If your only source of news is the mainstream corporate American media, you might very well be under the impression that recent fighting in the Georgian province of South Ossetia is nothing more than a cynical, belligerent attempt by Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin to rebuild a Soviet-style empire by invading a peaceful, harmless neighbor.
The mainstream media rarely mentions that South Ossetia fought a battle of independence from Georgia beginning in 1989. In 1992 a cease fire was negotiated in which South Ossetia was officially recognized as semi-autonomous from Georgia. The agreement stipulated that several hundred Russian peacekeeping soldiers would occupy South Ossetia to protect against Georgian military incursion.
Things were fairly peaceful in the region until 2004, when tensions between South Ossetians and Georgians began to rise again. In 2006 a referendum was conducted in South Ossetia to determine whether it would remain independent. The result was almost 99% in favor of independence, with about a 95% turnout of eligible voters.
On August 8, 2008, while most of the world was distracted by the opening ceremonies of the Beijing Olympics, Georgia launched a large-scale military incursion into South Ossetia. The town of Tskhinvali was shelled by a sustained artillery bombardment. Twelve Russian soldiers were killed and over 100 injured. It is estimated that about 1500 civilians were killed. Most of the remaining 30,000 inhabitants of Tskhinvali fled across the border into the Russian province of North Ossetia. The Georgian military moved into the town and occupied it.
Two days later, heavily-armed Russian military units crossed the border into South Ossetia and drove the Georgian troops out of Tskhinvali after bloody fighting. Both sides have accused each other of human rights atrocities, including rape, murder, and ethnic cleansing. A fragile cease fire is currently in place.
The Real News Network has produced a 3-part series on the politics of Georgia and South Ossetia:
(Click below to play video)
Parts 2 and 3 are available here:
Part 2
Part 3
Followup (8/15/2008): In a press conference at the State Department yesterday, Condoleeza Rice said:
This is not 1968 and the invasion of Czechoslovakia, where Russia can threaten its neighbors, occupy a capital, overthrow a government, and get away with it.Apparently, it's not the 2003 invasion of Iraq, either, where the United States did all of the above. Oh, wait, Iraq wasn't our neighbor. I guess that makes all the difference.
In the same spirit of revisionism, John McCain said yesterday:
In the twenty-first century, nations don't invade other nations.
Followup (8/16/2008): The Real News Network posted an interview with Matthew Rothschild, editor of The Progressive. He says:
It's hard to find anyone who's behaved well in this whole event. . . . If you examine the arguments on every side, everyone is being hypocritical, especially the Russians and the United States. . . . The Russians didn't want Chechnya to be autonomous. . . . The United States supported the efforts of Kosovo to secede. . . . There are no good guys here.
Followup (8/17/2008): As a great example of how the mainstream media gets nervous when anyone counters official propaganda, check out this video of Fox News anchor Shepard Smith interviewing two Americans who escaped the fighting in Georgia. Ironically, less-biased coverage of this story is provided by Russia Today.
Followup (8/17/2008): Today on NBC's Meet the Press, Condoleeza Rice said:
We need to keep the focus on the culprit here. The culprit is that Russia overreached, used disproportionate force against a small neighbor, and is now paying the price for that because Russia's reputation as a potential partner in international institutions . . . is, frankly, in tatters. . . . Georgia will rebuild. Russia's reputation, on the other hand, may not be rebuilt.As we all know, Ms. Rice is one of the world's leading experts on the subject of military overreaching against small countries leading to ruined international reputations. The host of Meet the Press, Dick Gregory, never pointed out the irony of her comments. Nor did he question her version of events or provide airtime for a dissenting point of view.
