Give credit to Russia, they have exercised power brilliantly, and the end game is near. While there are still media reports of sporadic fighting in Russia well after the cease-fire, the objectives of Russia have become clear. The politics will now decide whether the cease-fire holds.
Early in the conflict Putin and Bush exchanged words in China, prior to Putin flying off to the front lines to be the face of the conflict. Some have described the Medvedev-Putin relationship in this conflict as “good cop/bad cop.” We think that relationship applies, but not in a conventional way. We see Medvedev as the good cop for Europe, and Putin as the bad cop for the US.
Based on Bush’s actions following his meeting with Putin: staying in China… and Bush’s inactions following that meeting: doing almost nothing for Georgia; Russia essentially had the green light to achieve all of its objectives. There will be no partial achievements here.
Russia’s objectives from the beginning has been the insurance of Russian interests for South Ossetia and Abkhazia. We can only assume, based on Bush’s press conference at the White House, that Bush expected Russia to fill in those regions with Russian troops and stop. We can also assume the administration did not believe Russia’s tactical objectives included Senaki, Zugdidi, Gori, and Poti.
With these assumptions, and taking Russia at its word that the objectives are South Ossetia and Abkhazia, why then did Russia move on to these other tactical objectives? Furthermore, while Russia is established near all of the towns mentioned above, why has Russia stopped, set up defensive lines, and not occupied the cities themselves? How can we suggest that some sort of diplomatic effort factored into a cease fire where Russia ends up strategically positioned, dug in, and prepared to let loose its full force on the major cities in Georgia? One might imply instead that Russia positioned its forces exactly where they wanted them to be ‘coincidently’ before the cease fire was announced.
If Russia’s strategic objective is South Ossetia and Abkhazia, then what is the purpose of the other territories Russia currently occupies? These represent Russian political concessions. No one can take them from Russia, and they can destroy the cities if their demands are not met. In other words, Russia can achieve exactly what they want, and if the west complies, Georgia gets to keep its country. If Georgia or the West doesn’t comply? Georgia is destroyed further until the west accepts Russia’s conditions. One should expect that one condition will be to validate Russian military action as legitimate.
All Russia needs is a broker. Enter France. This ran in the Russian press yesterday.
The US is not suited to the role of lead mediator in resolving the Georgian-Ossetian conflict. The statement was made by French Minister of Foreign and European Affairs Bernard Kouchner.
In Kouchner’s opinion, the United States is actually part of the conflict, as it is present in Georgia and is equipping its armies, reports Channel 1.
Is it coincidence good cop Medvedev is ready to receive Sarkozy and work out a cease fire? We expect France to put forth a resolution of the conflict that puts the EU in charge of Georgia. This will insure Germany and France’s position that Georgia should never join NATO, and will additionally give the EU a public victory in foreign policy and diplomacy. Russia gets its new provinces and legitimacy in its military action, while Georgia gets to survive, probably without regime change although the next election may not be kind to Saakashvili.
Where does that leave the US? The US has proven itself not to be factor in this entire affair, and that is not likely to change now. Georgia, a small country that joined the “coalition of the willing, ” was left to the tender mercies of Russia thinking their friend the US would come. I’m sure the Chinese and Russians are ready to sell the script to other powers, and that script will sell.
Superpowers pay a high cost for action in the 21st century, but it is also true that superpowers pay a high cost of inaction in the 21st century. When Bush took the military option off the table, even if he never in a million years intended to actually use that option, he doomed Georgia. Russia hasn’t given the United States a second thought since. The Bush Administration played poker with Putin, but did so with the cards face up on the table. We should expect results to reflect such a play.
When we say Russia’s divide and conquer strategy, surely you didn’t think we were talking about Georgia. Russia will use this incident to divide Europe and the US, there is humiliation coming for American inaction. The Russian exit strategy involves Europe throwing the US under the bus so Georgia can survive. It’s Russia and France at the diplomatic table, what did you really expect? In that room, US interests finish last. [From Russia's Divide and Conquer Strategy]
IBM’s entry into the personal computer business on this date in 1981 was a signal event in the history of business and technology. And since then? Oh, a few items of note. [From Do you remember where you were when this happened?]
So now that Georgia and Russia have officially challenged each other to fisticuffs, how do the two match up?
Georgian tanks w/reactive armor roll into South Ossetia
Georgia has roughly 30k troops serving in the Georgian Armed Forces, with 2,000 of their best troops serving in Iraq. Though small, the Georgian Army is respected by their Coalition partners in Iraq as a highly competent fighting force. They’re equipped with relatively modern Russian weapons, to include some 200 tanks, 450 armored fighting vehicles, Su-25 and MiG-25 fighter jets, and a whole mess of artillery, mortars, surface to air missiles, etc etc.
The Russian bear is still, well… a juggernaut. Ivan’s armed forces weigh in at just over 1 million troops. The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation suffered during the harsh post-Soviet breakup defense cuts, but have since flourished under Vladimir Putin. They are technologically advanced, disciplined, and effectively trained. The Russians are familiar and comfortable operating in the Caucasus Mountain region, both from their unification with Georgia under the Soviet Empire and from their fighting in nearby Chechnya.
So yeah, on the surface, it looks like we’ve got a classic David v. Goliath matchup. Not so fast. As mentioned, the Georgians can be mean little bastards. They’ve got a home field advantage, are furiously calling up reserves, and are fighting a Russian enemy that has one (one!!) supply line over the Caucasus into South Ossetia. That logistics line, ironically enough, will be closed in a few short months by Russia’s old tried and true ally — Old Man Winter.
If Georgia can plug that hole, get creative with their air defense assets, kill a whole mess of Russians, and force this thing into a winter overtime — I wouldn’t be surprised if the international community forces a peace favorable to the Georgians.
Of course if they don’t plug that line, I can see Russia’s tanks bringing Georgia back into the family — the old school way.
[From Georgia v. Russia]
The Georgian embassy in the U.K. has accused forces within Russia of launching a coordinated cyberattack against Georgian Web sites, to coincide with military operations in the breakaway region of South Ossetia.
Speaking to ZDNet UK on Monday, a Georgian embassy spokesperson said that Web sites had been unavailable over the weekend, claiming this was due to Russian denial-of-service attacks.
“All Georgian Web sites have been blocked,” said the spokesperson. “Georgia is working on redirecting Web traffic.”
Looks like Google’s blogspot is picking up the slack.
Georgia’s military isn’t exactly net-centric, so it’s looking like these attacks are more public-relations related than military. Both Georgia and Russia have been furiously conducting PR ops, spinning the conflict to make it seem like the other guy’s fault. World opinion tends to gravitate towards the underdog, so neutralizing Georgia’s most convenient and easily accessible communications medium might be Ivan’s way of evening the playing field.
Then again, it might be a couple of Russian teenagers trying to do their part…
[From Russia takes the fight to cyberspace]
ComputerWorld dispels myths about the history of modern day computers — or, more appropriately, the invention of the first microprocessor. Contrary to popular belief, ‘the [Intel] 8008 was not actually derived from the 4004 — they were separate projects.’ In fact, the 8008 concept didn’t originate from Intel (though they were eventually granted IP rights.) The article goes on to explain the events leading up to the invention and first intended use of the 8008 (a predecessor to the 8086, etc.), and how Intel was initially uneasy about the venture.
![]()
[From Origins of the Modern PC ]
Bigger, better, faster, more are the driving themes behind the advanced network monitoring technology BBN Technologies is building for the military. The high-tech firm got a $4.4 million contract today from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to develop novel, scalable attack detection algorithms; a flexible and expandable architecture for implementing and deploying the algorithms; and an execution environment for traffic inspection and algorithm execution. The network monitoring system is being developed under DARPA’s Scalable Network Monitoring program which seeks to bolt down network security in the face of cyber attacks that have grown more subtle and sophisticated
Bad Behavior has blocked 172 access attempts in the last 7 days.