Hardliners are trying to wrest control of foreign policy from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who is widely blamed for failing to predict the Russian invasion of Georgia ten days ago.

White House advisers say events in the Caucasus have strengthened the hand of neoconservatives, who have been steadily losing influence in Washington since the botched Iraq campaign.

The hawks are pushing for the US to press Nato to bring Georgia and the Ukraine into the alliance by the end of the year, as a way if deterring further Russian aggression.

Allies of Vice President Dick Cheney are also pressing Mr Bush to seek Russia’s expulsion from the G8 group of leading economies.

They were also instrumental in pushing ahead with a missile defence deal with Poland on Thursday, which led to Russian threats that Poland is now a target for Moscow’s nuclear arsenal.

“We’ve got to get Georgia and the Ukrainians into Nato,” said one former White House official, who still advises the Bush administration. “What we’ve got now, promising them future entry but not yet, is the worst of all worlds. It is a red rag to the Russians and does nothing to protect these new allies.”

Charles Kupchan, the former director of European affairs on America’s National Security Council, and now a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, remarked: “For the neocons, this is the gift on a silver platter because it justifies their view of the world and provides reason to return to a policy of militarised containment of Russia.

“There is a troubling sense that there is a longing to return to a world that is more black and white. You would think we were in a new Cold War.”

This week Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice travels to Brussels, where she will meet with Nato and EU foreign ministers to rally support for Georgia.

But Miss Rice’s reputation has taken a serious hit in Washington, where she first made her name as a Russia expert in the 1980s. She is blamed for underestimating Russia’s strength and desire to make a power play in the Caucasus.

Conservatives charge that Miss Rice failed to make clear to Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili that America would not provide military assistance in his confrontation with Russia over South Ossetia when she visited Georgia a month ago.

“She took her eye off the ball,” the former White House official said. “Her entire career has been based on being nice to the Russians, and look where’s that’s got us. She was just like Obama. It was all hope and no experience.”

Some officials in the State Department, stung by the criticism of their performance, believe Mr Bush’s rose tinted view of Georgia, driven by his wish to promote the country as a model democracy, is to blame for convincing Mr Saakashvili he could act with impunity.

Prof Kupchan agreed: “The US was giving mixed signals to Saakashvili. Through private channels it was saying: ‘You have to behave’ but publicly it was portraying him as a knight in shining armour, a beacon of freedom.

“There was an underestimation of the return of Russian power and an under-appreciation of how disgruntled Russia was becoming.”

Miss Rice’s falling stock has potential significance beyond the Russia dispute. Along with Defence Secretary Robert Gates, she has been a bulwark against hawks, who have urged a tougher line on a wide range of issues, including Iran’s nuclear programme.

Washington officials say the Bush administration was caught unawares by the fast-moving events in Georgia, where useable intelligence for making political judgments were frequently thin on the ground.

The Sunday Telegraph has learned that President Bush rejected suggestions by some advisers that he should return home early from the Olympics to handle the crisis.

When he did come back he was “irritated” to learn that the State Department and CIA’s assessments that Russia would not push into Georgia proper had proved inaccurate.

An official who advises the Pentagon said that the affair had exposed the folly of Mr Bush’s belief that he could trust Russian premier Vladimir Putin.

“He (Bush) wanted to stay in Beijing. There was little understanding of how serious this was,” the official said. “He thought he could talk to Putin and sort it out. That turned out to be wildly optimistic.”

Many, however, fear that Washington hawks will make the situation worse. James Collins, the US ambassador to Moscow between 1997 and 2001, said the US should at least show that it understood Russia’s defence interests, even if it could not accommodate them.

He said that Nato’s attitude that Russia has “no veto” on its activities “was perceived as: ‘We don’t care what you think. We’re doing it our way.’” He added: “That leads to confrontation. I’m not sure we should start to conduct ourselves in ways that make things more difficult.”#

The main beneficiary of the crisis in the US has been John McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, who has called for Russia to be kicked out of the G8 for two years. His quick and robust response reinforced the notion that he is more suited than Barack Obama to guiding America through the dangers of an increasingly uncertain world.

The crisis sparked rumours that Mr Obama might even choose John Kerry, his predecessor as the Democratic presidential nominee, to be his vice presidential running mate because of his foreign policy experience.

Mr McCain helped shape the White House response in talks with NSC officials and Miss Rice. Yesterday (SAT) he condemned Vladimir Putin as a “threat to peace”.

A Republican who served in the first Bush White House said: “Putin just reminded everyone that this is a nasty world out there, and you better have one tough sonofabitch in the White House.”

A Russian APC manoeuvers outside the flashpoint town of Gori. The world was still waiting Tuesday for proof of Russia’s promised troop pullout from Georgia, as Tbilisi accused Moscow of “gravely violating” a ceasefire accord.  [Agencies]

CRAWFORD, Texas - The United States accused Russia of not keeping its word to start withdrawing its forces from Georgia and vowed to look into charges of “ethnic cleansing” in the former Soviet republic.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, bound for crisis talks at NATO headquarters in Brussels, said Russian President Dmitry Medevdev had failed to fulfill his pull-out pledge under a France-brokered ceasefire plan.”(I wonder) why the Russian president either will not or cannot keep his word,” Rice told reporters on her airplane hours after the White House demanded that Moscow proceed with its withdrawal “without delay.”

“The Russians have said that their withdrawal would start at midday today. We will continue to closely monitor Russian actions in Georgia for confirmation of the withdrawal,” said spokesman Gordon Johndroe.

But hours later, a US defense official speaking on condition of anonymity said in Washington that US officials monitoring the situation “have not seen any significant Russian movement out of Georgia today.”

US President George W. Bush, watching the crisis from his Texas ranch, stayed out of sight after ordering Rice to Europe to seek a common NATO position in support of Georgia and reaffirm US solidarity with its ally.

Johndroe also said Washington would investigate charges, most recently levelled by staunch Georgia allies Lithuania and Poland, that Russian troops were guilty of “ethnic cleansing” as part of their offensive.

“That’s a serious charge and we take it seriously and are looking into the matter,” Johndroe told reporters, citing “charges from both sides” and stressing: “It’s clear this was an ugly conflict on the ground.”

Russia made similar charges against Tbilisi shortly after the conflict flared up August 6 with a Georgian incursion into the region of South Ossetia and escalated with an all-out Russian offensive two days later.

Johndroe declined to confirm reports, denied by Moscow, that Russia had rolled short-range SS-21 missiles into Georgia, but said any troops or equipment that came in when the conflict flared up August 6 must leave under the ceasefire.

“Let me be clear: If it rolled in after August 6, it needs to roll out” under the terms of a French-brokered ceasefire pact, said Johndroe. “That would be in keeping with the Russian commitment on withdrawal.”

The United States will help Georgia rebuild its battered infrastructure but also its security forces, said Johndroe, who declined to discuss possible US aid for specific military hardware like radar installations.

“I think it’s premature to talk about any specifics of what that reconstruction effort might be. But there should be no doubt that the United States is committed to helping Georgia rebuild,” he said.

In Brussels, Rice was to hold talks with key NATO allies as well as European Union heavyweights including French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana, and European Commissioner for External Relations Benita Fererro-Waldner, Rice’s office said.

She was also to sign a key missile defense shield pact with Warsaw that greenlights the basing of US interceptor missiles on Polish territory — a step that has drawn angry reactions from Russia.

Moscow is furious at Georgia’s attempt to join NATO, and alliance foreign ministers will meet on Tuesday to show their support for Georgia. But they remain divided on how to deal with a resurgent Moscow, with some western leaders unwilling to see ties with oil-rich Russia deteriorate any further.

Rice said Washington would not try to speed up Georgia and Ukraine’s path to membership in NATO, but said the alliance must make it clear to Moscow that it cannot prevent former Soviet countries from building closer ties with the West.

There are no military installations in the city of Tskhinvali. In fact, there are no military targets at all. It is an industrial center consisting of lumber mills, manufacturing plants and residential areas. It is also the home to 30,000 South Ossetians. When Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili ordered the city to be bombed by warplanes and shelled by heavy artillery last Thursday, he knew that he would be killing hundreds of civilians in their homes and neighborhoods. But he ordered the bombing anyway.

There was no “Battle of  Tskhinvali”; that’s another fiction. A battle implies that there is an opposing force that is resisting or fighting back. That’s not the case here. The Georgian army entered the city unopposed; after all, how can unarmed civilians stop armed units. Most of the townspeople had already fled across the border into Russia or hid in their basements while the tanks and armored vehicles rumbled bye firing at anything that moved.

What took place in South Ossetia on August 7, was not an invasion or a siege; it was a massacre. The people had no way to defend themselves against a fully-equiped modern army.  It was a war crime.

In less than 24 hours, the Russian army was deployed to the war zone where it chased the Georgian army away without a fight.  Michael Binyon put it this way in the London Guardian: “The attack was short, sharp and deadly—enough to send the Georgians fleeing in humiliating panic.”

Indeed, the Georgians left in such haste that many of their weapons were left behind.  It was a complete rout; another black-eye for the US and Israeli advisers who trained the clatter of thugs they call the Georgian army. Soon vendors on the streets of Tskhinvali will be hawking weapons that were left behind with a mocking sign: “Georgia Army M-16; Never used, dropped once.”

By the time the army was driven out, the downtown area was in engulfed in flames and the bodies of those who had been killed by sniper-fire were strewn  along the streets and sidewalks. Many of people who stayed behind were simply too old or infirm to leave. Instead, they huddled in their basements waiting for the shelling to stop. It was a bloodbath. The city’s only hospital was deliberately targeted and destroyed; another war crime. By day’s end, over 2,000 people were killed in an operation that was clearly engineered with the assistance of the Bush White House. Bush regards Saakashvilli as his main client in the region; they are friends. He is America’s cat’s paw in the Caucasus. Saakashvilli’s assignment is to try to get Putin to overreact militarily and demonstrate to European allies that Russia still poses a threat to their national security. Fortunately, many Europeans see through the ruse and know that the trouble originates in Washington.

For the most part, Americans are still in the dark about what really happened last weekend. There’s a great video circulating on the Internet by a Russian citizen that has been living in USA for the last 10 years. He sums up the role of the US media with great precision. He says, “The western media–especially CNN–is feeding you complete horseshit. Russia did not invade Georgia first.”  The youtube can be seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0c26Q-qxDEA

The coverage of the western media has been abysmal. Nearly every article and TV news segment begins with accusations of Russian aggression concealing the fact that the Georgian Army  bombarded and invaded the capital of South Ossetia one full day before the first Russian even tank crossed the border. By the time the Russians arrived, the city was already in a shambles and thousands were dead.

These facts are not in dispute by those who followed the developments as they took place. Now the media are revising the facts to manage public perceptions, just as they did with the fictional WMD in Iraq. Many people think that the press learned its lesson after they were exposed for using bogus information in the lead up to the war in Iraq. But that is not true. The corporate media–especially FOX News, CNN and PBS (the smug, liberal-sounding channel)—continue to operate like the propaganda arm of the Pentagon. Its disgraceful.

In a 2006 referendum, 99% of South Ossetians said they supported independence from Georgia. The voter turnout was 95% and the balloting was monitored by 34 international observers from the west. No one has challenged the results. The province has been under the protection of Russian and Georgian peacekeepers since 1992 and has been a de facto independent state ever since. If Putin applied the same standard as Bush did in Kosovo, he would unilaterally declare South Ossetia independent from Georgia and then thumb his nose at the UN. (Sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander) But Putin and newly-elected Russian President Dmitry Medvedev have taken a conciliatory attitude towards the international community and tried to resolve the issue through diplomatic channels.

Still, Russia’s operation in South Ossetia has ignited a firestorm in the US political establishment and Democrats and Republicans alike are demanding that Russia be “taught a lesson”. Condoleeza Rice flew to Tbilisi on Friday and ordered Russian combat troops to withdraw from Georgia immediately. Saakashvili topped off Rice’s comments by saying that the Russian troops were “cold-blooded killers” and “barbarians”. So much for reconciliation.

Saakashvili’s hyperbolic rhetoric was followed by a surprise announcement from Poland that they had approved Bush’s plans for deploying the Missile Defense Shield in Eastern Europe. The system is supposed to defend Europe from the possibility of attacks from so-called “rogue states” like Iran, but the Kremlin knows that it is intended to neutralize their nuclear arsenal.

The new “shield” will be integrated into the larger US nuclear weapons system placing the world’s most lethal weapons just a few hundred miles from Russia’s capital. It is a clear threat to Russia’s national security and no different than nuclear weapons in Cuba.

President Medvedev made this statement after hearing of Poland’s decision: “This decision clearly demonstrates everything we have said recently. The deployment of new anti-missile forces in Europe is aimed at the Russian Federation.”

It was President Ronald Reagan, the darling of the neoconservatives, who decided to remove short-range nuclear weapons from the European theater. Now, ironically, it is his ideological heir, George W. Bush, who is on track to restart the Cold War by putting a high-tech nuclear system on Russia’s perimeter. The younger Bush has already broken his father’s commitment to Mikail Gorbachev to never expand NATO beyond Germany. Presently, Bush is pushing to gain NATO membership for two former-Soviet states; Ukraine and Georgia. If they are approved, then any future dispute with Russia will pit the United States and Europe against Moscow. It’s no wonder Putin is trying to derail the process.

The Bush administration has been planning for a confrontation with Russia for more than a year. In fact, Raw Story reported on operations that were conducted by the military on July 14, 2008 which were probably a dress rehearsal for the current conflict. According to Raw Story:

“US troops on Monday (July 14) began military exercises near the Russian border in ex-Soviet Ukraine and were poised to launch them in Georgia, amid tense relations between Moscow and Washington. A ceremony inaugurating the Sea Breeze-2008 NATO exercise was held off Ukraine’s Black Sea coast against anti-NATO protests and a hostile reaction from officials in Russia. Sea Breeze-2008…includes forces from Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Britain, Canada, Denmark, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Latvia, Macedonia and Turkey…’The US-Georgia joint exercises will be held at the Vaziani military base’ less than 100 kilometers (60 miles) from the Russian border with a total of 1,650 servicemen taking part.”

So, it appears the Bush administration, working in conjunction with the Pentagon, did have contingency plans for dealing with a flare-up with Georgia. The real question is whether or not they planned to initiate those hostilities to advance their own regional agenda? No one knows for sure.

Now that Georgia’s American-trained army has been humiliated in front of the world, Bush is trying desperately to save face by demanding that Russia allow the US Air force to deliver humanitarian aid via C-17 military aircraft to the tens of thousands of Georgians who were displaced in the fighting.

Mike Whitney lives in Washington state. He can be reached at: fergiewhitney@msn.com

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev told French President Nicolas Sarkozy Sunday that Russian forces would begin withdrawing from Georgia around midday Monday, Sarkozy’s office said in a statement.

Sarkozy, whose country holds the rotating European Union presidency, telephoned Medvedev Sunday to discuss the French-brokered ceasefire deal Russia has signed with Georgia.”He stressed that the signature of the six point ceasefire agreement signed by all the parties concerned, most recently by the President of the Russian Federation, must result in the immediate withdrawal of all Russian military forces that have entered Georgia since Aug 7,” the statement said.

Russian commanders said yesterday their forces had begun regrouping around Georgian cities, but the Russian Defense Ministry said the troop movements were just preparatory.

The French statement said Sarkozy warned Medvedev of “serious consequences” for Russia’s relations with the EU if the accord were not implemented rapidly and competely.

It said Medvedev had assured him that the Russian withdrawal would begin Monday.

“President Medvedev announced to the President of the Republic that the withdrawal of Russian troops would begin tomorrow, Monday Aug 18 in the middle of the day,” the statement said.

The Kremlin confirmed the conversation and said Medvedev had informed Sarkozy “that from tomorrow Russia will begin the withdrawal of the military contingent which was moved to reinforce Russian peacekeepers after the Georgian aggression against South Ossetia… to the security zone and to the territory of South Ossetia.”

(China Daily)

The sight of bombed-out buildings and Russian tanks descending on villages in Georgia has underlined that for all its investment potential, this vast stretch of the globe remains a powder keg. Moscow has not just sent a message to several former Soviet states not to step out of line, it has sent a signal to Europe about the fragility and security of its economic interests.

Television pictures of Georgians fleeing the fighting brought forth international condemnation. But less publicised were the Russian missile strikes near the Baku- Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline, one of several arteries in the the Caucasus that bring oil and gas to the west.

Some 50 missiles struck within a few hundred metres of this key oil transit route. There is no evidence that the Russians intended to hit the BTC, which is 30 per cent-owned by BP, the UK energy major. But it was a salutary warning at a time when the European Union is desperate to reduce its dependency on Russian oil and gas.

The 1,100-mile pipeline, which ships about 90,000 barrels per day and from next year will have capacity for 1.2m barrels per day, is one of the few pipelines from the Caspian region not to cross Russian soil. It ships high-quality crude from eastern Azerbaijan,through Georgia, to the Turkish Mediterranean port of Ceyhan. It is the longest pipeline after Druzhba, which stretches 2,500 miles from south-eastern Russia to Germany.

The pipeline has, in fact, been shut for more than a week due to a fire in eastern Turkey, and should re-open in the next few weeks. The Kurdistan Workers Party claimed it sabotaged the facility, though there are doubts that this was the case. According to Samuel Ciszuk, an analyst at Global Insight: “The entire route of the BTC, the only major oil pipeline from the Caspian region outside of Russia’s control, should now be treated as high-risk, and Turkey’s viability as an energy bridge to Europe has been thrown into question.”

It is likely that the pipeline would have had to shut anyway, due to the closeness of the Russian bombing. Last week BP closed its much smaller Baku-Suspa oil and gas pipeline, which was carrying between 45,000 and 90,000 barrels per day, as a precautionary measure.

The section of the pipeline running from near Tbilisi, Georgia’s capital, to Turkey, was re-opened on Friday, but the oil pipeline remained shut this weekend.

Reports by Turkish newspapers said BP and its Turkish partner Botas International were examining the pipeline this weekend to assess how long repairs will take.

As well as shipping oil from Azerbaijan, the Black Sea ports of Poti and Batumi are also vital transit points for crude from Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan. Estimates from oil traders suggest that the amount of oil now being shipped from these three countries had fallen from 1.3m barrels a day to about 350,000.

It would take a sharp escalation of the Georgia conflict to close the transit routes long term, which is why the oil price remained relatively muted in response to Russia’s invasion. A lot of oil was re-routed by road tanker. The Kremlin, though, will be privately very pleased to have exposed the fragility of the supply network.

Dieter Helm, an energy economist and professor at Oxford University, said last week: “Russia has a very clear strategy and would prefer Europe’s gas to go via Russia and not via independent countries. There is no definite attempt [by Russia] to disrupt supplies. But it is not unhelpful to Russia that there is unrest.”

Russia is no longer a military superpower, but its vast natural resources mean it will become an energy superpower over the next decade. Russia’s state energy giant, Gazprom, produces 85 per cent of the country’s natural gas and controls 17 per cent of the world’s reserves. The European Union gets 25 per cent of its gas from Russia, and that is set to rise. Britain’s proposal to build a new generation of nuclear power stations is a race to diversify energy supplies and reduce dependency on Russia and the Middle East.

But until these reactors start coming on stream, from 2017 at the earliest, Britain, with its North Sea reserves dwindling fast, will have to look to places like Kazakhstan if it wants alternatives to Russia. That country’s giant Kashagan oil field, which is being developed by a consortium that includes Royal Dutch Shell and ExxonMobil, was the largest find for three decades when it was discovered in 2000, and will use the BTC pipeline once production begins in 2013. But will Russia resist the urge to try to control these reserves? At the very least Moscow will surely want influence over such a powerful geopolitical resource.

The BTC pipeline cost $3bn (£1.5bn) to build, but Ciszuk believes that the Georgian troubles will dampen investors’ enthusiasm for pumping hundreds of millions of pounds more into a planned upgrade. Indeed, he says that the pipeline’s vulnerability “could render further foreign investment in [any] oil and gas transport links that bypass Russia too risky”.

The proposed 2,000-mile Nabucco pipeline, backed by the European Union and running through Georgia, would bypass Russia and take gas via Turkey and Bulgaria to Austria. Moscow has tried to persuade its European gas customers that Nabucco is a red herring and that investors should concentrate on backing pipelines running through Russia. If diplomacy has failed to convince these investors, military action in Georgia may do. Nick Butler, a former chief strategy director at BP and director of energy studies at Cambridge University, says that there is no question that Georgia has “become an investment risk”.

Helm and other supporters of Nabucco say the answer is not to shelve the project, but to ensure that governments, not private investors, take the lead and defend it. But Gazprom, through its many strategic ventures with European energy companies, now wields considerable lobbying power in Europe’s capitals.

Tbilisi - The foreign minister of Russia said Thursday that Georgia could “forget about” getting back Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and the country remained on edge as Russia sent tank columns to search out and destroy Georgian military equipment.

Uncertainty about Russia’s intentions and back-and-forth charges clouded the conflict two days after Russia and Georgia signaled acceptance of a French-brokered truce, and a week after Georgia’s crackdown on the two provinces drew a Russian military response.

Diplomats focused on finalizing a fragile truce between the two nations and clear the way for Russian withdrawal. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was heading Friday for Georgia to press the president to sign the deal.

Georgian officials accused Russia of sending a column of tanks and other armored vehicles toward Kutaisi, the second-largest city in Georgia, then said the convey stopped about 35 miles out.

“We have no idea what they’re doing there, why the movement, where they’re going,” Georgian Prime Minister Lado Gurgenidze said in a telephone briefing. “One explanation could be they are trying to rattle the civilian population.”

The US said a move toward Kutaisi would be a matter of great concern, but two defense officials said the Pentagon did not detect any major movement by Russia troops or tanks. There was no immediate response from Russia itself.

“I think the world should think very carefully about what is going on here,” Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili said. “We need to stop everything that can be stopped now.”

The Russian president met in the Kremlin with the leaders of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, a clear sign of Moscow’s support for the regions. And Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov issued a message that appeared to challenge US President Bush’s demand a day earlier that Russia must respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia.

“One can forget about any talk about Georgia’s territorial integrity because, I believe, it is impossible to persuade South Ossetia and Abkhazia to agree with the logic that they can be forced back into the Georgian state.”

The White House said Thursday that the US position was unchanged and dismissed Lavrov’s remark as bluster. US Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned Russia was in danger of hurting relations with the US “for years to come” but said he did not see “any prospect” for the use of American military force in Georgia.

As the military and diplomatic battles played out, US relief planes swooped into Tbilisi with tons of supplies for the estimated 100,000 people uprooted by the fighting.

US officials said their two planes carried cots, blankets, medicine and surgical supplies – but the Russians insinuated that the United States, a Georgia ally, might have sent in military aid as well. US officials rejected the claim.

Even as the relief rolled in, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned the fighting and lawlessness was keeping it from reaching large parts of Georgia. In some places, relief officials were overwhelmed by the sheer numbers of refugees.

“This is too much. It is all too much,” said Manana Karelidze, a 50-year-old retired accountant, who said she had waited for days at the Department of Refugees in the Georgian capital for registration and dry pasta. There were hundreds like her.

Russian troops spent the day searching selected cities, forests and fields for military equipment left behind by Georgian forces.

On the edge of the strategically important city of Gori, Georgian soldiers pointed their weapons at Russian forces, and explosions and small arms fire broke out in the distance.

Georgia claimed Russians had left the oil port city of Poti, but hours later some forces were still there.

Georgia also accused Russia of using short-range missiles in Poti and Gori, showing reporters purported images of shrapnel. There was no immediate response from Russia.

Russian and Georgian troops briefly patrolled Gori, but relations between the two sides broke down and the Georgians left. At least 20 explosions were heard later near Gori, along with small-arms fire.

It was not clear whether it was renewed fighting or the disposal of ordnance from a nearby Georgian military base. Russia said its troops were there to establish contact with the civilian administration and take over abandoned military depots.

Gori lies on Georgia’s main east-west road only 60 miles west of Tbilisi. Television footage showed Russian troops in and near Gori, and Georgia said it was checking the area for mines.

The Russian General Prosecutor’s office said it had formally opened a genocide probe into Georgian treatment of South Ossetians. Georgia sued Russia in international court, alleging murder, rape and mass expulsions of Georgians in both provinces.

The opinion piece in the online version of the Los Angeles Times (2008.08.12) is a clear and classic example of the type of material western readers are being bombarded with in what appears to be an orchestrated campaign of disinformation to shape public opinion against Russia. As was the case in Iraq, the Western public is being duped by what amounts to a perverse act of manipulation… and is guzzling the bait hook, line and sinker. he piece “Stand up to Russia” was shown to me by a Russian friend, who asked me to reply in PRAVDA.Ru, which was quoted in this two-page schmuckfest of unadulterated bilge. It could almost have been printed by the British Bullshit Corporation or written by that other insolent female who got a Pulitzer. Max Boot, “Senior fellow in National Security Studies at the Council of Foreign Relations” is the name of the author in this case.

We now see clearly why the National Security Agency was so adept in defending the people of America on 9/11, as adept in fact as Washington’s (chuckle) military advisors were in Georgia.

When I read through this article last night, I thought, “Where does one begin?” I mean, it is one nonsensical piece of drivel from beginning to end, a tissue of lies and insults directed at Russia without one iota of truth from the first letter to the final period.

For a start, the piece opens with a childish chortle, comparing the Russian Army to the “Red Army”, a clear attempt to paint the modern Russian Federation with the Soviet brush, then, wait for it, yeah here it is, line 2 of paragraph 2, the “collapse” of the Soviet Union. It’s like those animal documentaries where you have three failed hunting scenes then finally the kill, where the lionesses get the gazelle and cart it off to daddy. And it is so predictable as to be boring.

True, like the Red Army, the Russian Army has the capacity to carpet nuke all countries, be they NATO or anything else, which commit acts of aggression against Russia but unlike the USA, Russia does not deploy atomic weapons or Depleted Uranium against civilians. And for Max Boot’s information, and that of his readers, once and for all, the Soviet Union did not “collapse” (there was no confrontation after all, not even a stand-off; relations with the West were at their highest point at the time, with perestroika and glaznost in full swing). The voluntary dissolution of the Soviet Union was forecast and accounted for in its Constitution. When the members wished to leave, they did and most of them formed alternative and looser trading organizations such as the CIS, among others.

The one lacking in legitimacy here is Georgia, which was bound under its act of secession from the Union to hold referendums in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, for the peoples of these regions to vote as to the degree of autonomy they wished to have. Georgia refused. We then have an infantile reference to Chechnya. In the last free and fair referendum, 95 per cent of the people of Chechnya voted to remain within the Russian Federation. Stick that up your readers, Max Boot, and tell them to sit on it.

We then get down to the most absurd claims one could expect to find. Is it the LA hard Times, or what? Paragraph after paragraph of lies, fabrications and insults more befitting of a latrine wall, written by some demented retard with his own excrement, than in the pages of what I thought (until last night) was a reputable publication. I mean, what an eye opener.

Max Boot calls Russia’s crossing into Georgia a violation of international law. So what does he have to say about the USA’s act of criminal agression and mass murder in Iraq? What does he have to say about the deployment of WMD in civilian areas? What does he have to say about the massacre of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians? What does he have to say about the concentration camp at Guantanamo, which brings back flashes of Belsen, Treblinka and Dachau, or the innumerous concentration and extermination camps in the Baltic States?

Nothing. The Georgian massacre of two thousand Russian civilians in one night, war crimes in which grenades were thrown into basements where women and children were huddling, tanks opening fire on old ladies, children being burned alive, are relegated to the word “details”. Details, eh? Yeah right, today a child, tomorrow a terrorist, so blast the crap out of him and get it done with. Is that what you teach as Senior fellow, Mr. Boot? Is that really how the people of the United States of America feel?

Then in that case I apologise. After reading this article (there is more, comparisons with Hitler – and if the author knew that 26 million Soviet citizens gave their lives to stop that Nazi criminal lunatic, he would not be so insulting; comparisons of Putin with Mussolini, then references to the appeasement that led to WW2) I apologise to all those people I have told to be lenient towards Americans, that there are decent and balanced people over there with valid opinions.

If this is the sort of vapid claptrap that its more famous publications publish, then imagine what you can find in the tabloids and infer from this that given this level of systemic and systematic mis- and disinformation, it is virtually impossible for any US citizen to have a balanced idea of world events. The citizens of the USA are being misinformed, lied to and made clowns of by their own media.

And how someone like Max Boot can be a Senior fellow of a National Security studies institution, well if it was not so frightening it would be risible. Here is a man who calls for the West to unite against Russia and who claims that the Georgians should be supplied with anti-tank and AA-missiles. As if there were not hundreds of American and Israeli advisors in Georgia who were routed along with their pupils, with their tails hanging between their legs. And while we’re at it, there is an investigation going on as to who perpetrated the war crimes. And a handful of missiles would have made a difference? If Russia were to use US military tactics, they would blast a hundred-metre crater around where the missiles were being fired from. Besides, Russia has enough precision missiles to neutralise and exterminate any military threat anywhere on Earth at any given moment, be this a matchbox, a tank or a concentration of troops, without even sending in one soldier.

The difference is that while the Russian press is full of cultural pieces, information about the economy and the need to proceed with friendly relations with its international partners, US and western papers are caught by a clique of control-freaks, desperate not to let the truth get out and the result is Max Boot and his Stand up to Russia.

Source Pravda.ru

US President Bush began sending American troops and aid to Georgia on Wednesday to oversee a “vigorous and ongoing” humanitarian mission, the New York Times reported.

The first relief aircraft, a C-17 transporter carrying medical supplies and materials for shelter for thousands displaced by the fighting, arrived in Tbilisi, Georgia’s capital, on Wednesday; a second was due Thursday.

Bush, flanked by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defence Secretary Robert Gates in the Rose Garden, demanded Moscow end all military actions and withdraw Russian troops sent into Georgia after fighting began last Thursday.

In a direct challenge to Moscow, Bush demanded Russia to end the crisis or risk its place in “the diplomatic, political, economic and security structures of the 21st century.” It was Bush’s strongest warning yet of potential retaliation against Russia over the conflict, the report said.

“We expect Russia to ensure that all lines of communication and transport, including seaports, airports, roads and airspace, remain open for the delivery of humanitarian assistance and for civilian transit,” Bush said. “We expect Russia to meet its commitment to cease all military activities in Georgia, and we expect all Russian forces that entered Georgia in recent days to withdraw from that country.”

The decision to send the American military, even on a humanitarian mission, put the US more firmly than ever on Georgia’s side.

A senior Pentagon official was quoted as saying that the relief effort was intended “to show to Russia that we can come to the aid of a European ally, and that we can do it at will, whenever and wherever we want.”

In Georgia, President Mikheil Saakashvili declared the relief operation a “turning point” in the conflict, which began on Thursday when Georgian launched a massive offensive in a bid to regain control over South Ossetia. Heavy rocket and artillery fire and air strikes pounded the provincial capital, Tskhinvali.

“We were unhappy with the initial actions of the American officials, because they were perceived by the Russians as green lines, basically, but this one was very strong,” he told the New York Times in a telephone interview after Bush’s statement.

Saakashvili said Bush’s pledge meant Georgian ports and airports would be taken under US military control — a claim swiftly denied by the Pentagon. A senior administration official said, “We won’t be protecting the airport or seaport, but we’ll certainly protect our assets if we need to.”

Bush also dispatched Rice to Paris for talks with Europeans about the mediation efforts and then to the Georgian capital of Tbilisi “to demonstrate solidarity”, the report said.

Tough words aside, there appears to be little the US can - or will - do to punish Russia, the Associated Press analysed, saying Bush has never publicly discussed any specific penalty.

In Moscow, an official denied violating an EU-brokered truce designed to end the six-day conflict and rejected accusations its troops and armour had advanced on Tbilisi or looted the key town of Gori.

“I said from the very beginning that if any such facts prove true, we will react in the most serious way…The peaceful population should be protected. We are investigating all these reports and will not allow any such actions,” Russia Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said.

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov speaks during a news briefing in Moscow August 13, 2008. [Agencies]

Lavrov said the United States needed to choose between partnership with Moscow or the Georgian leadership, which he characterised as a “virtual project” of the Bush administration.

The fighting in the Caucasus, an important transit for Caspian oil, has unnerved the United States, NATO and the European Union and rattled investors.

Russia says more than 2,000 people, mostly civilians died when Georgia attacked South Ossetia. The claim couldn’t be independently confirmed, but witnesses who fled the area said hundreds had died.

Tbilisi puts deaths on its side at over 175, with hundreds injured. That figure does not include South Ossetia.

Moscow announced an emergency aid package for South Ossetia, with Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin pledging 10 billion roubles ($414 million) to rebuild the shattered region.

Georgia’s attempt to bring South Ossetia under control has failed. President Saakashvili is counting on help from the USA-–a serious miscalculation.

Michail Saakashvili backed the wrong horse. His attempt last Friday to regain control over the breakaway province of South Ossetia by military force has failed and resulted in a bloodbath. Additionally, with this military adventure Saakashvili may have squandered any chances to salvage anything from the losses Georgia suffered in the early 90s. What could have possibly motivated the Georgian President, and what did he gamble on?

While reliable information is still scant at this point, it’s apparent Saakashvili took it for granted that his American supporters, principally U.S. President George W. Bush, would make sure that Russia remained silent until U.S.-trained Georgian troops could change conditions on the ground in South Ossetia.

It was a catastrophic mistake that probably cost several thousand lives, left South Ossetia in ruins, and turned many towns in the rest of Georgia into combat zones.

Whether or not the conflict between Georgia and its two breakaway provinces, South Ossetia and Abchasia, had already begun in 1992, it picked up strength when the former Serbian province of Kosovo declared its independence in February this year. Independence in Kosovo was an indication to the people of Abchasia and South Ossetia that independence was also possible for them. The Russians saw the two provinces as revenge against the west, proof that democracy and self-determination could be turned against western interests. Vladimir Putin, President of Russia at the time, declared he would have dealings with the leaders of the two provinces, something equal to de-facto recognition.

Michail Saakashvili recognized correctly that the 15-year truce concerning Georgia’s borders was entering a new phase for the future, but he played the wrong cards. Instead of negotiating a deal with Russia, he sent in his troops instead.

The run-up began in Abchasia. Around late April and early May, Georgian troops began massing on the armistice line between Abchasia and Georgia. A period of saber-rattling followed, during which Russian fighter planes shot down several Georgian spy drones over Abchasia, thereby making clear their objection to Georgian military intervention in the region. Saakashvili quickly denied ensuing rumors that Georgian and Russian mediators were discussing the possibility of a territorial swap – western Abchasia would return to Gerogia in exchange for independence in the rest of Abchasia – as an alternative to military action. Instead, disputes on the Georgia-Ossetia border suddenly escalated.

The United States sharply criticized the Russian course of action in South Ossetia, but that was about it. Not even Bush entertained the remotest thoughts of sending American troops on behalf of Georgian interests in the region.

To say nothing of NATO, upon which Saakashvili had also gambled. Fraser Cameron of the EU Russian think-tank was quoted in Brussels as saying that Saakashvili had sufficient warnings from the west and should have known that “nobody would pull his chestnuts out of the fire, and no knights would be riding in to help him.” James Nixey, an analyst with the Royal Institute for International Relations in London remarked, “On the contrary, people in most western capitals were disappointed at Saakashvili’s overreaction. He is in grave danger of squandering the cachet he has built up in the west.”

What the United States, the European Union, and Germany’s Foreign Minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, wanted to accomplish was peace in the Caucasus, even if Georgia had to make concessions in areas it had in reality long since lost. To accomplish this, Saakashvili should have shown diplomatic flexibility during his August meeting in Berlin with Steinmeier when they discussed Abchasian and South Ossetian issues. The meeting was a failure and Saakashvili subsequently decided on a course that has presented Russia with a golden opportunity to create a new reality in the region by military means. Putin made it clear long ago from the North Ossetian capital of Vladikavkaz that a South Ossetian return to Georgian rule was out of the question. The same applied to Abchasia.

Saakashvili bet far too much on his cards - and lost.

By JÜRGEN GOTTSCHLICH

The small oil-rich emirate of Kuwait – situated between Iraq, Iran and an un-enviable geographic hard place on the northern end of the Persian Gulf – has reportedly activated its “Emergency War Plan” as a massive U.S. and European armada is reported heading for the region.

Coming on the heels of Operation Brimstone just a week ago that saw U.S., British and French naval forces participate in war games in the Atlantic Ocean, the object of which was to practice enforcing an eventual blockade on Iran, the joint task force is now headed for the Gulf and what could easily turn into a major confrontation with Iran.

The naval force comprises a U.S. Navy super carrier battle group and is accompanied by an expeditionary carrier battle group, a British Royal Navy carrier battle group and a French nuclear hunter-killer submarine.

Leading the pack is the nuclear-powered carrier, the USS Theodore Roosevelt and its Carrier Strike Group Two; besides its 80-plus combat planes the Roosevelt normally transports, it is carrying an additional load of French Naval Rafale fighter jets from the French carrier Charles de Gaulle, currently in dry dock.

Also reported heading toward Iran is another nuclear-powered carrier, the USS Ronald Reagan and its Carrier Strike Group Seven; the USS Iwo Jima, the Royal Navy aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal and a number of French warships, including the nuclear hunter-killer submarine Amethyste.

Once the naval force arrives in the Gulf region it will be joining two other U.S. naval battle groups already on site: the USS Abraham Lincoln and the USS Peleliu; the Lincoln with its carrier strike group and the latter with an expeditionary strike group.

Telephone calls to the Pentagon were not returned by publication time.

This deployment is the largest naval task force from the United States and allied countries to assemble in the strategic waters of the Persian Gulf since the two Gulf wars.

The object of the naval deployment would be to enforce an eventual blockade on Iran, if as expected by many observers, current negotiations with the Islamic republic over its insistence to pursue enrichment of uranium, allowing it, eventually, to produce nuclear weapons yields no results.

Adding to the volatility is the presence of a major Russian navy deployment affected earlier this year to the eastern Mediterranean comprising the jewel of the Russian fleet, the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov with approximately 50 Su-33 warplanes that have the capacity for mid-air refueling. This means the Russian warplanes could reach the Gulf from the Mediterranean, a distance of some 850 miles and would be forced to fly over Syria (not a problem) but Iraq as well, where the skies are controlled by the U.S. military, and the guided missile heavy cruiser Moskva. The Russian task force is believed to be composed of no less than a dozen warships as well as several submarines.

However, Russia is unlikely to get involved in a military showdown in the Persian Gulf, particularly at this time when it is engaged in a major confrontation with the Republic of Georgia in South Ossetia.

For Iran however, a naval blockade preventing it from importing refined oil would have devastating effects on its economy, virtually crippling the Islamic republic’s infrastructure. Although Iran is a major oil producer and exporter, the country lacks refining facilities having to re-import its own oil once refined.

Iran’s oil – both the exported crude as well as the returning refined product – passes through the strategic Straits of Hormuz, controlled by Iran on one side and the Sultanate of Oman – a U.S. ally – on the other. The strait is about 30 miles wide at its narrowest point, making it easy to control, but at the same time placing Western naval vessels within easy reach of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards fast moving light crafts that could be used by Iranian suicide bombers.

Although Kuwait is on the opposite end of the entrance to the Gulf and the Straits of Hormuz, Kuwait City is less than 60 miles from Iran – and with good reason to worry.

“Kuwait was caught by surprise last time, when Iraqi troops invaded the small emirate and routed the Kuwaiti army in just a few hours,” a former U.S. diplomat to Kuwait told the Middle East Times.

By CLAUDE SALHANI