Take a look at the news reports from just one day, February 3. The day started with two articles. One in “Nezavisimaya gazeta” was written in such a way that it caused a sensation: U.S. State Department official Matthew Bryza was portrayed as threatening Moscow with the prospect that the United States would establish military bases in Georgia in retaliation for planned Russian military installations in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. And “Kommersant,” citing unnamed sources, reported that during talks later that day between Kyrgyzstan’s president and his Russian counterpart it would be announced that Bishkek would demand the closure of the U.S. base at Manas.

These reports were followed by the announcement that Russia and Belarus had signed an agreement on creating a joint, unified missile-defense system that would protect the two countries from an insidious aerial or space-based attack by NATO. The day ended with a staged appearance by Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiev at which he explained in a confused sort of way that the Kyrgyz people had demanded the closure of the U.S. base, inasmuch as Bishkek had been unable to agree with Washington on how much the U.S. should pay.

At first glance it would appear that, in full accordance with the Kremlin’s realpolitik, the entire territory of the former Soviet Union has been turned into one giant chessboard on which the battle between Moscow and Washington is being played out. The only problem is that in this match, there is only one player and he seems to be carrying out some complex maneuver aimed at himself.

The new administration of U.S. President Barack Obama is preoccupied with little matters like getting out of Iraq, achieving victory in Afghanistan, and coping with Iran — which, as it happens, launched its own satellite on the very same day as all the events listed above. The White House has no time for the Kremlin.

And this would seem the perfect moment for ratcheting up the anti-Americanism.

Playing Realpolitik Solitaire

So Russia is focused on creating both real and deeply imaginary unpleasantness for Washington. Of course, Bryza didn’t utter any stupidities about U.S. bases in Georgia. This was reported by the “authoritative” Kavkas-Press news agency. But none of the Russians who spent the whole day repeating this nonsense bothered to check whether Bryza ever said any such thing. Why? Because they think that Washington and Moscow are both engaged in the game of turning Georgia into their own military testing ground.

The situation with the Russian-Belarusian missile-defense system is a bit stranger. Moscow and Minsk have been floating this trial balloon now and again for years now. It would be hard to count all the joint statements on this question. There have been three attempts to sign a final document.

But each time the wily Alyaksandr Lukashenka managed to wriggle out of Moscow’s embrace, each time carrying off a couple hundred million dollars in Russian loans. But what’s a few million among family? It would simply be tactless to talk about a few pathetic dollars (a million barrels more, a million barrels less — what’s the difference?) when the Motherland is at stake. We are talking about defending Russia from that accursed NATO.

But now, it seems, the unattainable has been achieved: Belarusian President Lukashenka signed the necessary papers. True, even now he continues trading, announcing that the agreement must be “viewed as part of a whole package of measures to intensify military-technical cooperation.” He also emphasized that “many problems have accumulated that demand joint discussion and a working out of the optimal solutions.” That is, he is asking for more money. Then he disappeared without commenting further.

The content of the agreement was revealed only by President Dmitry Medvedev’s foreign-policy adviser, Sergei Prikhodko. He explained that the unified system would consist of five antiaircraft batteries, 10 surface-to-air missile-defense systems, five radar installations, and one radio-monitoring unit. That is, under the most ambitious counting, we are talking about 50-70 military aircraft and perhaps 100 antimissile rocket batteries. It would be hard to claim that this force would actually be able to counter an attack from NATO, which deployed more than 1,500 military aircraft during its operations in the former Yugoslavia.

Moreover, as far as I can tell, no sort of “unification” is happening at all. Lukashenka remains extremely cautious about placing Belarusian forces under Moscow’s command. At present, the only agreement is for a joint command structure in the event of “a time of threat.”

Finally, we come to Bakiev’s sensational announcement of the closure of the U.S. base at Manas, which Moscow has been lobbying for over the last two years. A series of complex intrigues collapsed in 2006 when then-U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld traveled to Bishkek and laid a little more money on the table. I strongly suspect that the story will end the same way this time — with Washington increasing its proposed payment for the base.

But it is nonetheless interesting to try to figure out exactly what Russia is trying to achieve. After all, it is hard to deny that the United States and NATO are defending Russia’s national security in Afghanistan. Imagine that Moscow’s game succeeds and Manas is closed. As a result, the supply of international forces in Afghanistan is cut off. So the Americans end the operation and withdraw. The victorious Taliban immediately begin moving into Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, with all the consequences that implies for Russia.

It is sufficient to recall that back in 2000, the Russian General Staff had worked out a contingency plan for moving a force of some 60,000 men “in a southerly direction,” to counter the threat from Afghanistan.

So, what did Moscow achieve on February 3? It forced Minsk to sign a meaningless agreement and compelled Bishkek to say it will ask the United States to withdraw from Manas. That is to say, no concrete, direct benefits, and indirectly the Kremlin only harmed its own security, not that of the United States. But Moscow got to indulge its own inferiority complex by creating the impression that Moscow and Washington are playing the same game.

www.rferl.org/content/A_Day_In_The_Life_Of_Moscows_Inferiority_Complex/1379127.html

Source: RFE/RL, February 2009

In his written address to the congress of Georgians, held in Moscow on February 3, Medvedev said: “We sincerely want to see stable, independent and genuinely democratic Georgian state; the state, which lives in peace and security, which has friendly relations with other states.”

“Your meeting has special importance in the light of the fact that Russian-Georgian inter-state relations are going through serious test today,” the address posted on the Kremlin’s website reads. “I hope your forum will significantly contribute to formation of positive atmosphere in the Russian-Georgian relationships.”

“Close cultural and humanitarian relations are integral part of our joint history. Direct people-to-people contacts and relations between civil society organizations play important role in strengthening mutual understanding and confidence.”

The congress was organized by head of the Union of Georgians in Russia, Mikheil Khubutia. The Georgian television stations which covered the event extensively, reported the congress was held with the Kremlin’s blessing. Khubutia, who says that President Medvedev is his friend, told journalists on February 4 that while Russia can live without Georgia, it will be difficult for the latter to live without Russia.

Khubutia said in a recent interview with the Georgian television that he had invited some of the officials from the Georgian government, including Iulon Gagoshidze, the state minister for diaspora issues; the latter declined to participate. Nestan Kirtadze of the opposition Labor Party participated in the event.

In December the Russian daily, Kommersant, reported that President Saakashvili had an attempt to establish contacts with the Russian authorities through intermediaries and met with Khubutia in Munich in November for that purpose. There has been no official confirmation of the report from the Georgian authorities.

In his address, President Medvedev also said that “close relations” between the Russian and Georgian Orthodox Churches were of special importance.

A delegation of the Georgian Orthodox Church was in Moscow participating in the enthronement ceremony of Russia’s new Patriarch Kirill this week. Ilia II, the Patriarch of the Georgian Orthodox Church, was not able to attend the enthronement of Russia’s new Patriarch, because of the health condition. Ilia II left for Germany on February 4 for medical examination, the Georgian patriarchate said.

Patriarch Kirill told the Georgian delegation that relations between the two Churches should not depend on political developments between the two countries.

“Orthodox unity is not simple words,” the Russian Patriarch said. “We can help our nations by joint efforts.”

“We hope and his [Russian Patriarch’s] words confirm it that the Russian Church will still continue to support the unity of the Georgian Church and we hope that he will help us to achieve actual and not fictitious restoration of functioning of the Georgian church there [in breakaway regions], that will promote the unification of our country,” Metropolitan Gerasim of the Georgian Orthodox Church, who was in the delegation, told journalists after the meeting.

Issues related with the canonical jurisdiction of Abkhazia and South Ossetia – breakaway regions, which Russia has recognized – are yet to be resolved.

Before becoming the Patriarch, Metropolitan Kirill, who chaired foreign relations department of the Moscow Patriarchate, said in November, 2008 that canonical jurisdiction limbo in which these two regions remained was “the most painful and the most difficult issue, which may not be resolved today or tomorrow.”

He told Russia’s Vesti news channel in November that the Georgian church in fact was not able “to take spiritual care” of parish in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, because of the political situation. Metropolitan Kirill said “some kind of temporary, transition solution” should be found to this problem.

www.civil.ge/eng/article.php?id=20372

Source: Civil.Ge, February 2009

On February 4, the mission met with a group of Russian lawmakers.

“I think that the mood is very constructive; there are no foregone conclusions; there was readiness to accept the Russian side’s arguments,” MP Konstantin Kosachev, the chairman of the Russian State Duma’s foreign affairs committee, said after the meeting. “I think that our position has been heard and what is the most important, it seemed to me that the mission will not only focus on fact-finding, but also on setting out recommendations.”

“Today it is important to gather the facts and documentary evidence,” MP Sergei Markov said after the meeting. “Of course, Russia is cooperating [with the mission], we are holding meetings… I think that Ossetians and Abkhazians will also cooperate with them upon our request.”

www.civil.ge/eng/article.php?id=20376

Source: Civil.Ge, February 2009

Distribution of Parliamentary Seats

One of the key aspects of the proposal is to change the current system of electing the legislative body, wherein half of the lawmakers in the 150-seat parliament are elected through the majoritarian system in 75 single-mandate constituencies and another half – through the party-list, proportional system.

The New Rights and Republicans have instead offered to elect 100 lawmakers through the proportional, party-list system and remaining 50 – through so called “regional proportional system”

Electing majoritarian MPs through ‘regional proportional lists’ allows parties or election blocs to nominate several candidates in each constituency (the number of seats available would depend on the size of the constituency). Seats in the parliament, under this system, would be allocated proportionally, based on the votes received by parties in a particular constituency. The proposal also envisages leaving five majoritarian seats allocated for Abkhazia (three seats) and for South Ossetia (two seats) vacant before the restoration of the territorial integrity. This proposal was pushed by the opposition before the May 21, 2008 parliamentary elections, but at that time it was rejected by the ruling National Movement party.

New Arbitration System

The proposal offers setting up of a nine-member arbitration board, which will deal with the election complaints filed by the parties.

The board, according to the proposal, should be composed by “highly respected and trusted” individuals, including from the international organizations.

Such board, if established, will deprive the Central Election Commission (CEC) authority to address the electoral complaints.

According to the proposal the decision of the board should be final, which can not be appealed to the common courts. Only the decision related with the final vote tally can be appealed to the Constitutional Court, according to the document.

Election Administrations

The New Rights and Republicans have also offered to compose the election administrations of all three levels – precinct election commissions, district election commissions and central election commission – by representatives of the political parties based on “a parity principle.”

The proposal, however, does not specify an exact mechanism of composition.

Other Technical Aspects

The proposal envisages installing CCTV cameras at all the polling stations and full and unrestricted access to video recordings.

According to the current rule political parties or election observers can only request access to 15-minute portion of the video recordings.

The New Rights and Republicans have also offered to change the current identity cards with magnetic stripe cards to prevent multiple voting through faked IDs.

The opposition parties have been alleging prior to the May 21, 2008 parliamentary elections and on election day that fake IDs had been issued by the authorities to allow multiple voting. The opposition also claimed that after checking the voter list provided by the CEC, it found cases where more than a dozen and in some cases up to 80 voters were registered in one and the same apartment. International observation mission under the OSCE aegis said in its report that it could “substantiate some of these cases.”

The proposal has been sent to other political parties, including to the ruling party and international organizations.

“It means that we are ready to launch a dialogue with everyone” on the matter, including with the ruling party, Davit Berdzenishvili of the Republican Party said at a press conference on February 4.

Mamuka Katsitadze of the New Rights party said that adoption of new election rules was essential for holding early presidential and parliamentary elections.

MP from the ruling party, Akaki Minashvili, said on February 4, that the ruling party was open for a dialogue on the matter. He, however, also said that the next elections were only scheduled for 2010 – local self-governance elections, ruling out holding of early polls this year.

In mid-December, Davit Bakradze, the Parliamentary Chairman, announced about the plans to set up an all-inclusive special group to work on the amendments into the election code. The group has not been established yet.

www.civil.ge/eng/article.php?id=20377

Source: Civil.Ge, February 2009

Saakashvili’s remarks were made in response to his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev’s statement that Moscow has always remained and will remain “committed to centuries-old tradition of good neighborly and friendly relations with its close Georgian people.”

Medvedev also said in his written address to the congress of Georgians living in Russia: “We sincerely want to see stable, independent and genuinely democratic Georgian state; the state, which lives in peace and security, which has friendly relations with other states.”

The Russian leadership has said previously that they would not negotiate directly with the Georgian President and Medvedev even said in September: “President Saakashvili no longer exists in our eyes; he is a political corpse.”

“I want to tell the Russian government and the President: if they want to talk with the Georgian people, they should talk with the government, elected by Georgia and we can talk on any issue after Russia de-occupies the Georgian territories and after it retreats from the occupied territories,” he said.

Saakashvili spoke mockingly about the congress of Georgian community in Russia held on February 3, calling it “so called gathering of Georgians, organized by the Kremlin.”

“They [Russia] say that there are million Georgians living in Russia – although there are not as many – and in a 310-seat hall they could hardly gather 191 participants from all over Russia,” Saakashvili said. “They could not even fill the smallest hall in Moscow and the Russian President changed his decision last minute and did not go to the event”

“I want to thank all the Georgian citizens of all ethnicity who went from Georgia and are now in Russia; they acted in dignity… Just imagine, they [the Russian authorities] have in fact failed to find anyone – although there have been rare exceptions – who would have confronted own country [Georgia] and this amounts to civil heroism in today’s Russia,” he added.

The congress was organized by Mikheil Khubutia, head of the Union of Georgians in Russia. Khubutia, who says that President Medvedev is his friend, told journalists on February 4 that while Russia can live without Georgia, it will be difficult for the latter to live without Russia.

Khubutia said in a recent interview with the Georgian television that he had invited some of the officials from the Georgian government, including Iulon Gagoshidze, the state minister for diaspora issues; the latter declined to participate. Nestan Kirtadze of the opposition Labor Party participated in the event.

In December the Russian daily, Kommersant, reported that President Saakashvili had an attempt to establish contacts with the Russian authorities through intermediaries and met with Khubutia in Munich in November for that purpose. There has been no official confirmation of the report from the Georgian authorities.

www.civil.ge/eng/article.php?id=20373

Source: Civil.Ge, February 2008

EU foreign ministers formally approved the deployment of a 200-strong civilian observer mission to Georgia, meant to verify the pullback of Russian troops to positions in the breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia held before the outbreak of fighting on August 7.

They appointed Pierre Morel, a French diplomat with long experience in the region, as a special envoy to oversee the EU’s diplomatic drive and coordinate the bloc’s position ahead of peace talks due to start next month in Geneva.

Ministers gave broad approval to a proposed three-year EU aid package of €500 million ($700 million) to help Georgia recover from the conflict and agreed the EU should host an international donors’ conference to raise still more money for the battered Caucasus nation.

“The European Union must undertake a very significant financial effort,” said EU External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner. “We have to go beyond the ongoing assistance.”

She said the “stability and growth package” designed to run from 2008-2010 will assist people displaced by the conflict, help to rebuild, support Georgia’s economic stability and finance the construction of new infrastructure. Ferrero-Waldner told reporters she hoped the money from the EU’s central budget would be matched by contributions from individual EU nations, bringing the bloc’s total aid to at least €1 billion ($1.4 billion).

The EU said a donors’ conference will be held in Brussels, probably in mid-October.

Ferrero-Waldner said the European Commission hoped to spend €100 million on Georgia by the end of this year, compared to the pre-conflict average of €30 million a year.

The EU observer mission is expected to last at least one year, and cost €31 million. France was to provide the biggest contingent of the unarmed observers — around 70.

Russia says the mission should be limited to parts of Georgia outside South Ossetia and Abkhazia. However Javier Solana, the EU’s foreign policy chief, said the mission should eventually be deployed throughout the country including the separatist run provinces.

Morel, 64, is currently the EU’s special envoy to Central Asia. He served as French ambassador to Russia and Georgia in the 1990s.
advertisement

It was not clear how much of the EU aid money would be spent in South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

The EU faces a dilemma in dealing with those regions. Excluding them from the package would reinforce their separation from the rest of Georgia. However, Russia insists that any aid be coordinated with the separatist regimes, which are not recognized by EU nations.

Source: CNN, September 2008

edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/09/15/georgia.eu.aid.ap/index.html

Mikhail Saakashvili said Georgia and NATO should work hard to show that Georgia is on track to join what he called the “Euro-Atlantic family.”

That is Georgia’s proper and rightful place, he said.

NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, also speaking in Georgia’s capital, criticized Russia but spoke cautiously in remarks before a NATO-Georgia meeting.

De Hoop Scheffer and ambassadors from every NATO member converged on Tbilisi, Georgia’s capital, in a show of support for the former Soviet republic. The U.S. strongly supports NATO membership for Georgia, but Germany and others dependent on Russian energy supplies have balked at taking an action sure to infuriate the Kremlin.

The NATO chief said the alliance will assess “how to further enhance” the partnership between NATO and Georgia.

The trip to Georgia, scheduled before the war, comes as Russia is strengthening its grip on South Ossetia and Abkhazia, another separatist region of Georgia, in a challenge to Georgia’s NATO hopes.

Russia, which borders Georgia to the north, objects strenuously to having Georgia join the Western military alliance — an opposition underscored last month when Russia crushed Georgia in a war over Georgia’s separatist, Russian-oriented province of South Ossetia.

As the ambassadors arrived in Tbilisi, Georgia’s capital, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev warned the West that any sanctions imposed on Russia over the war would backfire.

“It’s senseless to pressure Russia with sanctions,” Medvedev said at a meeting with Russian business leaders. “They can shut a couple of sources of (revenue) to a banana republic and make its situation dramatic. It won’t work like that here.”

Without mentioning any specific nation, Medvedev warned that attempts to punish Russia would also hurt the West. “Sanctions is a weapon that will backfire,” he said.

And he dismissed calls by some Western diplomats to bar Russia from joining the World Trade Organization. Russia would like to join but will not be pressured into concessions, Medvedev said.

“WTO isn’t a carrot; it entails a lot of difficult obligations,” he said. “And if we do it, let us do it in a normal way without them trying to scare us.”

The two-day NATO visit is expected to include the first meeting of a new NATO-Georgia Commission set up to oversee future ties.

De Hoop Scheffer said last week that NATO wants to show support for Georgia after Russia’s use of “disproportionate force” against its much smaller neighbor. He has stressed NATO’s condemnation of Russia’s recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states.

Following the war, NATO said it was making closer ties with Russia dependent on the withdrawal of Russian forces to the positions they held before the conflict, as required by a cease-fire agreement.

Russia has promised to withdraw from positions in Georgia proper next month. But it has said it will keep nearly 8,000 troops in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, although the U.S. and European Union that would violate the cease-fire.

Saakashvili, a U.S. ally, has angered Russia by seeking NATO membership. In April, NATO declined to grant Georgia a road map — a detailed plan for achieving membership — but said Georgia would eventually join.

A review of Georgia’s request for a road map is scheduled for December.

The war has deepened NATO’s dilemma over Georgia — how to handle the membership aspirations of a country with large chunks of territory controlled by Russia and its separatist allies.

NATO members have been united in their criticism of Russia, but less so on Georgia’s future.

The United States has pushed for NATO to take a key step toward granting Georgia membership in April.

Russia seems confident that Georgia is not close to joining NATO.

“Georgia is much farther away from membership in NATO than it used to be,” Sergei Karaganov, a political analyst with close Kremlin connections, said in Moscow.

Anatol Lieven, a senior research fellow at the New America Foundation in Washington, said European countries and the United States would be unlikely to fight Russia on Georgia’s behalf, even if joined NATO.

“Georgia would be crushingly defeated and NATO would be humiliated,” he said.

The war began Aug. 7, when Georgian forces launched an attack to regain control of South Ossetia. Russian forces repelled the offensive and pushed deep into Georgia.

After a partial withdrawal last month, Russia pulled out of the Black Sea port of Poti and other positions in western Georgia over the weekend as part of an additional agreement reached by French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who brokered the original EU peace plan.

Moscow has pledged to withdraw all other forces now on Georgian territory outside South Ossetia and Abkhazia within 10 days of the deployment of EU monitors who are supposed to be in place by Oct. 1. But it is pushing to keep Western observers away from South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

At a tent camp housing more than 2,000 displaced people in Gori, a central Georgian city near South Ossetia, families wondered Sunday whether they would ever return home for good.

Nanuli Okroperidze, 45, who lives in Tent 85 with her mother, four children, two grandchildren and two other relatives, said her home is one of many in her mostly ethnic Georgian village in South Ossetia that were torched.

“It’s gone, burned to ashes,” she said.

Source: The Associated Press, September 2008

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080915/ap_on_re_eu/georgia_nato

The Kremlin controls much of the Russian media, and Putin occasionally meets with friendly groups of senior journalists to answer questions and guide news coverage. On Aug. 29, though, for the first time in five years, he also invited the editor in chief of Echo Moskvy, the only national radio station that routinely broadcasts opposition voices.

For several minutes, according to people who attended the session or were briefed about it, Putin berated the editor in front of his peers, criticizing Echo’s coverage of the war with Georgia and reading from a dossier of transcripts to point out what he considered errors.

“I’m not interested in who said these things,” one participant quoted Putin telling the editor, Alexei Venediktov. “You are responsible for everything that goes on at the radio station. I don’t know who they are, but I know who you are.”

The message to the 30 or so media executives at the gathering was clear: With Russia occupying parts of Georgia and locked in perhaps its most serious conflict with the West since the Cold War, they should be especially vigilant against reporting anything that the government might find objectionable.

Four months after Putin handed the presidency to his protégé Dmitry Medvedev, mildly raising expectations that the Kremlin might relax its grip on political life here, the continuing standoff with the West over Georgia has largely ended that talk and brought fears that a turn toward increased repression might be underway instead.

Prosecutors have opened a criminal investigation into whether Echo Moskvy has broadcast “extremist” speech. A leading opposition figure in the troubled Ingushetia region has been shot dead by police.

And a campaign to undermine the reputations of nongovernmental organizations seems to be picking up. In remarks to a group of foreign academics last week, Putin said Russia needed to act in Georgia because “certain nongovernmental organizations in certain republics” were using the crisis to justify separatism in the Russian part of the Northern Caucasus region.

The domestic fallout of the Georgian war can also be seen in the caution and anxiety of journalists, civic activists and others who work near the boundaries of what the Kremlin tolerates — and who little more than a month ago were optimistic those limits might be expanding.

“When Medvedev took office, we hoped for a new thaw,” said Mariana Maximovskaya, deputy editor of Ren-TV, a station that often broadcasts voices critical of the government. “But after the Georgian war, people are now very concerned about a new tightening inside the country.”

Yuri Samodurov, former curator of the Andrei Sakharov Museum, an institution devoted to honoring the late Soviet dissident, said a prominent filmmaker recently backed out of a plan to produce a documentary for the museum about the Soviet era. “Before the war, she agreed to do it, but she told me she is afraid now,” he said. “The situation is changing, and she felt it changing.”

The museum is also being more cautious, he said. For years, a banner protesting Russia’s long war in Chechnya hung outside the building. After the invasion of Georgia, Samodurov wanted to put up another tough message, but the museum decided to take down the old banner and not replace it. “It’s just a bad time to do it,” said Igor Veritiny, the museum’s acting director. “We’re trying to be careful.”

During eight years in office, Putin consolidated control of the government, media and big business. Many analysts say he remains Russia’s paramount leader despite stepping down as president to make way for Medvedev, the low-profile bureaucrat and former law professor he chose as successor.

After winning an election carefully scripted by the Kremlin, Medvedev immediately appointed Putin prime minister.

But even as Medvedev positioned himself as a Putin loyalist, he raised hopes in some quarters with promises to fight corruption, help small businesses and champion human rights and the rule of law. In an early move, Medvedev established a think tank, the Institute of Contemporary Development, to help him develop domestic policy and gathered a group of liberal-minded scholars who favored a program of economic and democratic reforms.

“We had hopes in the spring that we were entering a new stage,” said Evgeny Gontmakher, an economist whom Medvedev invited to serve on the board of the institute. “We hoped for some kind of democratic transition.”

Gontmakher said he and others thought that Medvedev was trying to build a base of political support for such action, and that Putin had stayed on as prime minister to help him. But the Georgian crisis has altered the political calculus, he said, making it more likely the leadership will put off reforms and strengthening influential officials and state corporations resisting change.

“It’s a dangerous situation,” Gontmakher said, warning that with economic problems on the horizon — industrial growth has slowed, and inflation is climbing fast — Medvedev and Putin might be tempted to use the crisis in Georgia to divert public anger over the economy.

Some analysts still think a thaw is possible under Medvedev, arguing that he has gained political capital during the Georgian crisis by positioning himself as a tough, decisive leader. Although Putin remains far more popular, Medvedev’s approval ratings have jumped, and he has received more time on national television than Putin.
ad_icon

But others say the crisis has highlighted Medvedev’s lack of clout, especially after he signed a cease-fire agreement with Georgia and then appeared unable or unwilling to get his military to comply. Gontmakher said officials have told him that Putin has been the driving force behind the key decisions during the crisis.

Yevgenia Albats, a prominent journalist who hosts a show on Echo Moskvy, said that although Medvedev has been getting media attention, he has looked like Putin’s press secretary. Democratic reforms, she added, will be difficult to adopt because the Kremlin has portrayed the West as the enemy in the Georgian crisis, and reforms are associated with the West.

“All hope is gone,” she said. “Basically, most of the liberals are trying to figure out if we are about to go into a repressive period in our history. It means what’s left of the free media may disappear. We don’t know if Echo Moskvy will exist a month from now.”

Venediktov, Echo Moskvy’s editor in chief, confirmed he had been called on the carpet by Putin in Sochi. He said Putin pointed out problems with the station’s coverage of the Georgian war, including a statement by one reporter referring to Russian soldiers as enemy forces and a report about troop movements based only on Georgian accounts.

“It was unpleasant to be publicly reprimanded, and it was even more unpleasant to have to admit mistakes, because there were mistakes, unfortunately,” he said, adding that Putin didn’t single out any journalists or make any demands.

Venediktov said that he disagreed with some of Putin’s complaints and was allowed to explain his positions, and that Putin expressed his displeasure with the radio station even more forcefully in a private session. Venediktov declined to further describe that conversation.

The station continues to operate as usual and broadcast voices critical of the Kremlin. But Venediktov acknowledged that “the situation is complicated” by heightened official scrutiny. “It means we must work even more professionally, even more accurately,” he said.

A day after meeting Putin, Venediktov barred a dissident politician, Valeriya Novodvorskaya, from appearing on Echo Moskvy for the rest of the year after she made on-air remarks that appeared to defend the Chechen separatist responsible for the 2004 Beslan school siege that left 334 people dead. He also announced that Yulia Latynina, a program host and critic of the Kremlin, would be off the air and out of the country on business and vacation for several weeks.

Latynina is the focus of an investigation by prosecutors in the southern province of Dagestan examining whether the radio service violated laws prohibiting “public incitement of extremist activity through the mass media,” the official RIA Novosti news agency reported Aug. 27.

According to two journalists, the pressure on Echo Moskvy intensified after the meeting with Putin. Top government officials reacted angrily to its coverage of the slaying of Magomed Yevloyev, the opposition leader in Ingushetia province who was shot in the head in a police vehicle Aug. 31.

Authorities have maintained that Yevloyev was shot after trying to seize a gun from an officer in the car with him. But opposition leaders say the killing is an example of how the Georgian crisis has emboldened hard-liners in the government apparatus. A colleague of Yevloyev’s, Magomed Hazbiyev, was heard on Echo Moskvy accusing the Russian government of committing genocide in Ingushetia and saying that if it continued, “we need to ask Europe or America to have us disconnected from Russia.”

Opposition activists said they thought that Murat Zyazikov, the former KGB official who is the Kremlin-appointed president of Ingushetia and has been accused of waging a campaign of abductions and killings against his critics, seized on the Georgian crisis as a chance to move against Yevloyev and others with impunity. Hazbiyev, for example, said Zyazikov’s security forces fired machine guns at his home just days after the Georgian war began.

Addressing a news conference on Sept. 5, Zyazikov denied there was any unrest in Ingushetia and accused the United States of trying to “destabilize” the republic just as he said it had done in Georgia.

Hazbiyev and other opposition activists in Ingushetia have gathered tens of thousands of signatures on a petition calling on Medvedev to replace Zyazikov. But Zyazikov is considered a strong ally of Putin’s, and there has been no action on the request.

Source: The Washington Post, September 2008

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/14/AR2008091402249_2.html?hpid=moreheadlines

Russian soldiers pack up their gear at the Georgian checkpoint in Poti on Sept. 11.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Andrei Nesterenko said the peacekeeping forces will be withdrawn over the next seven days from five spots between the port city of Poti and the town of Senaki farther inland, Interfax said.

Nesterenko said the move was in line with Russia’s agreement this week to completely withdraw from Georgia, with the exception of the two disputed territories of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

The agreement came after French President Nicolas Sarkozy traveled to Moscow and met with his Russian counterpart, Dmitry Medvedev.

The September 8 agreement also called for 200 international monitors to be deployed to South Ossetia.

Russia said Saturday, however, that its forces would remain in a “security zone” around South Ossetia and Abkhazia — a zone that is actually inside Georgia.

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said the goal of remaining in the zone is to prevent Georgia from launching any offensive in the territories, and that Russia expects the international monitors to take over responsibility in the zone once they arrive.

“If that is done, Russia will honor all of its obligations” and withdraw from the security zone, Putin said in an interview in the French newspaper Le Figaro. “But it is necessary that the European Union also fulfills its obligations.”

The conflict began in early August after Georgia’s military moved to secure South Ossetia, sparking the intervention of Russia, which pushed its troops deep into Georgia proper. Some Russian troops have remained in Georgia ever since.

Source: CNN, September 2008

edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/09/13/russia.georgia.withdrawal/index.html

The Georgian Ministry of Defense said on September 3 that Alexandre Osepaishvili, the deputy chief of staff of the armed forces, had been replaced by Devi Chankotadze. The latter was the commander of an artillery brigade of the land forces before his new appointment. He has been replaced in his previous post by Vakhtang Maisuradze.

Mamuka Balakhadze, the commander of land forces, has been replaced by Zurab Agladze.

Davit Aptsiauri, the commander of the national guard, has also been dismissed. The national guard is in charge of reserve troops. Many accounts - from reservists themselves and eyewitnesses - have been circulating about the chaos and uncoordinated nature of the mobilisation and deployment of reservists to Gori and other areas close to the frontline in the early days of the conflict.

“Those who have failed to fulfill their duties will of course be dismissed, or downgraded,” Batu Kutelia, the deputy defense minister, told Rustavi 2 TV on September 3. “Evaluation is ongoing following combat activities about how systems worked.

Davit Nairashvili was appointed as deputy chief of staff of the Georgian armed forces, the Defense Ministry said on September 12. Nairashvili, who was commander of the air forces, replaced Giga Tatishvili.

Also on September 12, President Saakashvili promoted Davit Nairashvili from Colonel’s rank into Brigadier General, the MoD said.

Source: Civil.Ge, September 2008

www.civil.ge/eng/article.php?id=19402