Dealbreaker

Entry: Q&A on WTF Is Going on with Russia And Georgia, Part I: Who Started It?

posted by legaleagle

Aug 11, 2008 2:43PM

DB--thanks for the post, this is great. Being that there is limited freedom of press in Russia and Georgia isn't letting any many journalists, it's tough to get the "truth" in this situation. But here is a post from another website I'm a member of:

"I am currently in Tbilisi and bombing has not been stopped during the last 3 nights... Most parts of Georgia has been completely destroyed....the list is too long... It is a little bit quiet in Tbilisi at this point but the planes are still flying over the city. Just this morning from 4 a.m. to 6 a.m. four-five places were bombed in different places!"

Pretty frightening . . .

Anyway, the whole situation seems to involve a very tough legal issue: On one hand, we have the claim that Georgia was involved in "ethnic cleansing" in Ossetia and that Russia intervened to protect its own people, while on the other hand, we have the fact that Ossetia is in the territory of Georgia, so any involvement by Russia is technically an invasion of Georgia.

Entry: Q&A on WTF Is Going on with Russia And Georgia, Part I: Who Started It?

posted by legaleagle

Aug 11, 2008 3:33PM

15--in case you haven't been in conversations about this, there are a multitude of people who do not actually concede that Russia has invaded Georgia. Rather, they believe that S. Ossetia has been a Russian territory all along and that it was forcefully and reluctantly included as part of Georgia (plus the fact that Russia is willing to give Russian passports to S. Ossetians).

Point being, while yes, to some the statemet that this is a tough legal issue is obvious, to others it is not (thus your comment on the "daftness" of what I, and apparently you, would consider a statment of the obvious, but which others do not, is quite one-sided). Many see this simply as Georgia attacking Russians in S. Ossetia which allows Russia to enter S. Ossetia, an area they do not fully believe is/should be part of Georgia.

Entry: Q&A on WTF Is Going on with Russia And Georgia, Part I: Who Started It?

posted by legaleagle

Aug 11, 2008 3:47PM

@ 15: Maybe you haven't been in many discussions with people surrounding this war, but to many, this is not a tough legal issue. Many believe that S. Ossetia is not/should not be a part of Georgia and that any entry by Russia into the area is, in fact, merely movement into an Russian area that was unwillingly/forcefully annexed into Georgia. Plus, Russia has stated that those residing in S. Ossetia may have Russian passports. Therefore, an attack by Georgia on S. Ossetians is to man (and most Russians) an attack on Russia itself, meaning that Russia's movement is not considered an invasion of a sovereign country at all, but rather an entry into a Russian area to protect fellow Russians.

Point being, a statement of what I, and you, would consider the obvious, and thus a "daft" statement, is not obvious to everyone. To state that it is a daft statement is to embrace a very one-sided view that is inconsistent with the thoughts and opinions of many. Plus you seemed to actually add something insightful in the rest of your post, which makes me wonder why you would be so petty as to make a feeble attempt at an insult on an anonymous blog.

Entry: Q&A on WTF Is Going on with Russia And Georgia, Part I: Who Started It?

posted by legaleagle

Aug 11, 2008 4:10PM

@26--I'm not disagreeing with you. From an objective POV, Georgia does have internationally recognized boundaries that include S. Ossetia. I was simply stating that not everyone agrees with those boundaries, and those that don't agree do not think the boundaries are legitimate (it's a statement of subjective belief by those who justify Russia's entry into Georgia).

Similar things can be said about Kosovo--40 something nations have recognized its independence, but others haven't. So, depending on who you ask, the Republic of Kosovo either does or does not actually exist. While this is a much more extreme example than S. Ossetia, it just reveals how the idea of "international law" and state recognition/existence is murky as hell.

Apologies for the double post earlier, by the way.

But, 23, you're probably right, now that Russia has entered into other parts of Georgia, it looks much more like an invasion. Though Russia will argue protective stance . . .

Entry: Q&A on WTF Is Going on with Russia And Georgia, Part I: Who Started It?

posted by legaleagle

Aug 11, 2008 4:57PM

"do you actually think anyone gives a hoot anymore about international laws/rights/borders? the security council is a circus. UN is a joke. who's going to enforce the law you invoke?"

That is a wise comment, and I totally agree. I'm also in the camp that true "international law" does not exist. It's just a fabricated system that attempts to entice countries to negotiate before blowing each other up. But there's not jurisdiction for "international law" and thus no way to enforce the "rules." So when any country sees that its own interests are not aligned with the international community, it will do as it pleases.

I think Russia is well aware that no other country will really get involved with this war ('cause it would probably just lead to a world war and we'd all be screwed) so it attacked. Russia also has some legitimate arguements on its side, so whether it's in the wrong is arguable.