tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5259082628352435132.post497036927490048248..comments2023-11-05T01:33:49.683-07:00Comments on from Russia with love: THE EMPIRE OF LIE. Part 2. A BLOODY MASQUERADElastochkahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03693705381682951810noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5259082628352435132.post-37517703279368437342009-02-05T08:18:00.000-08:002009-02-05T08:18:00.000-08:00I have felt the same about most of the "color" rev...I have felt the same about most of the "color" revolutions that followed the breakup of the Soviet Union. Except that those in several places have become more extreme than others.<BR/><BR/>I was never comfortable with Saakashvili, and I expected an anti Russian nationalism would be involved, because Russia relationship with Georgia goes back quite a long time. Most of the politicians in the states bordering Russia have used an anti Russian nationalism to cement their own bid for power.<BR/><BR/>You see this happening in the Ukraine, where pretty much a handful of politicians move in and out of office, with no real improvement in the situation in that nation. <BR/><BR/>Either he will not last very long, as other parties in Georgia are beginging to quesion his increasing the powers of the presidency, and he has offered to reduce them in a bid to keep power, but I anticipate that this will eventually blow up in another internal revolution. I do not suppose it will be much different in its anti Russia sentiment, but the change might be a better one.Chernevoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10164753602062259638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5259082628352435132.post-71740132194509539642009-02-05T05:34:00.000-08:002009-02-05T05:34:00.000-08:00This bloody conflict happened because Saakashvivli...This bloody conflict happened because Saakashvivli is a really crazy nationalist.He felt support from US ex-administration and Nato, he was true democratic "ally", like Yuschenko in Ukraine.These organizations practically didn't do anything to prevent this terrible tragedy.<BR/>If other countries didn't supply his regime with weapons it could never happen. And they started to rearm georgian troops soon after the conflict.I don't see any difference between the nationalist Miloshevish or any other and Saakashvili.He's not at Hague court, he is still the president of Georgia...lastochkahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03693705381682951810noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5259082628352435132.post-1160353431979888502009-02-04T18:56:00.000-08:002009-02-04T18:56:00.000-08:00You will get no disagreements with me on the natio...You will get no disagreements with me on the national aspirations of the South Ossetians. One of the primary doctrines of the United Nations at its creation was the issue of self determination. There is no difference between the desire of the Kosavar Albanians to form a separate nation and that of the South Ossetians. There has to a consistancy when it comes to such situations, or the issue of self determination is useless.<BR/><BR/>Then again, the policies of the previous administration in the U.S. are really not the same as the new administration. This is always a problem here, because of the continual switching from one party to the other. Both have decidedly different ideas about these things. <BR/><BR/>I agree with you on this issue completely. I also agree with the Serbians in the northern part of Kosovo. If there are regions that are contiguous with the Republic of Serbia that have a large Serbian majority who wish to be part of Serbia, rather than Kosovo, this also should be respected.<BR/><BR/>If there is a large majority of non Georgians in South Ossetia who do not want to be part of Georgia, but to form their own nation, there is no difference between this and what the Kosovar Albanians wanted. But in the small area, north of the River Ibar the population is something like 95 percent Serbian. Clinging to ancient borders for some, but creating totally artificial nations for others is simply hypocritical, and North Kossovo, being largely Serb, with a clear geographical feature like a river defining a clear border makes the it perfectly reasonable for the Serbs of North Kosovo to have the right to decide they would rather be a part of Serbia than a part of Kosovo.<BR/><BR/>There was no consistant position in the western press with regard to this, because with regard to the situation in South Ossetia, I read in a number of western sources that it was the Georgians who attacked first, and that the Russians in Georgia simply took up defensive positions, and did not fire back at the Georgian troops, but simply took positions where they would not be harmed by Georgian fire. Then they took reasonable steps to get the Georgians out of South Ossetia. As soon as an agreement was brokered, Russia removed its troops and withdrew to a defensive buffer zone between Georgia and South Ossetia, and Georgia and Abkhazia. I think the Russia government has shown considerable restraint. But I expect that the Georgians will break the current agreement eventually.<BR/><BR/>I heard very early on in the western press that the Georgians launched an air attack on the capital city of South Ossetia. Tskhinvali, and that Russia responded to protect both South Ossetians and Russian populations in this country. <BR/><BR/>Also that it has been Georgia that has been continually violating agreements. So the infowar in the west is not all that one sided, regardless of the political positions taken by the previous administration, which is already being very vocal in attacking some of the policies of the new president here in overturning some of their most strongly held political positions with regard on many things. <BR/><BR/>I found out all of what I know about the Georgian attacks on South Ossetia from the western media, primarily because my ability to read Russian and South Ossetian is well, no where near as good as your English. <BR/><BR/>But I was made aware of both sides of the issues by the western press, and was able to draw my own conclusions this way. So the infowar in the western press is not completely one sided. The news media here provided a fairly balance picture of both sides of the issue, and while the previous presidential administration took a rather pro-Georgia position, the press was not very biased about it. Had it been, I dont think I could have formed the opinion I have of the situation.<BR/><BR/><BR/>I am rather completely supportive of the South Ossetian desire for their own national autonomy.Chernevoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10164753602062259638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5259082628352435132.post-58616905960344178562009-02-04T15:30:00.000-08:002009-02-04T15:30:00.000-08:00I read fragments from the book of Avro Manhatan-"T...I read fragments from the book of Avro Manhatan-"The Vatican's genocide" about the usatsha and Rome politics in Balkans during WW2,I know that serbs also wasn't united, there were chetniks.I'm not accusing only one ethnic groupe.<BR/>I just cann't acceppt the western politic of infowar like it happened, for example, in August 2008 during the Georia-Ossetian conflict and double standarts.lastochkahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03693705381682951810noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5259082628352435132.post-4658808307536361902009-02-04T11:40:00.000-08:002009-02-04T11:40:00.000-08:00I was here in the U.S. during the events which led...I was here in the U.S. during the events which led to western involvement. After the previous president got the U.S. involved in the peacekeeping less than three weeks before Clinton took office, there was little taste in the U.S. for getting involved in any peacekeeping missions anywhere. if anything, the United Nations decision to get involved created conditions that resulted in Clinton being put into a position he really didnt want to get into.<BR/><BR/>Milosovic's speeches, rather than sooth non Serbians about how they would be treated in a New Yugoslavia stoked fear,in a "Greater Serbia" first in Slovenia, then Croatia, then Bosnia. Particularly in areas that had no historical connection with Serbia at all. The attempts to include area that were not originally Serbian, but where ethnic Serbs had moved into during the post World War II period is largely responsible for the decisions of Croatian nationalists to move towards the idea of creation of a separate Croatian state. When Milosovic said "wherever there is a Serb, there is Serbia" most of these other states decided that breaking up was the best thing to do. Until 1990, most of the member regions of Yugoslavia had no problem with remaining within a confederation. There were many within the area of Serbia itself who had no problem with keeping the state the same sort of confederation that existed under Tito, when there was at least some semblence of regional autonomy. The Socialist Party of Yugoslavia was more supportive of keeping a Yugoslav State, and this position was completely acceptable to most Croatians and Bosnians. It was the call to create a "Greater Serbia" by Milosovic in his bid for power which created these fears in the other states. The idea of a Yugoslavia did not seem to be the problem. In the bid for power, Milosevic appealed to a Serb nationalism that had no appeal to the other ethnicities of Yugoslavia.<BR/><BR/>It is often said that there is a long history of hate between the various groups in this region when in fact, it is a rather recent phenomenon, which started in the late 19th Century and accelerated during the 1940's.<BR/><BR/>Had the ethnic, nationalistic elements been kept out of the discussions, I think a single Yugoslavia might still exist. The more moderate Serbs had no problem with a confederation, and the Croats and Slovenians concurred. Those who put forth the idea of a strong federation with Serbia retaining control of the other areas was not acceptable to them. Milosevic unfortunately was the proponent of a strong Serbia under which the other ethnic groups would have little regional autonomy and this led to what is now considered the most violent war of the 20th Century. <BR/><BR/>Until 1990, the people the Republics were totally deadlocked over the idea of splitting off from Yugoslavia. <BR/><BR/>When a Croatian was elected to the presidency of Yugoslavia in 1991 blocked the accession of the Croatian representative to his seat (the presidency rotated between ethnic groups to keep the peace) and the Serbian would not allow him to take his position as president of Yugoslavia, as the legal situation called for at the time, the state of Yugoslavia, defacto, no longer existed.<BR/><BR/>Again had the legalities with regard to the sucession to the presidency been followed, it is likely that the state of Yugislavia would still exist. The idea of rotating the presidency among the various ethnicities was about the only thing that held the nation together after the death of Tito, an ethic Croat/Slovenian. Because of Tito's almost complete disregard of ethnicity, Serbs served in many high government positions, which was not looked on kindly by Croats. Yugoslavia was an idea that could only exist if the office of head of state was rotated in this way, and preventing the Croatian president from taking his seat after the prior Serbian president had completed his term in office effectively kicked off the entire period of "ethnic cleansing"Chernevoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10164753602062259638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5259082628352435132.post-57802455124018744662009-02-04T07:52:00.000-08:002009-02-04T07:52:00.000-08:00A lot of terrible thing have occured in the ex-Yug...A lot of terrible thing have occured in the ex-Yugoslavia. There are no groups that can claim innocence.<BR/><BR/>The Croatian author, Slavenka Drakulic has had to become an exile from her own country because she chose to write about the excesses of all of the parties to attrocities during the 1990's that occured in this region, rather than simply write about the Serbs.<BR/><BR/>As If I Am Not There is about crimes against women in the Bosnian War, while They Would Never Hurt a Fly is a book in which she also analyzed her experience overseeing the proceedings and the inmates of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia at The Hague. Both books touch on the same issues that caused her wartime emigration from the home country.<BR/><BR/>These books created such threats against her life, that she was forced to emigrate. She never places blame on one ethnic group in the area, or another, but simply points out that there was blood on every ethic groups hands.<BR/><BR/>Most critical was that she chose to not separate those who perpetrated these acts out as monsters, but as humans, and that some humans are capable of horrific acts. Because she chose not to label them by their ethnicity and noted that there were guilty persons on all sides, she was considered a traitor to Croatia, and her life was continually under threat.<BR/><BR/>An unsigned article in the Croation periodical Globus, named Drakulic and five other women as witches who were raping Croatia, by indentifying the events of the war as the actions of "unidentified males" against women. Drakulic and the others soon started receiving death threats and left their homes.Chernevoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10164753602062259638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5259082628352435132.post-64583886126195659752009-02-04T04:00:00.000-08:002009-02-04T04:00:00.000-08:00Like in the former ex-USSR those (three persons in...Like in the former ex-USSR those (three persons in Belovezhskaya pushcha)who want to break up it, also didn't have support among the population (80% voted against this decision), but they have power and possibility to do it, and strong will to became a kind of apanage prince and to encrich themselves...Halifes for an hour...<BR/>People need and like stability no matter where they live.<BR/>I have a friend of mine from Kosovska Mitrovitsa in my russian blog, I heard terrible things from her.I watched a lot of documentaries about Kosovo.<BR/>This manipulations with facts, lies, infowars didn't surprize me, West always has it's own interests in Balkans.lastochkahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03693705381682951810noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5259082628352435132.post-4415866885568336952009-02-03T13:02:00.000-08:002009-02-03T13:02:00.000-08:00Strange to say, I live in an area that many Bosnia...Strange to say, I live in an area that many Bosnians have moved to as a result of the warfare in the Balkans. Even stranger is that many seem to have prefered the unified Yugoslavia under Josip Broz Tito, than anything that occured after the breakup of Yugoslavia. I found this a bit of a surprise, but after thinking about, it became quite understandable. Those who wanted to break up the modern state of Yugoslavia really didnt have much support among the general citizenry,outside of Slovenia, but those who did happened to have the weapons.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Though Tito was of Croat and Slovenian descent, he had little tolerance for the nationalism exhibited by Croats in Yugoslavia. This was rooted in the sort of pan slavism among southern slavs he supported.<BR/><BR/>In 1980, when he died, I completely anticipated the events that were to follow, and the final breakup of that nation. Tito held it together by sheer force of will, and political cunning. None of the leaders who followed had the same abilities.Chernevoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10164753602062259638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5259082628352435132.post-89639272418969008912009-02-03T09:49:00.000-08:002009-02-03T09:49:00.000-08:00The entire set of events in the Balkans is a testi...The entire set of events in the Balkans is a testiment to how otherwise normal individuals behave during rather non-normal conditions.<BR/><BR/>Neighbors who in peacetime became best of friends, become mortal enemies. For what. A line on a map.Chernevoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10164753602062259638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5259082628352435132.post-2785222258866999542009-02-03T08:08:00.000-08:002009-02-03T08:08:00.000-08:00Theres a good reasons its called the Balkans and t...Theres a good reasons its called the Balkans and the word "balkanization" has entered English and other languages.<BR/><BR/>While the Serbs, Croats, Bosnians and other small subethnic groups had external and non Slavic rule, they had a common purpose and that was getting out from under the yoke of the Austro Hungarian monarchy, in the western area of the Balkans, and the Ottoman Empire in the east. The post World War I solution of creating a union of Southern Slavs was doomed to failure, basically because it was artificially imposed from the start. <BR/><BR/>On the other side, the idea of creating nation states that are smaller than a good sized city in some places makes little sense.Chernevoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10164753602062259638noreply@blogger.com