Another one gone

Last October I wrote about a meeting I attended at which a very courageous Russian (well, half Chechnyan) journalist and human rights activist, a friend of the late Anna Politkovskaya, spoke. While I was not over-impressed by the organizers of the meeting, Raw in War (Reach All Women in War) and, indeed, had a somewhat tart exchange of views with Mariana Katzarova of that outfit, I thought Natalya Estemirova was one of the most courageous and inspiring people I had come across for a long time.

Well, she no longer is. This morning Ms Estemirova was kidnapped from her home in Grozny and a few hours later her bullet-riddled body was found in neighbouring Ingushetia. President Medvedev has declared himself to be outraged and promised a high-level enquiry. Yeah, right. Like the high-level enquiry into Anna Politkovskaya's murder or Stanislav Merkelov's murder or, even, Galina Starovoitova's murder. Indeed, the many other murders, beatings, kidnappings and tortures of journalists, investigators and human rights activists in Russia.

It would appear that Ms Estemirova was collecting information for the Russian organization Memorial, that tries to establish the truth about Soviet crimes of the past as well as the more recent ones, about the activity of the government-backed militias in Chechnya and the surrounding republics. It is reasonable to assume that her murder was carried out by one of these militias though the involvement of Russian troops is not to be excluded.

RIP, Natalya Estemirova, a brave and irreplaceable lady.

COMMENT THREAD

The wise and all-seeing leader

The late unlamented (by most people) Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin was during his lifetime often describedthe world's greatest leader as well as being completely omniscient. Every now and then he would leave the cares of state and his never-ceasing watch over the people behind and would unbend his mind to put scientists or linguists or agricultural experts right about whatever it was they were wrong about. Woe betide anyone who ignored the great sage's guidance.

Even Stalin was not quite as hands-on as the former President, now Prime Minister, Putin appears to be. They do seem to have one thing in common – an ability to get the western media all excited by their activity. The Russian media has little choice.

The story that has convulsed the MSM a couple of days ago was that of Vladimir Putin and the Siberian tiger. I need not spend too much time on the actual story as it was written up everywhere but the pictures are worth looking at and one or two questions do arise.

The account in the Sydney Morning Herald is as good as any other.

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has tried to boost his macho image by shooting tranquilisers at a Siberian tiger.

Putin, dressed in combat fatigues, was with a team of wildlife researchers in the Ussuri reserve in Russia's far east when the tiger escaped its harness and headed towards a television crew.

Armed with a tranquiliser gun, Putin shot at the tiger, which soon slumped to the ground.

Amazing. There was nobody better qualified there to deal with the escaped tiger either before or after it had been shot with a tranquilizer gun? I mean, do they all need careful instructions on how to deal with the problem? That is certainly the impression one gets from the second photograph where the omniscient one appears to be instructing someone else on the best way to deal with the stunned tigress.

Apparently, the tranquilizer worked immediately. Sheesh! That's superior Russian technology for you. How long does something like that take normally? About 20 minutes, I have been told.

The Aussies seem a little sceptical as one reads the story.

It seems that not a summer goes by without some macho image of the former President, now Prime Minister appearing in the media. In this he has long outstripped Stalin and his henchmen as well as his successors who usually preferred to appear in jolly poses, perhaps post-hunting but with children and happy friends and family members. Our Vlad does not seem to like that. When did we last see him with his family, just enjoying himself, not throwing judo opponents over his shoulder or riding bare-chested with a knife stuck in his belt or brandishing a tranquilizer gun?

Why on earth was he wearing combat fatigues anyway? Is this all part of the message he is trying to convey to the Russian people: the country is constantly at war with its neighbours, all of whom are her enemies and are merely thinking of invading as soon as possible?

Meanwhile, there is trouble in Ingushetiya. (That's next door to Chechnya in north Caucasus.)

The owner of the embattled opposition web site Ingushetiya.ru was killed Sunday after being detained by police, and his supporters promised massive protests that could lead to a sharp escalation in violence in the restive region.

Magomed Yevloyev, a prominent opposition member and staunch critic of Ingush President Murat Zyazikov, was detained in Ingushetia's main city of Nazran as he stepped off a plane from Moscow, his lawyer and friend Kaloi Akhilgov said by telephone.

The police maintain it was an accident that happened while Yevloyev tried to wrestle an assault rifle away from a police officer in the police car. In the process he was accidentally shot in the head. I am a little surprised they did not go for the suicide explanation.

Other people give different accounts:

Ingush opposition activist Magomed Khazbiyev said Yevloyev was found lying near a Nazran hospital with a bullet in his temple, Interfax reported.

He died during an operation at the hospital, said Vladimir Markin, a spokesman for the Investigative Committee in the Prosecutor General's Office. The Investigative Committee has opened an investigation into the death that might lead to charges being filed against the local police, Markin said, Interfax reported.

As they say, you pays your money and you takes your choice.

The protest that had started during Mr Yevloyev's funeral was broken up by baton-wielding police though the police are denying that as well.

President Medvedev, meanwhile, possibly to show that he is as tough as his predecessor, now Prime Minister, has announced that President Saakashvili is a "political corpse" and should, presumably, be given a decent burial. Whatever one may think of President Saakashvili and his ability to withstand Russian provocation, the fact remains that he was elected by the people of Georgia. Therefore, despite the many Western comments about him being the wrong person in that position because the Kremlin does not like it, the fact remains that Georgia is no longer a Russian colony.

Needless to say, the whole mess is America's fault (but President Prime Minister Putin will solve it all with his tranquilizer gun) and there was praise for the European Union, which refused to impose sanctions, though did suspend talks on a strategic pact until Russia withdraws her troops from Georgia. Apparently there have been suggestions that those troops will be withdrawn. We have, I believe, been here before.

The BBC Russian Service reports that Georgia has broken off diplomatic relations with Russia and employees of the Russian embassy will be leaving Tbilisi. There is also a brief report that Vice-President Cheney is about to visit Azerbaijan, Georgia and Ukraine.

Turkey has been complaining that there are delays for its goods at Russian border crossings, a move that is seen as a "punishment" because the country has dared to allow "US warships carrying aid to Georgia to pass through the Turkish straits, which connect the Mediterranean to the Black Sea" and is thinking about retaliatory gestures.

Not so, said Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who is visiting Istanbul.

This is not an action directed against Turkey; Turkey is not being singled out. There can be no politics involved in trade.

Of course not. And the best person to subdue an escaped tigress is a country's President Prime Minister.

Concentrates the mind

I do not like drawing inexact historical parallels but the news that Poland and the USA will shortly sign (if, indeed, have not already done so, as the BBC Russian Service says) that agreement for setting up a defence shield made me smile (as well as I can do so after a very painful session in the dentist's chair).

The plan would see the US base 10 missile interceptors in Poland in exchange for help strengthening Polish defences, said PM Donald Tusk.

Of course, the parallels with 1938/9 are not really that. It was the Poles who were dragging their feet this time but I imagine the argument about strengthening Polish defences came to the fore in those negotiations.

Sarkozy is pleased

It seems that Presidents Sarkozy and Medvedev have agreed on a six-point peace plan that the Georgians will be required to sign. As Sarkozy was supposed to have gone to Moscow with the European plan that President Saakashvili already signed yesterday, one can only assume that there had been some change or substitution of plans.

Moscow Times reports that the Russians want Georgia to agree to a cease-fire (which they requested two days ago), a return of their troops to their bases and the continuing presence of Russian troops peacekeepers in the two break-away regions. This cannot be all as these terms merely restore that famous status quo ante.

What are the other three points? If Russia is happy to restore matters to what they were at the beginning of last week the whole expedition becomes questionable. Did they get a bigger mauling than anybody had realized?

Sarkozy also emphasised that the South Ossetians and Abkhazians should be asked whether they want to be part of Georgia. The answer almost certainly will be no. On the other hand, will they be asked whether they want to be part of Russia, which seems to be their fate? I predict serious military problems in South Ossetia within a year.

The BBC Russian Service website reports that President Saakashvili has signed the document that Presidents Sarkozy and Medvedev had put together. (Where is former President, now Prime Minister Putin, we ask.)

The BBC World Service is cautious, remarking that some of the details, where the devil is, no doubt, are still up for discussion. Both sides are still accusing the other of ruthless murder of civilians though only the Russians have used the word "genocide", hoping, presumably, to remind their own people yet again of World War II. After all, much of Putin's foreign policy has been conducted with an eye on domestic population - win or lose, he had to appear tough.

The Russian Service lists the six items as read out by President Medvedev and fairly anodyne they are, too [my translation]:

eschew all use of force

final cessation of military activity (at this stage it was still temporary as there had been no Georgian signature)

free access to humanitarian aid (NGOs have not been allowed into Chechnya - will they be allowed into South Ossetia under its new status?)

Georgian armed forces return to their permanent bases

Russian forces return to their positions before the start of the military activity; Russian peacekeeping forces will remain and institute additional security measures until trust between Georgians and Ossetians is restored

there will be an international discussion of the status of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as well of the two regions' security [something Russia has always shown herself to be against in the past]

So far, none of this seems worth the trouble the Russians have gone to. Although President Sarkozy seems certain that the Russian government will not demand a change of government in Georgia and Russian forces will not occupy any part of Georgia proper, President Medvedev's language about his opponent remains extreme and personally abusive.

Later on today, I expect, there will be some more twists.

UPDATE: According to Reuters, the reference to talks on the future status of South Ossetia and Abkhazia have been removed. It probably was not all that important to Medvedev, anyway. Saakashvili is talking about international peacekeepers replacing Russian ones in South Ossetia. Medvedev is saying nothing about that.

So what now?

The news is that Russia has ceased its military action. Or has announced that she has done so, though there are still reports of fighting. It is not quite clear what that means, since before doing so, its forces penetrated far into Georgian territory. What will they demand in return for taking them out and, indeed, will they take them out?

The whole subject of South Ossetian independence has disappeared into a memory hole. Yesterday I took part in a discussion on the BBC Russian Service, together with Ariel Cohen of the Heritage Foundation and a Russian political analyst and former member of the Duma (whose name I managed not to catch, which is really annoying but had something to do with me having to adjust my earphones).

The latter very calmly informed us all that there was no question of going back to status quo ante because only Russian troops (I don’t think he bothered with the words peacekeepers or peacemakers) could guarantee the two break-away republics’ security and they were staying. Under no circumstances would international peacekeepers be allowed in.

Nor did he argue when I made the point that this was not about South Ossetian independence. Of course, not. Only those who are wilfully blind can say so.

Indeed, the gentleman in question remained very calm and full of certainty throughout the discussion, losing his temper only when I started enumerating the various ways in which the West can respond without any military intervention. “And who are you going to buy gas from,” he asked me angrily. “Lots of people,” replied I airily. “Who are you going to sell it to if we don’t buy it? There are no pipelines to China.” This did not make him very happy.

While we are on the subject of what the West can do to prevent attacks on other countries (the idea that Russia will do no such thing now that it has taught Georgia a lesson can be believed only by people who also think that stars are God’s daisy chains), here is a posting on a blog that has recently come my way, which makes me look like a real ninny.

What we could not find out was Russia’s endgame. What is it they want? We still don’t know, though according to the BBC Russian Service website [it’s in Russian but I think there is a way of having the article translated] some experts are saying that Russia has achieved her aims. Others are more cautious and suggesting we should wait and see.

On the whole, waiting and seeing sounds like an excellent idea. Not least we should hear what it is Mr Putin or his teddy bear, Mr Medvedev are going to demand. Simply asserting that they have punished the aggressor and reasserted the security of the civilian population (something that Mr Putin cares about desperately) as well as of the peacemakers is not the end. There will be more demands.

Meanwhile President Saakashvili has announced to around 50,000 people in Tbilisi that Georgia is leaving the Commonwealth of Independent States, Russia’s post-Soviet attempt to control the break-away republics.

While the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline appears not to have been damaged (apart from the fire caused by an explosion in Turkey a few days before the hostilities in Georgia began) BP has prudently closed it down for the duration. When they will reopen it might well depend on the separate battle that is being waged for the control of the joint Anglo-Russian consortium TNK-BP.

We can but speculate why Russia has decided to end hostilities for the time being, while there is still fighting in Abkhazia. It may be that they do feel that they have taught Georgia a lesson and, in any case, they are in a good position to resume the teaching of that lesson if the Georgians refuse to kiss the rod.

It may be that the Georgian forces fought back with greater vigour than the Russians had expected and there was a sudden worry (which we have speculated on before) of another quagmire like Chechnya. It may be that the angry conversation between President Bush and former President, now Prime Minister, Putin included certain very specific threats possibly to do with ships in the Mediterranean.

As opposed to that last point Russia may well have reassured herself that the West will do nothing if she proceeds to reconquer the old Soviet colonies as Putin has always threatened to do and there is no need to do anything else for the moment.

I shall do a separate posting, possibly on the other blog about Russia, her so-called humiliation and the amazing lengths to which her supporters in the West will go to. For the moment, let me just point out that if there has been any humiliation it was that of President Medvedev. He may say that he has decided to end the hostilities and he may look solemn during his meeting with President Sarkozy as the Reuters picture above shows but the whole world has been watching and we know who has been in charge all the time.

As the International Herald Tribune wrote today:

In recent days, Putin has appeared on television with his sleeves rolled up, mingling with refugees on the border with South Ossetia — the very picture of a man of action.

By contrast, Medvedev is shown sitting at his desk in Moscow, giving ceremonial orders to the minister of defense.

"All his liberal speeches which he made in Berlin and elsewhere are forgotten," Rahr, who serves on the German Council on Foreign Relations, said of the new president. "He is playing the game which is designed by Putin."

Yulia L. Latynina, a frequent critic of Putin's government, noted with amusement that on the eve of the conflict in Georgia, when President George W. Bush and Putin were deep in conversation in Beijing at the start of the Olympics, Medvedev was taking a cruise on the Volga River.

"Now he can cruise the Volga for all the remaining years, or can go right to the Bahamas," she wrote in Daily Magazine, a Russian Web site. "I must admit that for the first time in my life I felt admiration for the skill with which Vladimir Putin maintains his power."

What, one cannot help wondering, will happen if the worm or the teddy bear turns?

UPDATE: The announcements were all premature and wait and see remains a good policy. It seems that the Russians are shelling Gori, which is, indeed, Stalin's birth place. More to the point, it is a long way from the disputed territory, some days after the Georgians asked for a cease-fire and a day or so after President Saakashvile agreed to the European plan for negotiations. Of course, it could be that President Medvedev's announcements are not worth the paper they are described on.

It's the same old story

If anyone out there really believed that Russia's attack was about South Ossetia or Kosovo, do get in touch with me. I have a bridge I'd like to sell you. Russia is sweeping into Georgia proper, despite pleas for a cease-fire, and we hear the same question as many heard before: where are our friends?

Get used to it - if Russia bullies anyone, the West keeps schtumm. Georgia will get no help any more than the Balts did, or Poland, or Hungary or Czechoslovakia. We shall see no large demonstrations against blood for oil (and believe me, oil comes into it). The UN will not condemn or do anything. How can it, with Russia on the Security Council?

Something may come out of the US's unreserved condemnation of the aggression (oh, by the way, did the UN approve this and where does international law stand on the Russian attack on Georgia?), which was supported by Senator McCain. Senator Obama waffled about the UN and the international community. This is just to warn everyone.

Can we, at least, offer real help to those who are the next on that list, Ukraine and the Baltic states?

As I look through my various postings and articles about Russia I feel that, once again, I have played the part of Cassandra. Appeasement is never a good idea, particularly if the one you are appeasing is strong only through the folly of its opponents. Yes, Russia looks to her interests and makes no secret of it, though nothing good for the country or its people will come from it getting bogged down in another war in the Caucasus. Nothing good came from the Soviet empire and this will be no different. But the Kremlin cares little as we can see from the little trolls that have cropped up on all the sites and forums (even Facebook, I am told).

The question is, however, is it not time we all looked to our interests. Do we even know what they are?

COMMENT THREAD

The EU moves at its usual speed

The French EU Presidency, we are told by EUObserver, is preparing to call an emergency EU "summit" on the Russia-Georgia "conflict" (when does it become a war?) at Poland's request. This is how the EU functions and why it is impossible to use that organization and any other tranzi for the development of foreign policy, quite apart from the fact that there is no EU policy on the Caucasus.

Russia is bombing cities inside Georgia, including the outskirts of Tbilisi, and has sunk at least one Georgian boat in Georgian waters. Gori is being evacuated and the Baku-Tbilisi oil pipeline has been bombed though not, apparently, put out of action.

The EU, the body that demands that it becomes our sole representative on the international scene is preparing to call an emergency meeting of foreign ministers and this will take place, possibly, on Wednesday. Or possibly not.

"The proposal of [Polish] prime minister Donald Tusk to hold a meeting of the European council at the level of heads of government has been accepted. We don't know the date yet," Polish foreign minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, said at a press briefing in Warsaw on Saturday.

"There is...a possibility a formal summit will take place in Brussels later in the week," Swedish foreign minister, Carl Bildt, told Swedish news agency TT.

It seems that Wednesday will probably be the day after French Foreign Minister, Bernard Kouchner and his Finnish colleague, Alexander Stubb, return from Tbilisi.

Meanwhile, other countries who have a clearer understanding of what Russia might do next, have been speaking up.

Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland called on the European Union and NATO to oppose Russia's "imperialist" policy towards Georgia.

And even countries such as Sweden, which was not part of the Soviet bloc, expressed extreme concern at the conflict, making comparisons to Adolf Hitler's tactics as leader of Nazi Germany.

Russia has in turn been vocal in criticising neighbours such as Ukraine, which it accused of "encouraging" Georgia to attack the separatist region of South Ossetia.

"The EU and NATO must take the initiative and stand up against the spread of imperialist and revisionist policy in the east of Europe," the leaders of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland said in a joint statement.

Ukraine has plenty to worry about, being the next on the shopping list. After all, former President, now Prime Minister, Putin has always made it clear that he intended to restore the Soviet geopolitical territory and, in particular, he was anxious to take back the two biggest ones that got away: Ukraine and Georgia. Obviously, he meant that, if necessary, it will be done by force.

Swedish Foreign Minister, Carl Bildt, has demanded a very strong response from the European Union. That will be a little hard to achieve with Germany being so dependent on Russian gas and with other West European states being more anxious "to stand up to America" than pay attention to what is going on next door to it. Well may Ukraine and the Balts worry.