. A month passed, but things hadn’t improved at all, and he again stood in front of the workers with a sinister look on his face: “Tomorrow every fifth worker will be hanged. Any questions?” A tiny woman raised her hand and stuttered: “Are we supposed to bring our own rope?”

“That’s how the Russian mind works after 80 years of intellectual deconstruction”, Oleg assures me. “That’s why there will be NO change”.

An offer Europe couldn't refuse

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 18:29:00 +0000

"It seems the Russian company Intersputnik made Eutelsat an offer it couldn't refuse on 15 January, holding out the possibility of millions of dollars in business with the media holdings of Russian gas giant Gazprom on the condition that Eutelsat stop doing business with First-Caucasian."

Garry Kasparov has written a great article about Europe's strange "loveaffair" with the totalitarian Russia in todays Guardian. In this article, wich is signed by many dissidents, he asks why Europe supports the criminal regime in Cremlin with arms, like France do, and why Eutelsat, Europe's largest satellite broadcaster decides to deny the First Caucasian Channel place on the channellist after pressure from Gazprom. Is this how we want Europe to react to the systematic violations of human rights in Russia?

I think this article is worth reading.

Yeah, Well..

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:51:00 +0000

I am painfully aware of the slow frequency of postings lately. There is ofcourse a lot to write about. The French arming Russia, the Russians fighting with the Abkhazians over Georgian property, the South Ossetians forcing Georgian citizens to change their names, and so on.

The reason for me not posting anything is lack of time. I am writing my master thesis, and together with work for my clients there's no time left for blogging. But stay tuned! I will find time to occational rants. A great site for amusement over at the dark side is the official website for the Prez of Abkhazia. They write in english, and always manage to create a surpricing twist to the realities around the Black Sea.

Anyway, this picture i took in one of Tbilisi's Bazars might serve as a reminder of who's calling the shots these days..

Agrotourism in the Pankisi Gorge

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 13:30:00 +0000

Now there’s a really exciting opportunity to discover a multicultural part of Georgia. The Pankisi Gorge is located on the border between Georgia, Chechnya, Ingushetia, Dagestan and Azerbaijan, in the very heart of the wild and beautiful High Caucasus. It’s populated by Muslims and Christians, of which many cherish the traditions of both religions. The Pankisi Gorge was earlier mainly known as Georgia’s “black hole”, where after the breakout of the Chechen War refugees and fighters fled. At the end of 2003 the situation in Pankisi got back to normal, however. Most refugees either returned home or obtained asylum in other countries.

Local initiative & Polish Aid
The Association of Pankisi Women, Marshua Kawkaz (“Peace in the Caucasus”), has prepared an extensive tourist and accommodation offer. There are a number of mountain tracks leading from the gorge to the High Caucasus. Agrotourism in Pankisi is organised by non-governmental charity organisation of Kist women living in Georgia - "Marszua Kawkaz" (Peace at Caucasus) which works in cooperation with Polish Foundation for Intercultural Education on the project "Rural tourism and development of local community in Pankisi" as a part of “Polish Aid”, a foreign assistance program of Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Poland since 2006.

The website www.pankisi.org presents the offer of agrotourism in the Pankisi Gorge.
Enjoy!

Source and picture: www.pankisi.org

Misha goes to Hollywood.

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 15:57:00 +0000

Moviedirector Renny Harlin is now shooting a movie about the 2008 war in Georgia starring Hollywood stars like Val Kilmer (plays journalist) and Andy Garcia (plays Misha). Georgiandaily.com today writes that ”Georgian media have raised questions about the film's impartiality, pointing out that co-producer Davitaia is a pro-Saakashvili member of parliament”.

Movies are NEVER impartial.
Now, who told Georgian media that film’s are supposed to be impartial? A Hollywood movie should evoke emotions, excitement, horror. It’s entertainment! Was Eisenstein ever impartial? Film is art, film is emotions. film is propaganda, film is aesthetics, film is about dreams…and money. But film is NEVER impartial. And frankly: Who cares about impartiality when top notch actors are protagonists in a pro-Georgian drama (hopefully)?

Russians make great crooks.
Let me remind you that Russians have been perfect antagonists in many films for centuries now. Who seriously want to change that? Remember from the Bond-movies the evil SMERSH Colonel Rosa Klebb?(From Russia With Love) The Russian commander of DDR forces, General Orlov (”Octopussy”), the corrupt General Georgi Koskov (”The Living Daylights”). And of course we remember Viktor Lavrentievich Zokas, better known by his alias of Renard, the Anarchist and KGB-trained assasin in ”The World Is Not Enough” (dismissed from KGB due to his mental instability??Who was ever dismissed from the KGB due to mental instability??). And NOT to forget: the Georgian female villain Xenia Onatop, ex-Soviet pilot and KGB assassin, in ”Golden Eye”. So what can possibly go wrong with a spin like “Russia as imperialist-nation-seeking-world- dominance lead by a mentally instable Renard-like character of Bonditudinal proportions attacking innocent democratic neighbours in cooperation with local mafia/terrorists/traitors” (Feel free to choose).

Come on. This is great publicity for Georgia, even, and hopefully, good propaganda too. Actually, when I come to think about it..Putin..Renard…..?

Meanwhile...on the Dark Side

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 18:42:00 +0000

I fell for this one. Enjoy, my friends!

Analysis of the reasons of the beginnings of wars and armed conflicts: By the example of the Georgian military aggression in South Ossetia the Defense Minister of the Republic of South Ossetia Lieutenant-General Jury Tanaev showed officers and students of the Military academy of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Abkhazia that the states which launch wars will be punished sooner or later. Officers and students of the Military academy of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Abkhazia listened to the lectures of the Defense Minister of South Ossetia with great interest”, the Abkhaz TV reports.

I bet they did. It must have been quite a revelation in all its profound philosophical and ironical depth.

(Lifted from the Official Site of Abkhazian President Bagapsh)

Russia's new military doctrine opens for first strike nuclear attacks in "local or regional wars"

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:00:00 +0000

The Russian newspaper Izvestia reports that Cremlin is working on a new military doctrine on first strike use of nuclear arms against “aggressors”. That must include Georgia according to President Medvedev’s statement after the war in Georgia in 2008: “The aggressor has been punished”.

Patrushev: “Nuclear weapons could be used in case of a nuclear attack, but also in 'regional or even local wars.”
According to Izvestia, “Russia will insist on the right to pre-emptive nuclear strikes against aggressor countries in its new military doctrine”, the head of the country's Security Council, Nikolai Patrushev, said.

A greater threat to Russia's neighboring countries
This new doctrine is contrary to US nuclear military policy, which do not allow for first strike attacks. This leads us once more to seriously wonder what’s going on in the Cremlin. Such an aggressive move means a further treat to Russia’s bordering countries and serves no civilized purpose. As we have seen the later period, US’ reset has had no impact on the hawks in Moscow when it comes to serious cooperation on for instance Iran. Judging from this doctrine, one could on the contrary be led to believe that Russia today poses a significant greater danger to civilization than Iran: The combination of Putins restoration of Stalin as "a great leader", Russia claiming a priveledged sphere of influence in the former Soviet space, and now the suggested doctrine of first strike use of nuclear arms against local/regional wars and "agressors" should really start to worry all governments in the modern world.

Who's the target?
Georgia certainly will have to seriously consider it self as a prime target for a nuclear attack from Russia. The latest Russian accusations of Georgia supporting and aiding Al Quaeda operations in Russia is a reminder of the fact that the war is not over. Russia uses all means available to portray Georgia as an aggressor, and thus threatens Georgia with first strike use of nuclear arms if neccessary. Judging by Russia’s willingness to use excessive force in the attack on Georgia in 2008, this represents a real threat to Georgia and also Ukraine, where the situation on the Crimean peninsula is gradually heating up. In fact the whole of North Caucasus might be targeted due to uprise and intensivated terrorist attacs in several regions.

Sources: DPI, AP, Izvestia.

Link to the doctrine (Curtesy of V.Konnander): http://www.scrf.gov.ru/documents/99.html

The "Georgian Radio-Liberty swindle"

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 19:02:00 +0000

Last week Radio Free Europe /Radio Liberty sent an official letter to the Foreign Ministry of Abkhazia, in which the radio station proposed to open a representative office in the republic, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Abkhazia, Sergey Shamba (picture) told Apsnypress. Shamba gave his consent, but set some serios conditions to be met for the free press:

“I stand for the expansion of the freedom of speech; the main thing is that it should have nothing to do with Georgia in any way”.

So the RFE/RL office was reluctantly ok’ed. But what about broadcasting? That's a whole other departement, and a very different head: Namely The head of The Department of Governmental Information and Mass Media of Abkhazia, Christian Bzhania. He is extremely worried about this unheard of proposal of free press broadcasting inside Abkhazia. He strongly objects to the very thought of it, and guarantees this won’t happen on HIS watch:

“An attempt to start Radio Liberty's broadcasting over the territory of Abkhazia will be illegal with all the respective consequences.[..]The worst time, the time of pirated radio-penetration into "enemy's territory" seems to linger behind the editorial office of the radio station.[..] Should it start broadcasting, we’ll take tough measures, including technical ones, up to radio signal suppression. [..] We have such means. Then, all this Georgian-Radio-Liberty swindle will go broke [..]”.

It’s the US, stupid!
To further contribute to rising mr. Bezhania's bloodpressure, one might add that the radio-station is financed partly through US Congress, and is what Hillary Clinton calls a great example of Smart Power. The obvious problem with free press is that it tends to interfere with the political agenda from time to time, and not to forget: also with the official Russian interpretation of the sole concept of free press and freedom of speech. I guess the radiowaves will experience some obstacles on their way to Abkhazian ears.

Sources:
Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty
Official Site - President of Abkhazia

Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty in short: Their journalists provide uncensored news, responsible discussion, and open debate. RFE/RL broadcast to 20 countries in 28 languages, including Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Russia. With over 400 full-time journalists, 750 freelancers, and 19 local bureaus. RFE/RL's mission is to promote democratic values and institutions by reporting the news in countries where a free press is banned by the government or not fully established. Based on the conviction that the first requirement of democracy is a well informed citizenry, and building on over a half-century of surrogate broadcasting.

Remember the Munich Agreement?

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 22:49:00 +0000

I came to think that a reminder of some historical events could be on it's place in these all cuddly relation reset times:

(Pics and facts from Wikipedia).

Neville Chamberlain, announcing the Munich Agreement: “[T]he settlement of the Czechoslovakian problem, which has now been achieved is, in my view, only the prelude to a larger settlement in which all Europe may find peace. This morning I had another talk with the German Chancellor, Herr Hitler, and here is the paper which bears his name upon it as well as mine[..]"My good friends, for the second time in our history a British Prime Minister has returned from Germany bringing peace with honor. I believe it is peace for our time."

Winston Churchill, denouncing the Munich Agreement: "We are in the presence of a disaster of the first magnitude...we have sustained a defeat without a war, the consequences of which will travel far with us along our road...we have passed an awful milestone in our history, when the whole equilibrium of Europe has been deranged, and that the terrible words have for the time being been pronounced against the Western democracies: "Thou art weighed in the balance and found wanting". And do not suppose that this is the end. This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigour, we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time".

The Lessons of Munich: In international relations, the Lesson of Munich asserts that adversaries will interpret restraint as indicating a lack of capability or political will or both. The name refers to the appeasement ( the policy of settling international quarrels by admitting and satisfying grievances through rational negotiation and compromise, thereby avoiding an armed conflict which would be expensive, bloody, and possibly dangerous) of Hitler's Nazi Germany in negotiations toward the eventual Munich Agreement. Many scholars argue that Neville Chamberlain's capitulation to German demands guaranteed eventual war as Hitler believed he could do as he pleased without the other Great Powers going to war to stop him. Steven Chan describes the moral as "appeasement discredits the defenders' willingness to fight, and encourages the aggressor to escalate his demands."

France would like to help Russia assault their neighbours “more swiftly”.

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 13:46:00 +0000

According to Reuters, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said France might sell a French assault ship to Russia. The Mistral-class ships can be used in amphibious assaults and can carry tanks, helicopters, and other armoured vehicles and personnel. The purchase would be Russia's biggest arms purchase from abroad.

“If Russia had had this kind of ship in its fleet, it could have moved more swiftly in the Black Sea during last year's war with Georgia. Instead of taking 26 hours to perform certain unnamed tasks, it would have taken the Russian Black Sea fleet 40 minutes with such a warship”, naval commander Vladimir Vysotsky said.

"This political agreement should be reached, I think, but it's not up to me to decide ... concerning this wonderful warship," Kouchner told Moscow's Ekho Moskvy radio station on Thursday.

This puts Sarkozy’s negotiation of the size fire agreement between Georgia and Russia, which Russia has declined to fulfil, in a strange light. Georgia is also a key energy transit route for oil and gas from the Caspian sea to Europe. That makes this deal even more irrational. Looking at France as a NATO and EU member I honestly can’t understand what goes on in the French political heads. The monumental stupidity of such a transaction is only surpassed by the amount of money the french gets for this vessel. And yes, it's more than 30 silvercoins.

Causal Attribution. Where the Tagliavini report plays in the hands of Russia.

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 00:12:00 +0000

According to Entmann, framing essentially involves selection and salience. To frame is to select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient in a communicating text, in such way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation for the item described.[..] Frames, then, define problems – determine what a causal agent is doing with what costs and benefits, usually measured in terms of common cultural values; diagnose causes – identify the forces creating the problem, make moral judgements – evaluate causal agents and their effects, and suggests remedies – offer and justify treatments for the problems and predict their likely effects.

Framing divert attention to certain aspects of the matter too. This brings us to the next level: Causal attribution. Simplified this can be illustrated by Iengard’s study Framing Responsibility for Political Issues:The Case of Poverty. He shows that attitudes for a large portion is created by media framing. The context in which political questions are presented has a significant impact on how people think about them, and how much guilt they attribute to the involved. To be held accountable for a result is largely the same as being the cause of the result.

So when media, in it’s limited formats shouts out with their five words headings that “Georgia started the war”, and leaves out the fact that Russia was creating the pretext of the conflict by numerous provocations, handing out passports to the rebel-republics population on Georgian territory, arming them, sending troops into the republics and so on; the public will attribute responsibility for the war to Georgia, which is, I think most will agree, to stretch the reality a bit far and absolutely wrong, if you read the report and it’s conclusions.

The report therefore should have focused on “what was the reason for the war”, rather than “who started it”. Then the picture would have become more complicated, but still more just. Georgia maybe fired first, and to protect Georgian citizens, but that was in reality a minor part of a largely complex picture. Sooner or later Georgia would be forced to defend itself, and what Russia was after was to replace Saakashvili and to secure an unacceptable sphere of influence in the old soviet territories against NATO expansion. For months they have prepared for this war, analytics like Ilarionov, and the report states clearly.

This is too complexed for the media, which need to simplify their stories and framing. The outfall is: Georgia started the war, Georgia is to blame. Which maybe was the aim for the report, because it is unthinkable that the report would have blamed Russia, as it rightfully should, given the pretext and the political consequences for EU.

No genocide. Georgia triggerd the war after years of Russian provocations.

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:11:00 +0000

The EU-Fact finding Mission lead by Swiss diplomat Ms. Heidi Tagliavini has finished it’s work, and their report was presented to the public today. Analysts anticipated that the report would blame both sides. It of course did. Here's some of the findings from the report:

Wall Street Journal: "The 9-month international investigation into the 2008 war in the Caucasus concludes that Georgia triggered the war, but that Russia had prepared the ground, broke international law by invading Georgia as a whole and that Russia-backed South Ossetian militias conducted ethnic cleansing of Georgian civilians[..] [W]hile there was evidence that regular Russian troops as well as volunteers and mercenaries had entered South Ossetia in Georgia before the start of the conflict on Aug. 7, no evidence was found of the full-scale Russian invasion to which Georgia said it was responding".

Financial Times: “While the onus of having actually triggered off the war lies with the Georgian side, the Russian side, too, carries the blame for a substantial number of violations of international law”, Ms Tagliavini says. “These include, even prior to the armed conflict, the mass conferral of Russian citizenship to a majority of the population living in South Ossetia and in Abkhazia. It also includes, in terms of an additional violation of international law, the military action by the Russian armed forces on Georgian territory, [which went] far beyond the needs of a proportionate defense of Russian Peace Keepers in Tskhinvali who had come under the [initial] Georgian attack.” [..] Russia’s subsequent recognition of both South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent must also “be considered as being not valid in the context of international law, and as violations of Georgia´s territorial integrity and sovereignty.” The report rejects outright Russian allegations that Georgia was carrying out a genocide against the South Ossetian population. But it accepts Tbilisi’s charges that ethnic cleansing took place against ethnic Georgians driven from South Ossetia.

Georgian Government pressrelease: "The report goes into detail in confirming the obvious—that Russia invaded Georgia; Georgia never attacked Russia or any other country. It confirms that attacks and warfare happened on Georgian soil. Among its key findings were there":
- The Commission found evidence that at least some units of Russian regular forces—not peacekeepers—entered sovereign Georgian territory prior to August 8. That constitutes an illegal invasion.
- Specifically the report says: “there seems to have been an influx of volunteers or mercenaries from the territory of the Russian Federation to South Ossetia through the Roki tunnel and over the Caucasus range in early August, as well as the presence of some Russian forces in South Ossetia, other than the Russian JPKF [Peacekeeping] battalion, prior to 14.30 hours on 8 August 2008.”
- The Commission also found evidence that separatist forces were armed and trained by Russia—in defiance of international law and Russia’s peacekeeping obligations.
- The report also points out that these Russian-backed separatist forces broke international law by attacking Georgian civilians in the days before August 7.
- The report concludes: “The vastly superior political and military weight of Russia toppled the balance of what might have been possible otherwise, if at all, in terms of arrangements between Tbilisi and its two breakaway provinces.”

New York Times published an article today by the Leader of the EU Fact Finding Mission, Heidi Tagliavini where she discusses the "Lessons of the Georgia Conflict"

So what?
Now it’s up to the PR advisors on both sides to create a favourable spin to the report. I have no doubt that Georgians have a tough job ahead of them, mainly because the report, in stating that Georgia “started” the war, (although Russia spent months preparing for it and provoking it), gives the EU/NATO countries who has taken a stand against Georgian NATO membership an argument. A NATO membership is now definitely postponed in indefinite time. The report will surely also make it easier for EU to do "business as usual" with Putin. But can EU accept that Russia has occupied a sovereign country, violated international laws by ethnic cleansing, recognised two rebel republics, and not honoured the seizfire agreement negotiated by French President Nicholas Sarkozy/EU? Yes they can. This report will not change anything, because the EU policy towards Russia and Georgia has been established more than a year ago based on facts described in the report. The report doesn't bring new, potential policychanging evidence: Putin got his sphere of influence when he invaded Georgia in 2008.

Medvedev's "friendship"?

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 22:44:00 +0000

According to RIA Novosti russian president? Medvedev still promotes the idea of Georgians having a moscow friendly president like the specimen they have installed in Chechnya, Kadyrov:

"I personally will not deal with President Saakashvili because he committed a crime against his own people, and the people of South Ossetia," but Moscow would be happy to build "good, warm" relations with Tbilisi, "based on hundreds of years of friendship," but not with Saakashvili. (Source: Eurasianet)

What “hundreds of years of friendship” means can be read in the signed handwritten death sentences passed by a number of more or less degenerated former soviet leaders, displayed together with all the broken deals Russia has signed, in the Tbilisi streets on the memorial day for the 2008 russian attack (se picture). Also the Russian troops killing 20 students with gas in 1989 will surely be remembered by the Georgians as an act of friendhip together with all the warmongery, embargos and support of all kinds of separatism from 1991 and onwards? I really don’t know what planet you come from, Medvedev.

Is Georgia a democracy?

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 15:02:00 +0000

I came across this interesting report on the Caucasus Research Resource Center (CRRC)'s blog.

Koba Turmanidze, Director of CRRC Georgia, and Hans Gutbrod from the CRRC Regional Office have contrbuted to this publication by the Foreign Policy Centre, a UK Think Tank. The publication also includes essays by Peter Semneby (EU Special Representative), Giorgi Gogia (Human Rights Watch) and Giorgi Chkheidze (Georgian Young Lawyers/Ombudsman's office).

It's worth reading. Download as PDF here

When Food Talks

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 12:17:00 +0000

It’s fair to say that chickens are the most domesticated animal you can find. I always buy 8-10 live chickens when I go to our dacha in Racha. I enjoy having them around, providing great meat. This year I bought older chickens than usual because I wanted to test out egg production. What is crucial to find out is WHERE the chickens lay their eggs. You can run around looking for days. But as it seems, chickens starts to cackle intense when they have produced an egg. You then need to listen, and look from where they come, and scrutinise the surroundings nearby. Then you might find the secret place. When you find it, then mark the egg with a text-marker or pencil, and leave it so the chicken feel safe it’s a good spot to lay eggs. The next day the same thing will happen, and then you can take the next egg, leaving the marked one. One of the chickens in secret managed to adopt the bathroom as nest. The bathroom on our dacha has a separate door which can be accesses from outside the main building if left open. One day we found an egg in the basket with dirty clothes.

Why this cackling after they have laid eggs??
We have to go to science and ask this question. In Georgia there is a firm believe that the chickens cackle because they have a sore ass after pressing this huge egg out. I am not so sure. It seems like a major designflaw from nature if this is the case, so I would test the following hypothesis in a social constructivist perspective: Chickens cackle when having laid an egg because the want to make the other chickens aware of their deed, and then be recognised as important members of the chicken community.

Dr. Beaumer and his chick-talk tapes to the rescue!.
One should think that a quick “google” would solve the mystery, but no. Today chickens mostly is kept inside in extremely tight cages, and therefore there are no need to go looking for the eggs, so the information is scarce. But fear not, The Animal Welfare Movement found the traces of Fowl linguist Dr. Erich Baeumer of Wiedenau, Germany, who has been studying chickens since 1954. The good doctor proclaims that he keeps a list of 30 sentences which are part of a spoken international chicken language, be it an Indian Jungle fowl, a Russian Orloff rooster, an Italian Leghorn, a Cornish cock or a New Hampshire Red. Again accoring to the Animal Welfare Movement Dr.Baeumer was only eight when he realised that he could understand the chickens around his house. "It was an intuitive understanding, I could actually tell what they were saying. I began to spend hours with them; they became brothers and sisters to me," he says. In 1954, he started working with Professor Erich von Hoist at the Institute of Behaviour Physiology near Munich. After recording hours of chicken talk, Dr. Baeumer selected examples of clear-cut chicken "sentences" that could be related to records or photographs of specific actions. Dr. Baeumer’s chick-talk tapes have been played at universities in many countries (Animal Welfare Movement).

The hardcore facts about the chicken and the egg
Hens make a cackle when they have laid an egg, but Dr. Baeumer does not think they are boasting or saying, "Thank heaven that’s over." He believes that it all goes back to the days when wild hens laid eggs in hidden nests. After each delivery, the hen gave a loud cackle to regain contact with the rest of the flock. "Chicken behaviour is not too different from human behaviour," says Dr. Baeumer, " Nor is the chicken language" (Animal Welfare Movement).

I must remember that when I chop off the heads of those poor chickens.

Russian Occupation and refugee camps

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 11:52:00 +0000

After traveling around in Georgia for one month in July/august, I have a clear impression that this war is not over yet. Numerous provocations from separatists/ russians shooting at EUMM personnel, the pathetic visit to South Ossetia by miniputin in july, machoputin’s visit yesterday to Abkhazia where he pledge 500 mill $ for more armed forces, together with the ongoing Russian propaganda campaigns shows this clearly. The EUMM personell is doing their job as best they can, and is very visible around the separatist enclaves.

The refugee camps
Several thousands Georgians have been driven from their homes which has been thoroughly looted before burned down by russian and ossetian militia. For those reading the analysis starting to come out now, (that is besides Der Spiegel and other more or less unserious journalists) it’s clear that Russia preplanned the war and must without any doubt be regarded as the aggressor. And now it seems that ethnic cleansing is rewarded with more territory. A process Russia has taken active part in since 1992 in Abkhazia, where the total number of displaced people now amounts to round 250 000. The many huge refugee camps is evidence. I have seen a lot of them, newly erected around the Russian occupied territories.

NATO acts like the battered wife
Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the new NATO leader, proclaimed that he would pursue true and close cooperation with Russia. I seriously think he must spend more time out of office before doing business with a nation, now run by FSB, that systematically have broken every international and national agreements and laws, not forgetting human rights, since Stalin started the destruction of the nation. Surely NATO must have learned at least a tiny bit from the shameless lack of action in august 2008. But I am not sure of that. European politician are book keepers, not political leaders fit to defend principles of integrity and democracy. That includes Norway to, where foreign minister and wonderboy of “dialogue” Jonas Gahr Støre is quick to condemn actions in Zimbabwe and Burma, but quickly hides under the table when Russias systematic violations of everything a modern society holds high of values and principles is mentioned. This lack of action reminds me about the psychology of battered wives trying to please their abusive husbands without much success. The battering is a pathological condition impossible to cure with any “dialogue”.

The EU Factfinding Mission Report
The EUFFM report about the war in Georgia will be published in September. Is it political possible to blame Russia? I think no, given the political climate in Europe? We’ll see…The main questions that should be asked is this: Who gained land in the war? Russia gained 20% of Georgia, a sovereign nation. That ends the blame game.

Russia is deteriorating rapidly
Russia is on a steep downturn both democratic and financially. Hopefully that will bring down the regime, and give space for development for Russians, who more or less live in total confusion givet that the regime controls all information. Not even Europe’s last dictator Lukashenko, in Belarus follows the Russian threats and directives anymore. Only Hamas has formally recognized the breakaway regions, whatever that gives of credibility.

Medvedev legalize military action outside Russia.

Medvedevs new law proposal will allow Russian troops to intervene wherever there can be found a scent of Russian genetics being ”mistreated”. This should seriously alarm the Baltics and Ukraine. The Russian leadership is on a path which is dangerous for all nations having Russians with double citizenship as a part of the population.

A Georgian War II?

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 20:50:00 +0000

Reading the statements of Russian Foreign Minister Sergej Lavrov makes you think that the man is clearly living in another world than most of us. I long ago decided it was bad for my health to listen to the speeches of this truly haunted man, but sometimes I can’t help it, reminding my self that he after all is the mouthpiece of Putin I & II.

Mr. Lavrovs description of the “emerging new situation in trans Caucasus” is a masterpiece according to the DSM IV diagnostics. In his statement he points out Russia’s efforts to come up with a solution to keep OSCE observers in Georgia, while his soldiers are conducting the military exercise Kavkaz 2009, also INSIDE Georgian territory in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, with 8-10 000 soldiers and 200 tanks. The fact that Russia both manage to block the mandate for OSCE as well as UN observers is a clear evidence for Russia’s good will in the negotiations. Besides that means no witnesses. Russia is still in violation with the ceasefire agreement, and UN agreements signed by Russia on Georgian sovereignty. And now both Lavrov and Rogosin "fear" the Georgian agression and troop build up on the border to South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Sure, Georgia is keen to take on Russia which has stationed a huge amount of missiles and tanks inside the rebel republics, inside Georgia. What a monumental lie!

At the moment we are facing the same situation as in July 2008. Then, as I was staying in Tbilisi, and I was convinced that there would be a Russian invasion based on all the garbage Lavrov poured out in the media. (I wrote it on my blog 11. july 2008.) I think the war came as a surprise only for the media and the European politicians. Will there be a second this July or August? I really find it hard to say. One the one side it would be a devastating catastrophe mainly for Russia. (That is thinking like a rational person). A war could by no means be legitimated with lies and propaganda like the first one (the “humanitarian rescue mission” would be to plain even for Russians). It would completely alienate Russia from all its bordering neighbors, and in long term perspectives mean isolation. For Georgia it will mean to be temporarily be drawn back to the middle age, where the Russian cleptocracy resides. But thinking like a true Cremlin hoodlum it might just makes sense: It’s like peing in your pants to maintain some warmth in the winter. It’s the control of Georgian pipelines, and the ability to give Europe and USA a black eye. But then winter will set in, and your pants aren’t really that warm anymore. Especially not in the Caucasus.

So now everyone awaits Obamas mission to Moscow on the 6th of july. Most analysts think that his performance would mean the difference of “invade” or “not invade” Georgia. I really hope Obama will be firm, and won't proceed with the naïve "reset" project. Russia needs US as an enemy in order to keep the current cleptocracy at the power, thus persuing the "reset" project will only serve to project US as weak, and confirm the image Putin want's to create.

Analysis: Norwegian newspaper's coverage of the war in Caucasus 2008

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 22:26:00 +0000

As a part of my master studies in “Media, Communication and ICT” at NTNU, I did an analysis of the Norwegian newspaper coverage of the war in Caucasus. The analysis shows how the two major Norwegian newspapers (Aftenposten and Verdens Gang) framed the war, and how loyalty to the Governments foreign policy can be found in their largely one sided pro-western coverage of the conflict. It also shows that both the opposition (conservatives) and the government (social democratic) for a large part agree about Norwegian foreign policy. The politicians didn’t seem to pay much attention to the war and the possible consequences for Norway as a result of Russia’s new aggressive modus operandi. This can be portrayed as either political indifference among Norwegian politicians, or as a consensus between the Norwegian Government, the opposition and the media, where to show restraint in critizising Russia is imperative for national security. The news media might, as a result of this, seem to under-communicate Norway’s challenges in the northern areas regarding a weak defence, NATO’s unwillingness to confront Russia in the Caucasus; signalling a division in the alliance indicating less commitment to NATO Article 5 in the case of a potential Russian threat in the race for the Arctic oil and gas.

Download and read “A Cold War in the Caucasus?” as a PDF. Language: Norwegian. Grade: A.

A new war? - Russia’s Caucasian Mess

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Fri, 29 May 2009 20:42:00 +0000

“Territorial integrity is a thing of the past”, Russias UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin (picture) said during the attack on Georgia last summer. It’s wise to have that statement in mind as we now learn that the Russians, like last spring, is planning their big military exercise Kavkaz 2009 in June, and the South Ossetians have began shooting at Georgians (Civil.ge) in the buffer zone (29.05.09), maybe to prepare the ground for yet a Russian “humanitarian intervension” like last year? They have also deployed more troops, missile launchers and tanks along the borderzones.The unstable situation has affected the whole of Georgia. Abkhazia and South Ossetia appear to be in deep political crisis, with various political forces fighting for power. The mess Russia has created after its invasion of Georgia in 2008 is considerable. As Solzhenitsyn pointed out, a Federation is always based on a mutual wish for a beneficial unity, a centripetal force, not the Russian centrifugal military invasion and oppression strategy. So naturally what Russia has achieved by its occupation of Georgian territory is more or less chaos and hostility everywhere. Maybe more than they wished for.

Political turmoil in Georgia proper
In Tbilisi, the opposition has gone completely off the rails lead by a singer called “Ucnobi”, the unknown. Gathering 60 000 at his political rallies, this oppositional figure, presumably perceived as a sort of romantic revolutionary hero, has his own TV show where he pours out his wrath in a small cell, only interrupted by frequent drinking and smoking. The man has no political program, and no identifiable political direction. He is supported by several opposition figures (also without any program or direction) like former Saakashvili allied and Parliamentary speaker Nino Burdjanaze and her compatriot Salome Zurabishvili, determined to commit political suicide as soon as possible. The goal is to topple president Saakashvili, which remains calm and relatively unprovoked judging from the lack of interference with the bold demonstrators. Blocking railroads and main roads, alienating it self and the vast majority of Georgians that wants peaceful reforms is playing it directly into the Russians hands. Destabilization and riots only serves the Russian Federation. The former Georgian Ambassador to the UN, Irakli Alasania, leader of Alliance for Georgia, is in spite of this a point of light. His fraction has turned from activism to more democratic means of protest, and wants to negotiate with the Saakashvili regime instead. A very smart move:According to Caucasus Research Resources Centres 20% - 30% of the population support the government. 20% support the more strident opposition. 50% to 60% are more or less undecided politically. Put in other terms: 20-30% want stability 20% want change, even if this involves risk, and 50-60% want significant change, but also sufficient stability. This means that for the opposition, they could have found up to 80% of the population agreeing with them that they want change -up to a point, and only if stability could be guaranteed.

Abkhazia – Soon to be swallowed by Putin.
According to the De facto Vice-President of Abkhazia Raul Khajimba, which is supported by Moscow and seen as the guarantor of Russian expansion in Abkhazia, there is a “deep governmental crisis” in Abkhazia. Khajimba says that President Baghapsh uses force against the opposition in Abkhazia, and accused Baghapsh of behaving in a “non-transparent” way when giving control over the Abkhazian-Georgian administrative border to Russian forces. Baghapsh is also accused by the opposition of “selling” the country to Russia. The majority of Abkhazian strategic and economic facilities are owned by Russian citizens and that the de facto authorities are drafting a law which will allow Russians to purchase Abkhazian land. Baghapsh has already signed a deal giving the Russian ownership to railroads and airfields for ten years ahead, given permission to drill for oil off the shores of Abkhazia, and finally given space for the mighty Russian Black Sea Fleet.

South Ossetia – dictatorship, corruption and nepotism
Separatist leader Eduard Kokoity is expected to extend what the opposition calls his tyranny over South Ossetia when the Russian-backed rebel region holds an election on Sunday. The opposition say Kokoity wants to change the constitution so that he can run for a third term in 2011 and an overwhelming success in the parliamentary election would help him do this.South Ossetia awaits Parliamentary elections on May 31. Representatives of the South Ossetian opposition have stated that the current separatist leader Eduard Kokoity is using “dirty tricks” to keep his party in power. Some opposition members have accused him of “stealing Russian money” destined for the rehabilitation of the region after the August 2008 conflict. “A dictatorship is being established in South Ossetia right now and the President Kokoity and his brother are stealing Russian humanitarian aid and budget funds destined for rehabilitation,” said a Moscow-backed ethnic Ossetian, Jambulat Tedeev. The South Ossetian opposition believes the election will be rigged, and will organize protests against Kokoity

Sources: Temur Kiguradze, Guy Faulconbridge - Reuters, Georgia Dayly, Caucasus Research Resources Centres and Civil.ge

OSCE on Russian ethnic cleansing of Georgians

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:45:00 +0000

It has been a while since last post on the blog, but now, as the Norwegian High Commissioner on Nationa Minorities in OSCE, Knut Vollebæk has made a statement on the situation in the russian-occupied parts of Georgia, I decided to post his statement as published by Civil Georgia, April 14:

Knut Vollebaek, the OSCE high commissioner on national minorities, called on the authorities in breakaway Abkhazia “to put an end to the pressure being exercised on the Georgian population in the Gali district.” “I am deeply concerned about recent developments in the Gali District of Abkhazia, which have led to a deteriorating security situation in the region” The OSCE commissioner said that the pressure on local ethnic Georgian population was exerted through “the limitation of their education rights, compulsory ‘passportization’, forced conscription into the Abkhaz military forces and restrictions on their freedom of movement.”

He also expressed “regret” about the decision of the Abkhaz leadership to close the administrative border, “which makes it increasingly difficult for the population to maintain family contacts, access necessary health care or sell their products on the other side of the de facto border.”

“I am concerned that such coercive practices, which violate international law, may further destabilize the already fragile inter-ethnic situation in the region and force many Georgians to leave,” Knut Vollebaek said. “I reiterate that international norms and standards require that any authority exercising jurisdiction over population and territory, even if not recognized by the international community, must respect the human rights of everyone, including those of persons belonging to ethnic communities. I urge the de facto authorities to desist from all intimidation and the imposition of Abkhazian ‘citizenship’ on and forced conscription of Georgians living in the Gali District. I also urge the de facto authorities to respect the education rights of Georgians residing there and to allow Georgian students in the region to study in the Georgian language.”

“While I understand and welcome the desire of the de facto Abkhaz authorities to strengthen the Abkhaz identity and language, I would like to stress that this should be done in a way that does not negatively affect the rights of persons belonging to other ethnic communities in the region to maintain and develop their own language and culture.”

The Russian Ambassador to Norway criticizes media coverage.

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 22:53:00 +0000

Tonight I spent 40 kr, or 6 dollars to listen to the Russian Ambassador to Norway Sergej Andrejev complaining about the negative media coverage Russia has gotten lately. That is, the first thing he wanted to make clear was that “I’m not complaining”.

So what misconceptions did Norwegian and Western media have? Here are some other grains of gold which I think sums it up from the Ambassador:

"Media should stop interfering with internal Russian affairs."
"There is no more journalist killed in Russia than other people."
"Georgia started the war, and Medvedev defended Russian citizens."
"Several hundred civilians were killed by Georgian forces in South Ossetia" (Ed. comment: Official Russian numbers are 162 soldiers, separatists and civilians killed in SO)
"Western media does not take in consideration the kind of difficult situation Russia is in."
"Russia is a democracy."
"Politics and moral should not be mixed together."
"If it were not for the Red Army, Estonia, Lithauen and Latvia would have been a part of The Third Reich, so don’t complain."
"You see what you see" (About planting the Russian flag on the North Pole under water)

Difficult questions?
As this was a meeting with debate in the student society in Trondheim, students could ask questions. The difficult ones about the Georgia war and Russian media the Ambassador at large”didn’t understand”, and allowed himself to take an effort in humiliating one critical students in particular on his use of English language (the meeting was held in English). “Maybe the student rather would present his questions in his native language?”

A Newspaper man without “cojones”
To defend the Russian critic of Norwegian media coverage the Studentersamfundet had invited Kjell Dragnes, the news editor for foreign affairs in Aftenposten, one of Norway’s dominating newspapers. He spent most of his time speaking about his love to Russia. Part of his heart was still there after years living in Russia, he said. I think maybe the debate would have been a lot better if a sharp and “heartless” journalist had participated instead. Dragsnes’s defence of the media was, to put it mildly, like that of any newspaperman standing side by side with a Cremlin bureaucrat, more or less missing.

NUPI represented the science.
NUPI, The Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, was represented by Elana Wilson Rowe. Now the truth would emerge, (at least I thought) but she presented only a mild general critique of Russian democracy, and was in a way very difficult to make much sense of. But she sounded great! I think she would become a great politician. She repeatedly made a point of how complicated the Georgia-Russia conflict was without making it much clearer to her self or the audience. She held an attitude that Georgia started the war, missing the fact that EU has set up a committee to investigate that particular issue, also taking in consideration that the war has it’s roots in the early nineties and later events building up to the conflict.

Same shit, same wrapping
I usually manage to get aggravated listening to debates about Russia, but this level was too low to even get the slightest excited. I don’t think Rusian officials have a clue about what democracy is, what media’s function is, and how to behave. Personally I think Vitaly Churkin and Sergei Lavrov present their dilutions with more style and assertiveness. But they also started to criticize the media when they were caught in lies on TV during the Georgia war.

The verdict
The audience at Studentersamfundet held a slightly tepid attitude to the Russian Ambassador if judged by the moderate applause he got. The opponents failed to present any critical view regarding the armed conflicts, the frequent embargos, and the ethnic cleansing Russia has been conducting in Georgia. Nobody confronted the Ambassador with the fact that their “defence” of Abkhazia also made it possible to relocate the entire Black Sea fleet from Ukraine to the “defended” and “recognized” Abkhazia. One thing is clear: Negative media coverage of Russia is something Russia have fully deserved, and in much larger amount than the commercialized western press have managed to cover. The Ambassador fails to understand that Russia’s own actions are the sole reason for negative media coverage, and by criticizing it he makes it clear to us all that Russia is everything that the press claims it to be.

Merry X-mas!

noreply@blogger.com (Eistein G.) — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 14:19:00 +0000

I wish all my readers a great x-mas and a happy new year!