Mosca, sfidando l’Occidente, riconosce l’indipendenza delle regioni georgiane

La Russia ha formalmente riconosciuto l’indipendenza delle due repubbliche separatiste Ossezia del Sud e Abkhazia, cosa “che minaccia lo smembramento di un alleato USA”.

Con l’Occidente, relazioni più gelide dalla fine della Guerra Fredda.

·        Russia non desidera ma non teme Guerra Fredda.

·        Russia potrà rispondere con mezzi militari a sistema difesa missilistica USA in Est EU.

Sia USA che GER avevano ufficialmente ammonito Russia contro riconoscimento repubbliche separatiste.

·          GW Bush: Russia riconsideri l’irresponsabile decisione;

·          A Merkel: mossa “assolutamente inaccettabile”;

·          UE: decisione contraria ai principi della sovranità e integrità territ. di Georgia.

·          MA: europei non stanno considerando sanzioni economiche.

·          Konstantin Kosachev, capo Comm. Esteri Parlamento Russia: proteste verbali saranno presto consegnate agli archivi della storia;

·          tuttavia Borsa russa è scesa al min. di due anni e il rublo ha perso l’1,5% da inizio mese.

·          Non solo ripresa della Russia, ma “sua fiducia nel ruolo secolare di espansione verso Sud, dove dai tempi degli zar manipolò con successo le rivalità etnico-linguistiche e la storia”… “mettendo le nazionalità le une contro le altre perché si controbilanciassero e dipendessero dal sostegno di Mosca”.

·          Richard Pipes (prof. Harvard, autore di biografia di Lenin: Russia interviene a favore di una minoranza e la utilizzare per prendere il controllo di un paese”.

·          1992 Russia costrinse Georgia ad accordo che introduceva peacekeeper russi in Ossezia del Sud. Sia osseti che georgiani sono in prevalenza cristiani ortodossi, ma parlano lingue diverse con alfabeti diversi.

·          Russia ha tradizionalmente tracciato confini assurdi per le province, lasciando minoranze dentro le repubbliche a fare i conti con i rivali tradizionali.

·          Es. Crimea, a maggioranza russa, atribuita ll’Ucraina da Krushchev nel 1953: oggi l’Ucraina accusa Mosca di manipolare la popolazione filorussa della Crimea, le cui proteste hanno contribuito a bloccare i tentativi dell’Ucraina di aderire alla NATO.

·          Epopea Osseti li vuole discendenti della tribù degli Alani, ch econ le loro incursioni militari difusero i propri geni dal Nordafrica all’Europa, e che sarebbero imparentati anche con Re Artù e i cavalieri della Tavola Rotonda.

·          Ma sul proprio territorio gli osseti subirono invasioni per secoli. Il periodo più buio fu il 1395, quando le orde del Tamerlano invasero da Est, incendiando città, violentando le donne e costringendo i sopravvissuti a fuggire sulle montagne del Caucaso. Per i 4 secoli successivi gli osseti rimasero poche migliaia di pastori montanari, e la loro condizione migliorò solo quando giunsero le truppe di Caterina la Grande che cacciarono le tribù ostili dai bassipiani fertili dichiarando l’Impero Russo protettore del popolo osseta. Ludwig Chibirov, docente storia osseta ed ex pres. Repubblica Osseta del Sud: “senza i russi il nostro popolo sarebbe semplicemente scomparso”.

·          Ma Mosca assegnò i villaggi osseti a sud del Caucaso alla Georgia, mentre quelli a nord vennero posti sotto il controllo della fortezza di Vladikavkaz (potere del Caucaso).

·          Da tempo gli osseti del Sud chiedono di essere riuniti a quelli del Nord. Quando la Georgia dichiarò indipendenza nel 1918, gli osseti del sud si ribellarono a Tbilisi per unirsi al Nord. Tbilisi [menscevichi] mandarono spedizioni punitive, incendiarono villaggi, a migliaia fuggirono a nord verso la Russia, molti si arruolarono nell’Armata Rossa e tornarono per rovesciare il governo di Tbilisi e portarvi il potere sovietico.

·          1992, con E. Shevardnadze (ex min. Esteri URSS) pres. Georgia, i russi mediarono cessate il fuoco tra osseti e georgiani, in base al quale stazionarono 500 militari russi quale forza di interposizione permanente, a fronte di altrettanti georgiani. Si verificarono periodici incidenti. I georgiani controllavano una serie di villaggi attorno alla strada principale verso la Russia, costringendo gli osseti a far eun largo giro per andare in Russia. D’estate i georgiani usano l’acqua dell’acquedotto per l’irrigazione, privandone gli abitanti di Tskhinvali.

·          Queste tensioni hanno portato al prevalere degli esponenti più radicali: l’ex lottatore E. Kokoity al posto di Chibirov in Sud Ossezia, e M. Saakashvili (sudi in USA) a Tbilisi nel 2003.

·          Truppe russe sono intervenute dopo l’attacco dei georgiani all’Ossezia del Sud.

Leader UE discutono della Georgia mentre la Russia si fa beffe dell’Occidente

·          La Francia ha convocato vertice UE per discutere della Georgia,

·          mentre Cremlino lascia parte delle truppe attestate in Georgia.

·          Ufficio Sarkozy: accordo con Medvedev prevede la sostituzione delle truppe russe con quelle di gruppo internazionale; Mosca nega impegno per ritiro forze russe. B. Kouchner (Francia, Esteri) minaccia ritorsioni europee anche ne l campo dell’energia [a danno della GER – ndr]. [Altro articolo: l’accordo di 6 punti Sarkozy-Medvedev prevede che i russi continuino a svolgere ruolo “di sicurezza” nell’area fino all’istituzione di meccanismi internazionali]

·          A Batumi arrivano parecchie navi militari USA con aiuti.

·          V. Yushchenko, P Ucraina: accelerare ingresso Ucraina in NATO e aumentare capacità di difesa.

G.White, J.W. Miller

·          Dirigenti USA ed UE ammettono che sanzioni economiche incisive non sono un’opzione contro la Russia, principale fornitrice di energia all’EU e 2° esportatore mondiale di petrolio. A. Rahr, esperto su Russia al Council on Foreign Relations: “non c’è niente che l’Occidente possa fare. UE e USA criticheranno il riconoscimento, ma non possono fermarlo”.

·          Uniche ritorsioni: riduzione cooperazione militare e minaccia di ritardare accesso Russia al WTO.

·          Probabile mancata ratifica trattato nucleare USA-Russia.

·          UE non intende impostare il vertice per punire Russia. GER metterà in rilievo la ricostruzione della Georgia. Un funzionario francese ipotizza limitazioni alla libertà dei russi di viaggiare in EU.

·          Putin ha disposto il ritiro da alcuni accordi commerciali negoziati con i principali partner in vista dell’ingresso nel WTO (senza specificare).

·          Improbabile approvazione accordo di cooperazione nucleare USA-Russia prima che Bush lasci Casa Bianca.

·          Accordo negoziato nel 2007: collaborazione per sviluppo reattori nucleari anti-proliferazione e banche dei combustibili nucleari.

·          Casa Bianca sta riconsiderando la questione alla luce del conflitto in Georgia.

·          VI è crescente opposizione in Congresso.

·          Joe Biden, P Comm. Esteri Senato (e candidato dem a VP) dopo viaggio in Georgia non spinge più per l’approvazione del trattato.

·          Ma Th. Pickering, ex amb. a Mosca: creare solido quadro per dialogo con Mosca, sul modello del dialogo strategico ad alto livello con Cina, diretto dal segr. al Tesoro H. Paulson.

·          Già prima della crisi georgiana aspro dibattito a Washington su trattato nucleare con Russia.

·          Per Amministrazione Bush e altri sostenitori esso è fondamentale per spingere Russia a cooperare con Occidente su questioni strategiche quali la negazione di armi nucleari all’Iran. L’accordo riflette linea USA di dissuadere PVS dal dotarsi di ciclo nucleare completo, offrendo in cambio la banca dei combustibili nucleari cui attingere.

·          Russia interessata all’accordo, che risolleverebbe la sua industria nucleare, a corto di ordinativi. Cremlino ha costituito nuova società statale per l’espansione dell’industria nucleare, anche all’estero, e ridurre la dipendenza dal petrolio e gas.

·          Gli oppositori (tra cui il Nonproliferation Policy Education Center): Russia non è partner affidabile, ha legami con Siria e Iran, che assiste nella costruzione del reattore di Bushehr e con fornitura di armi convenzionali.

·          MA molti nell’establishment della politica di sicurezza ritengono che una nuova guerra fredda con Mosca destabilizzerebbe l’ordine mondiale giù inacciato. Un esempio è il rafforzamento dei legami Russia-Siria. Basahar Assad a Mosca ha elogiato linea Russia in Georgia quale colpo all’egemonia occidentale. Russi si sono detti pronti a fornire nuovi sistemi d’arma a Damasco. Portavoce Dip. di Stato esorta i russi a non procedere a tali forniture.

OSCE decide invio di altri 20 osservatori (oltre ai 9 già presenti e irrilevanti) nella zona cuscinetto formata dai russi ai confini dell’Ossezia del sud. Potrebbero essere inviati altri 80 osservatori.

Il cessate il fuoco concordato con UE prevede fascia di di sicurezza di 4,3 km in territorio georgiano.

ONU stima in 158 mila i rifugiati delle ultime settimane, alcuni in Georgia, 37 mila in Russia

Paese Khetagurovo, abitato da osseti: testimonianze di bombardamenti con missili, distruzioni e 8 morti + deportazione civili nell’attacco dei georgiani il 7 agosto.

Tesi georgiani: il villaggio era base di artiglieria degli osseti.

Cacciati i georgiani dai russi, bande ossete hanno bruciato, saccheggiato e distrutto villaggi georgiani.

·          Manifestazione indipendentista di quasi 50 mila a Sukhumi, molti portati con autobus da lontano. Bandiere russe quasi eguagliano quelle abkaze.

·          Forte crescita della presenza immobiliare russa nell’Abkhazia, già nota come “Riviera sovietica”; forte afflusso turisti russi.

·          Ministro Esteri Abkhazia, Sergei Samba, auspica che se Russia riconosce lindipendenza, anche Turchia, Giordania e Siria, dove c’è forte diaspora abkhaza, la seguano.

·          In guerra con Georgia nel 1992-3 le forze abkhaze cacciarono le truppe georgiane e 250 mila georgiani, gran parte dei quali non ritornarono. Russia diede agli abkhazi passaporto russo.

·          Dopo riconoscimento Kosovo da parte UE, sostegno russo è aumentato, mentre a marzo sono state abolite le barriere commerciali: forte afflusso investimenti russi, che stanno costruendo centri turistici e rifacendo le strade, anche per le Olimpiadi invernali di Sochi nel 2014.

·          210 mila profughi georgiani fuggiti dall’Abkhazia nel 1992-93, rimasti finora in gran parte in condizioni precarie in Georgia, il cui governo non ne favorisce l’integrazione per poterli usare domani. In Croazia circa metà dei 250 mila serbi fuggiti nel 1995 sono ritornati.

·          Censimento 1989: Abkhazi = 18%, georgiani 46%, + armeni, russi, greci.

·          Governo Georgia non sta neppure favorendo il ritorno dei profughi, temendo che non ne tornino a sufficienza per prevalere su abkhazi e russi, e che ciò ridurrebbe la pressione per il ritorno degli altri.

·          Bielorussia e Kazakistan, considerati stretti alleati di Mosca, hanno fatto attendere e lesinato il proprio appoggio alla Russia sulla Georgia, temendo che la Russia possa fare analoghi giochi con le minoranze etniche al loro interno per sollevare questioni territoriali.

·          Nazarbayev (P Kazakistan): “Il principio dell’integrità territoriale è riconosciuto dall’intera comunità internazionale. Le difficili questioni interetniche dovrebbero essere affrontate con negoziati pacifici. Non vi può essere soluzione militare a questi conflitti”.

·          Armenia e Azerbaijan, che dipendono da Georgia per flussi petrolio, si sono defilati.

·          Anche Ucraina e Moldova temono il sollevamento di questioni territoriali.

·          Linea Merkel di scetticismo nei confronti della Russia prevarrebbe ora sulla tradizionale linea tedesca pro “relazione speciale” con Mosca.

·          In visita a Tbilisi Merkel ha espresso solidarietà ai georgiani; precedenti rapporti con Saakashvili erano tiepidi. Merkel era stata decisiva nel bloccare la richiesta georgiana di aderire alla NATO, appoggiata da USA, con la tesi che un paese con questioni territoriali irrisolte non era pronto per la NATO.

·          Lobby affaristiche tedesche sono contrarie a mosse che possano offendere Russia, tra i mercati più promettenti per GER, e fonte del 37% del gas e del 31% del petrolio consumati in GER.

·          USA hanno firmato impegno a proteggere Polonia con scudo missilistico, base in Polonia. Accordo segue di un giorno l’impegno di Polonia e altri membri NATO ad aiutare la Georgia.

·          Russia vede lo scudo come arma offensiva contro se stessa.

·          Ministero Esteri russo: risposta russa “andrà oltre la diplomazia”. Miliatari russi in passato avevano affermato che se accoglie missili Polonia rischia di essere attaccata.

·          Polonia ha ottenuto da USA concessioni: collocati anche missili antimissile a corto raggio Patriot; finanziamenti per ammodernamento vecchi armamenti polacchi; impagno USA a difesa di Polonia se attaccata.

·          POLONIA finora aveva resistito a concedere la base per gli intercettori USA (CEKIA l’ha concessa a luglio), anche perché USA non faceva concessioni su visti ai polacchi.

·          Analisti tuttavia sono scettici sulla volontà USA di mettere a rischio il proprio territorio per difendere la Polonia. Alastair Cameron, capo dell’ European Security Program presso il Royal United Services Institute (Londra): scommessa di Polonia = scommessa di Georgia su intervento USA [=scommessa di Polonia su intervento Francia e Gran Bretagna nel 1939 –ndr]

·          Al vertice NATO GB si smarca da linea USA pro isolamento Russia,

·          avvicinandosi a linea UE di maggior coinvolgimento Russia, perché abbia più da guadagnare “come partner che come agressore”.

·          “Un alleato in meno per Washington”.

·          Stampa russa sottolinea l’evento: vertice NATO fallimento per USA.

·          GB non ha appoggiato proposta USA di estromettere Russia da G8

·          GB ha questioni in sospeso con Russia, tra cui il contenzioso BP-soci russi.

·          Nuovo segnale di linea più filo UE anche se non di rottura con USA del min. Esteri D. Miliband, dato come potenziale successore di G. Brown.

1) MELIK KAYLAN in Welcome Back To the Great Game, August 13, 2008 accusa i Russi di pulizia etnica in Ossezia con eliminazione dei Georgiani, tanto che restano solo contadini Osseti e forze di sicurezza russe che si fingono Osseti. Ritiene che gli Usa abbiano sottostimato le ambizioni russe e in particolare gli effetti dell’invasione russa nei confronti di Ucraina, Stati Baltici ed Europa, ma anche come minaccia strategica alla presenza americana in Irak e Afghanistan. I russi non si sono mossi emotivamente, perché provocati, ma consci del peso geopolitico del Caucaso e in particolare dell’importanza di Georgia e Azerbaijan, unici “corridoi liberi” attraverso cui far giungere in occidente le risorse del Centro Asia (il gas turlkmeno, il petrolio kazhako). L’oleodotto Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan è importante non solo perché aggira Iran e Russia, ma per il suo valore simbolico. Secondo fonti georgiano i russi hanno cercato di interrompere il flusso attraverso l’oleodotto con bombardamenti. Occorre porre attenzione al fatto che l’Afghanistan è circondato da ex colonie sovietiche, oltre che da Iran e Pakistan. Se i russi ripropongono la loro presenza nel sud dell’Asia, come ai tempi dell’Unione Sovietica, possono supportare l’Iran nel suo sforzo di riaffermare un’influenza in Irak, Siria e Libano. Sono a rischio il futuro dell’Afghanistan e la stabilità dell’Irak.

2) In “Siamo tutti georgiani”, 14 agosto 08, il candidato repubblicano alla Presidenza John McCain avverte che è un errore per gli Americani considerare l’invasione della piccola remota Georgia come un ritorno al passato (un episodio da guerra fredda) che non li minaccia. Non bisogna credere alle motivazioni umanitarie dei russi il cui vero obiettivo è un cambio di regime in Georgia. I russi hanno continuato l’attacco in territorio georgiano, anche dopo gli accordi per un cessate il fuocomediato dai francesi, distruggendo basi militari e concentrando la loro flotta del mar Nero davanti alle coste georgiane; il loro intervento spiega perché Polonia, Lituania, Estonia Lettonia e Ucraina abbiano espresso la loro solidarietà alla Georgia, che resta, come l’Ucraina, un candidato a entrare nella Nato. Gli Usa devono mettere la Russia davanti alle sue responsabilità, difendere le libere scelte dei georgiani.

3) THOMAS DE WAAL, che scrive per l’ Institute for War and Peace Reporting di Londra, in Caucasus Burning, 19 ag 08, afferma che I perdenti del Caucaso in fiamme sono i 25 mila profughi osseti e georgiani, ma anche i villaggi devastati e i 50 mila georgiani che vivono oggi in Abkhazia, minacciati di pulizia etnica. Critica Germania e Francia per aver posto il veto nel 2005 a una forza di interposizione europea in Georgia, cosi che i russi sono rimasti a presidiare le regioni contese. Se la Germania volesse giocare un ruolo di leader dovrebbe cancellare il progetto di Nord Strema con la Russia. Critica anche la condotta del governo georgiano: Saakashvili ha deliberatamente provocato i russi, ha rifiutato ogni apertura alle esigenze di autonomia di Abkhazia e Sud Ossezia (arrivando a proibire il commercio dell’Abkhazia con la Turchia), isolandole, col risultato di aver perso entrambi i territori, che aveva promesso di riannettersi in 5 anni. Anche gli Usa sono responsabili per aver lasciato credere a   Saakashvili di essere disposti a scatenare una guerra per la Georgia. Ma il rischio maggiore della situazione sta nella possibilità che il conflitto si estenda alle altre questioni irrisolte, come quella del Nagorno-Karabakh che oppone Armenia e Azerbaijan. Per ora i Russi sono trionfanti e si presentano come gli unici garanti della pace.

4) Lavrov, Ministro degli Esteri della federazione russa, in “L’America deve scegliere fra Russia e Georgia” del 20 agosto 08, accusa gli occidentali di dipingere i russi c ome aggressori, ignorando volutamente la decisione della georgia di usare la forza contro l’Ossezia del sud, attaccando con ferocia la capitale Tskhinvali. Gli osservatori imparziali riconoscono che i russi non si sono mossi subito., ma solo in difesa di civili e delle proprie forze di interposizione. Lavrov contrappone l’efficienza e la professionalità delle truppe russe alla violenza dei bombardamenti occidentali sul Kosovo nel ’99, che hanno preso di mira soprattutto obiettivi civili. La Russia ha rispettato le leggi internazionali e ha evitato atrocità tipo quelle avvenute a Srebrenica nel 1995 in presenta di truppe ONU. Gli Usa hanno armato lo pseudodemocratico governo della Georgia, che si è comportato in modo irresponsabile. La Russia vuole la pace, ma continuerà a togliere all’attuale regime georgiano i mezzi per fare danno, a partire da un embargo sulle armi. La Russia vuole buoni rapporti con gli Usa, ma basati sulla reciprocità. Gli Usa devono valutare i costi di sostenere fino in fondo il regime georgiano.

By ALAN CULLISON and ANDREW OSBORN

TSKHINVALI, Georgia — Russia defied the West by recognizing the independence of two separatist regions of Georgia, a move that threatened to dismember a U.S. ally.

In brushing off Western denunciations, Moscow demonstrated not just its resurgence but a self-confidence in its centuries-old role of expansion along its southern borders, where since czarist times it has successfully manipulated language, ethnic rivalries and history to offset its enemies.

Getty Images 

Residents of Sukhumi celebrated the recognition of Abkhazian independence by Russian Federation.

Russia formally recognized the Georgian rebel regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states in a new challenge which angered the Western powers.

In the West, the move set off a string of criticisms, and warnings that relations are now the chilliest since the Cold War.

But in Moscow, officials prepared for outrage to blow over. "We’re not scared of anything, including the prospect of a Cold War, but of course we don’t want it," President Dmitry Medvedev said on the Kremlin-sponsored television network Russia Today. Mr. Medvedev separately warned that Moscow could respond with unspecified military means to a planned U.S. missile defense system in Eastern Europe. Adding to tensions with Moscow, Poland agreed to host part of that system last week after the conflict in Georgia helped speed talks.

Moscow has so far appeared confident that the West needs Russia too much — for everything from energy to cooperation on other international issues — to risk a serious rift over Georgia. The U.S. and Germany had both warned the Kremlin not to grant diplomatic recognition to the two separatist regions, South Ossetia and Abkhazia. On Tuesday, President George W. Bush condemned the Kremlin’s move and called on Moscow to "reconsider this irresponsible decision."

German Chancellor Angela Merkel called Russia’s move "absolutely unacceptable," and the European Union[e] said the decision was "contrary to the principles of Georgia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity."

But so far all Western leaders have said they want to continue dialogue with Russia. European officials say they aren’t considering economic sanctions.

On Tuesday, Konstantin Kosachev, head of the Russian parliament’s international affairs committee, told the Interfax news agency that the criticism will "remain at the level of political declarations, which will rather quickly be consigned to the historical archive."

Investors aren’t so sure. The rising East-West conflict has pushed Russian share prices to the lowest level in almost two years: The benchmark RTS stock index finished the session on Tuesday 4.2% lower, at 1579.12, its lowest point since late 2006. It has also eroded the value of the ruble, which closed at 29.86 against a managed dollar-euro currency basket, down 1.5% since the start of the war early this month.

While the West compares Russia’s invasion of South Ossetia to the Soviet intervention in Czechoslovakia 40 years ago, the roots of Russia’s actions here go much deeper. For centuries, it has expanded its borders by skillfully pitting nationalities against one another to keep them off balance and dependent on Moscow for support.

Russia intervenes "on behalf of a minority group and uses them to take control of a country," said Richard Pipes, a professor emeritus at Harvard University. "It’s something they will continue to do if the West does nothing."

Moscow followed this policy even in the early 1990s when it was economically and militarily feeble. In 1992, for example, it forced Georgia to accept an accord that introduced Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia after fighting erupted between separatists and Tbilisi. Ossetians and Georgians are both predominantly Orthodox Christian, but they are very different ethnic groups and speak different languages with different alphabets.

Now, Russia, emboldened by its own oil-fueled recovery and confident the U.S. is strained by its costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, is using the same strategy to take back what it views as its rightful place in the region — and make a point about the limits of Western power.

Within the empire, the Kremlin has in the past drawn borders for its provinces that made little historical sense, and left minorities in some republics stranded with traditional rivals.

Some of those borders remain a worry today. In 1954 Soviet leader Nikita Krushchev signed a decree awarding Crimea, home of the Soviet Black Sea Fleet, to Ukraine, which was then part of the Soviet Union[e]. But most of the peninsula’s population was Russian-speaking and not ethnic Ukrainian. Today, Kiev accuses Moscow of manipulating Crimea’s staunchly pro-Russian population, whose protests have helped stymie Ukraine’s efforts to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Russia as Rescuer

As Ossetian folklorists tells it, their people are descendents of the great tribe of Alans, whose warlike forays spread their genes to the far corners of North Africa and Europe, and are also related to King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table.

On their home turf, Ossetians have been invaded and occupied for centuries. Perhaps the darkest moment came in the year 1395, when Central Asian conqueror Tamerlane’s hordes swept in from the east, burning towns, killing the men, raping the women and forcing the few survivors to flee high into the rugged Caucasus Mountains that form what is now Russia’s southern border.

Recovery was slow. For the next 400 years, some Ossetians say, their once-great civilization numbered only a few thousand who scratched out a living as highland cattle herders. Life improved only when Russia, under Catherine the Great, sent its troops into the region, chased hostile tribes off the fertile lowlands and declared the Russian Empire protector of the Ossetian people.

"Without Russia, our people would have simply disappeared," says Ludwig Chibirov, a professor of Ossetian history and former president of the self-declared republic of South Ossetia, which claimed independence in the early 1990s. "Russia is our savior and protector to this day."

But while Russia intervened for the Ossetians under the czars, it also drew a line through their communities. Ossetian villages straddled the Caucasus Mountains, and Moscow assigned those on the south slopes to Georgia. On the north side, Moscow put them under control of Vladikavkaz, a Russian fortress meaning "power of the Caucasus" that was designed to dominate the chief trade routes traversing the region.

South Ossetians have long clamored to be united with the north — and have suffered the wrath of Georgia for seeking Moscow’s help in achieving it. When Georgia declared independence in 1918 after the Bolshevik Revolution, South Ossetians revolted against Tbilisi in hopes of uniting with their brethren to the north. Tbilisi sent in punitive expeditions, villages were burned, and thousands fled north into Russia. There, many took revenge by joining Bolshevik troops and returned to Georgia to topple the new government and usher in Soviet power.

Mounting Tensions

As the Soviet Union[e] teetered towards collapse, Georgia declared its independence in 1991. South Ossetia took steps to secede from Georgia, and fighting broke out as Georgians tried to put a stop to the move.

From 1992, the man running Georgia was former Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze. Around that time, a Russian-mediated cease-fire, monitored by the Organization for Cooperation and Security in Europe, between South Ossetian militias and Georgian troops was implemented. Under its terms, Russia garrisoned 500 peacekeepers permanently in the region. Georgia was allowed the same number of peacekeepers on the ground.

Tensions in the region mounted, and a standoff between armed militias continued with periodic outbreaks of violence. Ethnic Georgians controlled a string of villages north of Tskhinvali that straddled the main road to Russia. Ossetians were forced to take a looping road around the villages when traveling to and from Russia.

Ossetians say another source of frustration was water. The capital’s water supply comes from Russia in large metal pipes that run close or through the ethnic Georgian villages. In the summertime, Georgians cut holes in the pipes to divert water to irrigate their crops, according to South Ossetian government officials. In the summer, locals said Tskhinvali often had little or no water.

After years of simmering tensions, more radical figures took office on both sides. In South Ossetia, Mr. Chibirov was defeated in 2001 by a burly former wrestler, Eduard Kokoity. In undisputed Georgia, U.S.-educated Mikheil Saakashvili swept to power in the so-called Rose Revolution in 2003. He went on to win a landslide election victory the following year, with a promise to bring all the country’s breakaway territories back into the fold, restoring Georgia’s territorial integrity and banishing what he saw as pernicious Russian influence.

After fighting broke out earlier this month and Georgian forces swept into the South Ossetian capital, someone shot the head off a statue of Vasily Abayev, an Ossetian linguist. Last week, Irina Babayeva gathered the shards together in the hope that someone someday would glue them back together.

"Every time the Georgians attack, they try to destroy all our accomplishments," said Ms. Babayeva. "They don’t want us to have a history."

She led most of her life with her mother in a South Ossetian village, Tamarasheni, just north of the capital of Tskhinvali. The village was mostly ethnic Georgian, but "in Soviet times, nobody noticed the differences between us," she said. That changed as the U.S.S.R. dissolved and nationalist movements filled the void.

"My mother was a cleaning woman, and the Georgians would come to her all the time and say: "You, woman, give us money,’" said Ms. Babayeva. "What kind of money could my mother give? She had nothing."

Today, the Kremlin has military posts deeper in Georgian territory than ever before, guarding a key port and highway. Moscow’s recognition of the separatists’ independence means there’s virtually no chance they will return to Georgian control.

Tuesday, Mr. Medvedev said that Russia has no plans to intervene in other conflicts and isn’t seeking to reassert a sphere of influence. But he warned that "our government is obliged to ensure our interests along our entire periphery."

For now, Mr. Saakashvili says Georgia will still try to regain the breakaway provinces. Fluent in English, he has appeared repeatedly on U.S. television networks, and called Russia’s actions a land grab. "It is the first attempt in Europe, since Nazi Germany and Stalin, of a big country to annex the territory of another country," Saakashvili said in an interview.

In Tskhinvali, Mr. Kokoity said he hopes Moscow’s intervention could mean South Ossetia’s final integration into Russia. He had trouble concealing his jubilation.

"Instead of studying languages, Saakashvili should study the history of the Russian Federation, and how Georgia was once happy to be part of it," said Mr. Kokoity. Russia, he said, would be a much better defender of Georgia’s interest than the U.S. "If I were Saakashvili, I would shoot myself."

By LEILA ABBOUD in Paris and GREGORY L. WHITE in Moscow

August 25, 2008; Page A6

France called a summit of European Union[e] leaders for next week to discuss the conflict in Georgia, reflecting growing frustration among Western leaders as Russia defies calls to withdraw all its troops from Georgian territory.

Russia said late Friday it completed the pullback of its troops from Georgian territory to separatist regions that Moscow supports. But the Kremlin left hundreds of what it called "peacekeeping forces" at dug-in posts deep in Georgia, including near a vital port and transit corridor, as well as a military base.

So far, the Kremlin has seemed largely impervious to political pressure from the West, but U.S. and European leaders are growing increasingly concerned that Moscow’s ultimate aim is to cripple Georgia’s economy and the pro-Western government of Mikheil Saakashvili.

In a statement Sunday night, the Élyseé Palace said the Sept. 1 summit is being held at the request of several European countries and will discuss the future relationship between Russia and the EU, as well as aid to Georgia. While the U.S. has been quick to criticize Russia’s actions, Europe had been less categorical. The summit is among the strongest examples yet of Europe’s anger.

"What’s important here is that this isn’t about the U.S. and Russia," said a senior U.S. administration official. "It’s about everyone and Russia."

U.S. officials have said Moscow’s pullback fell short of its obligations under a six-point cease-fire deal French President Nicolas Sarkozy brokered with his Russian counterpart, Dmitry Medvedev, Aug. 12.

The two presidents spoke again by phone Saturday, focusing on the Russian forces still in Georgia, their offices said. But the official accounts of the conversation differed on the role of international monitors who are to be dispatched to Georgia soon. Mr. Sarkozy’s office said the two presidents had agreed the international group would replace Russian forces. Hours later, the Kremlin issued a statement denying Moscow had made any commitment to remove its peacekeeping forces.

Last week, after a conversation with Mr. Medvedev, Mr. Sarkozy said Russia would face "serious consequences" if the troops weren’t withdrawn as per the six-point plan. The president of France — which holds the rotating presidency of the EU — had said the first measure he would take in retaliation should the Russians not comply would be to call a special EU meeting. Later, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner warned that Russia could face a deterioration of relations with Europe, Moscow’s largest trading partner, including ties involving energy, Russia’s main export.

Russia sent thousands of troops into Georgia early this month after Georgian forces attacked South Ossetia, a Russian-backed separatist region of Georgia. Russian troops crushed Georgia’s much-smaller army and occupied large areas of the country. Most of the troops left Friday, but Moscow retained its peacekeepers in Kremlin-defined security zones around South Ossetia and Abkhazia, another Moscow-backed separatist region.

"They are trying to keep instruments to suffocate Georgia and create further trouble at any moment," said Giga Bokeria, Georgia’s deputy foreign minister. Russian officials said the troops are needed to ensure security.

The Kremlin faces another potential flash point with the West early this week, when Russian legislators are expected to consider recognizing the separatist regions as independent. Before the war, the Kremlin had refused to do so, citing international law, but Russian officials now said recognition is likely. That would be viewed in Western capitals as a violation of the spirit of the six-point agreement, diplomats say.

U.S. and European capitals already are stepping up support for the Georgian government, providing humanitarian aid and promising funding for rebuilding, including of Georgia’s battered military.

Sunday, the first of several U.S. Navy ships with aid arrived in the port of Batumi, providing a potent symbol of Western support. A Russian military spokesman complained that the warships carrying aid were fueling tensions in the Black Sea.

In Ukraine, meanwhile, pro-Western President Viktor Yushchenko said the conflict in Georgia showed his country needed to accelerate its bid to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Speaking at a military parade in honor of Ukraine’s independence, he said, "We must speed up our work to achieve membership of the European system of security and raise the defense capabilities of the country. Only these steps will guarantee our security and the integrity of our borders."

Russia opposes the idea of Ukraine joining NATO, which the Kremlin views as an anti-Russian bloc.

–Alessandra Galloni in Paris, John D. McKinnon in Washington and Andrew Osborn in Tbilisi contributed to this article.

Parliament Votes

For Recognition;

Trade Pacts at Risk

By GREGORY L. WHITE in Moscow and JOHN W. MILLER in Brussels

August 26, 2008; Page A9

The Kremlin upped the ante in its showdown with the West over Moscow’s invasion of Georgia, as Russia’s Parliament voted to recognize the independence of two separatist Georgian regions and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin threatened to pull out of trade agreements.

The unanimous votes in both houses of Parliament immediately drew stern condemnations from Western leaders, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel. She warned Russian President Dmitry Medvedev not to complete the process by officially recognizing the separatists as independent countries, a move that would effectively break up Georgia.

But the Kremlin, confident after crushing the Georgian assault on one of the Russian-backed separatist regions, South Ossetia, in a five-day war early this month, has seemed impervious to pressure so far. Divisions within Europe and the U.S. over how to handle the crisis have further weakened the West’s response.

Monday, Moscow stuck by its plans to keep hundreds of "peacekeeping forces" on Georgian territory in what U.S. and European officials insisted was a violation of the terms of the French-brokered cease-fire that ended the fighting.

Recognition of the separatists would be another challenge to that deal, which called for talks on the future of the territories, Western diplomats say. The Kremlin declined to comment on whether Mr. Medvedev will follow through on the nonbinding parliamentary votes with formal recognition, though he has said the separatist regions, Abkhazia and South Ossetia, will never return to Georgian control. "This [full recognition] would be against international law," Ms. Merkel told reporters in Stockholm, news agencies reported. "That would bring about a very difficult and critical situation."

U.S. and European officials acknowledge that painful economic sanctions aren’t an option against Russia, Europe’s largest energy supplier and the world’s No. 2 oil exporter. Political isolation also has proved difficult, given Moscow’s important role in such international issues as controlling Iran’s nuclear program. "There’s nothing the West can do," said Alexander Rahr, a Russia expert at the German Council on Foreign Relations. "The EU and U.S. will heavily criticize [the decision to recognize], but they can’t do anything to stop it."

Western retaliation for Moscow’s actions in Georgia has been limited to cutting back already limited military cooperation and threatening to delay Russia’s long-sought accession to the World Trade Organization.

In one of the first concrete signs of fallout from the tension, Bush administration officials have said a landmark nuclear-cooperation deal with Russia is unlikely to be ratified before a new president takes office. U.S. officials are also dispatching two delegations to Tbilisi to show Washington’s support for the government of President Mikheil Saakashvili. This week, a State Department aid team will visit, while next week, U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney plans to stop in Tbilisi on a trip through the region.

European officials Monday made clear the EU doesn’t plan to use a special summit on the Georgian crisis called for Sept. 1 to punish Russia.

Germany will emphasize the reconstruction of Georgia at the summit, according to a Foreign Ministry spokesman. The EU needs to strike a balance, he adds, "between on one side ‘no business as usual,’ and on the other side be careful, because stopping conversations with Moscow will not stop the conflict either."

A French official said that while sanctions against Russia won’t be on the agenda, there are other "economic interests" that Europe could leverage against Russia, such as tightening travel restrictions for Russians within the Continent.

Moscow, meanwhile, has threatened to turn some of the Western punishments back against the U.S. and Europe.

Monday, Mr. Putin ordered his government to pull out of some bilateral trade deals it had negotiated with major partners in anticipation of WTO membership. Russian officials didn’t link the move directly to the Georgian conflict but said that because there was now little chance of Russia’s joining the trade bloc in the near future, there was no reason to continue observing the agreements. Russian officials declined to specify what deals might be affected. Some such pacts cover agricultural products where Russia is a major export market for U.S. and European producers.

The White House urged Russia not to retreat from its trade commitments. "It’s certainly not in Russia’s interest to back away from their WTO commitments, if indeed they aspire to be part of the system," said Bush spokesman Tony Fratto. Mr. Fratto suggested a move away from the WTO, which oversees the trading system for more than 150 nations, would only add to the uncertainty investors are already facing in Russia. "If they step back from the commitments they’ve already made, then they’re taking steps further away from that goal and that’s certainly not good for Russia, at the end of the day."

Russia is by far the largest economy that isn’t a WTO member, but talks on accession have dragged on for more than a decade. While membership isn’t expected to have a major economic impact, a sign the Kremlin was giving it up as a policy goal could contribute to alarm among investors already spooked by the surge in East-West tensions, analysts said.

"The biggest concern that investors have is that any increased confrontation with the West might lead to a change in the promised reform agenda or a delay," said Chris Weafer, strategist at Uralsib, a Moscow investment house. He noted that many foreign investors had bought into Russian stocks over the past year or so expecting Mr. Medvedev to continue moves to open up the economy and stimulate private business.

"Now a lot of people are wondering, is the game changing?" he said. Russian stock prices dropped to their lowest levels in nearly two years Monday, but Mr. Weafer said the market hasn’t seen major outflows of foreign money yet. "There are a lot of itchy fingers hanging over the sell button," he added.

Tensions Prompt U.S. to Reconsider Proliferation Agreement

By JAY SOLOMON

August 23, 2008; Page A1

WASHINGTON — The Bush administration’s landmark nuclear-cooperation agreement with Russia is unlikely to gain passage before President George W. Bush leaves office, the latest sign of how Russia’s offensive in Georgia has roiled the international scene.

The accord, which Mr. Bush and Russia’s then-President Vladimir Putin signed in 2007, would allow for greater U.S.-Russian cooperation in developing proliferation-resistant reactors and nuclear fuel banks. The White House saw the pact as enhancing post-Cold War strategic cooperation between Washington and Moscow on issues ranging from weapons proliferation to alternative energy supplies.

The Bush administration initially presented a bill to Congress in May in the hope it could be passed into law by September.

An administration official familiar with National Security Council deliberations said Friday the White House is now "reviewing all options regarding Russia," as a result of the Georgia conflict, including its support for the nuclear-cooperation initiative. "It’s no longer business as usual," the official said.

In addition, leading congressional officials said there’s little chance of the nuclear pact being approved by Congress before the current session ends, a result of rising opposition to the bill among key lawmakers in the House of Representatives and Senate.

Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said this week he’s no longer going to push the bill during the current session, after concluding a fact-finding trip to Georgia. The Democrat, who has been mentioned as a possible vice presidential candidate, said he’d initially been inclined to favor the pact.

"Russia’s actions have already erased the possibility of advancing legislative efforts to promote U.S.-Russian partnership…including an agreement to allow for increased collaboration with Russia on nuclear energy production," Sen. Biden said in a written statement.

The deal’s uncertain future is the latest example of how the Russian-Georgian conflict has changed the international landscape. Earlier this month, the Bush administration and Poland reached an agreement to base part of a planned U.S. missile shield on Polish soil, a move long in the works that sped up as a result of the conflict.

The delay also represents a blow to the Bush administration’s anti-proliferation efforts, which are a cornerstone of its attempt to better secure the international supply of nuclear materials. At the same time, the White House is struggling to complete a similar deal with India.

Earlier this month, a long-simmering conflict between Russia and Georgia over two Georgian provinces burst into open conflict, in which Russian forces battered their opponents before agreeing to a ceasefire. Western governments, who to varying degrees decried Moscow’s actions, have since complained that the Russians aren’t abiding by the terms of the agreement, but have few options to address the situation.

To be sure, current and former U.S. officials say that cooperation between Washington and Moscow on issues ranging from weapons proliferation and energy security could still move ahead, once the conflict in Georgia is resolved. Indeed, they say the Bush administration’s nuclear-cooperation pact could be picked up by a successive administration. And some are even calling for an enhanced U.S.-Russia dialogue over key national-security issues, once the Georgia crisis subsides.

"We need to develop a solid framework" for a renewed dialogue with Russia, said Thomas Pickering, a former U.S. ambassador to Moscow, at a conference this week. As a model, he cited the Bush administration’s current high-level strategic dialogue with China, headed by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.

Even before Russia’s battles with Georgia, the nuclear-cooperation agreement had sparked a sharp debate inside Washington over the future path of U.S.-Russian relations.

The Bush administration and other supporters of the accord viewed its implementation as essential to nurturing Moscow as the West’s partner on key strategic issues, such as denying Iran nuclear weapons. They also believed U.S.-Russian nuclear cooperation could serve as the cornerstone of a new international nonproliferation regime.

The White House has sought to persuade developing nations against mastering a nuclear-fuel cycle in their pursuit of alternative energy sources due to related risk of weapons proliferation. The U.S. sought instead to develop an international nuclear fuel bank these nations could draw upon. And Russia, with among the world’s most advanced nuclear-energy industries, was seen as potentially hosting the fuel bank. Fuel banks store the processed nuclear fuels that can be used in electricity-generating power plants.

Russia also had high hopes for the accord and the impact it could have on its nuclear industry, which had been one of the most advanced under the Soviet system but later found itself short of funding and orders.

In recent years, the Kremlin has set up a new state-run company to expand the nuclear industry, seeking out contracts to build and service plants outside Russia, as well as making a major new investment in Russia’s own civilian-nuclear program. The industry is one of several the Russian authorities are promoting in an effort to wean the economy away from its dependence on oil and gas.

Opponents of the nuclear accord have argued Russia can’t be trusted as a partner, citing Moscow’s strategic ties to rogue states such as Iran and Syria. Moscow is currently assisting Tehran in building a light-water nuclear reactor in the Iranian city of Bushehr and has also supplied Iran with conventional weapons systems in recent years.

These critics say Moscow’s actions in Georgia clearly undercut the arguments of some U.S. strategists who’ve sought to define the new Russian government as a potentially benign player on the international stage.

"As goes the nuclear deal, as goes U.S.-Russia relations," said Henry Sokolski of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, a Washington think tank that opposes the Russia agreement. "By walking away from the agreement, the administration will be less willing to make excuses for Moscow."

Still, many U.S. national security strategists say any U.S. effort to engage in a new Cold War with Russia risks further destabilizing a global order already facing rising threats from conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan and the wider Middle East. They note the Kremlin could seek to further undercut U.S. efforts to promote peace agreements in the Middle East and to end the nuclear programs of Iran and North Korea.

In a troubling sign, U.S. officials point to Syria’s call this week for enhanced military cooperation with Russia. President Bashar Assad met with his Russian counterpart, Dmitry Medvedev, in Moscow and praised the Kremlin’s actions in Georgia as a strike against Western hegemony. The Russians, in turn, said they were prepared to provide new weapons systems to Damascus.

"We have always said to the Russians that these sales should not go forward, that they don’t contribute to regional stability," State Department spokesman Robert Wood said Friday. "I urge them not to go through with these sales."

Pursuing Peace in Georgia

Chairman Alexander Stubb Says

There Was No Warning of Attack

By MARC CHAMPION

August 22, 2008 12:43 p.m.

Amid the furious claims and counterclaims between Georgia and Russia over who started the war in the tiny separatist territory of South Ossetia, a group of independent monitors posted there when the fighting broke out probably knows the answer, but isn’t talking.

Finnish Foreign Minister Alexander Stubb, the current chairman of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe said in an interview Thursday that three OSCE monitors were stationed in the South Ossetian capital Tskhinvali when the fighting began and had to wait out the fighting in the basement of their post, which was bombed.

Mr. Stubb has tried to avoid speaking about what happened on the night of Aug. 7, when Georgian troops stormed Tskhinvali, triggering a massive Russian military intervention on foreign soil. The three monitors are being kept out of the way of the media. Georgians say they were forced to attack, because their villages and positions came under a hail of artillery fire and they feared an invasion had begun. Russia says the Georgian attack was premeditated and unprovoked.

But a Russian claim that the OSCE had been forewarned of the Georgian assault has prompted Mr. Stubb to respond. The claim, said Mr. Stubb, was "absolute rubbish" — had he known on Aug. 7 the attack would come, he would have pulled his people out.

"I had three OSCE officers in there living on vodka and water," said Mr. Stubb, adding that one of them was a Finn.

The OSCE is in an uncomfortable position. As independent observers, they are uniquely placed to know what happened on the ground and to give an authoritative account. But they are also key to efforts at implementing a cease-fire and persuading both sides to return to their positions before Aug. 6. If they back one side’s version of the events, it could explode the cease-fire efforts.

"Frankly, I’m not interested at all in who started it. I’m interested in getting military monitors in place a the cease-fire working," said Mr. Stubb sharply, when asked why his monitors had not left when heavy shelling began in the villages, if as Georgia claims a heavy bombardment preceded the assault on Tskhinvali.

"If all the energy that went into the tough talk on both sides went to getting a solution, we’d be a lot better off," he said, clearly tired and irritated.

The OSCE has had nine monitors — a team of eight plus a leader — on the ground in South Ossetia to observe a cease-fire maintained by Rusian-led peacekeepers in South Ossetia since the 1990s, after heavy fighting in the region. This week, the 56 nations of the OSCE, including Russia and Georgia, agreed to deploy 20 more monitors on the ground. They’ll then discuss the monitors’ precise mandate and may expand the number by another 80. The monitors’ job will be to patrol outside South Ossetia in the security zone Russia is now establishing.

Getting the monitors on the ground quickly is important, said Mr. Stubb, because it allows the international community to gather more information about what is actually going on in the region, where Russia is supposed to be pulling back and withdrawing its forces. The extra 20 monitors will operate in a buffer zone Russia is now establishing on the ground.

Two Finnish observers arrived in Georgia on Wednesday, said Mr. Stubb, while two Frenchmen arrived Thursday. The whole team will be assembled by Sunday, ready to deploy in armored personnel carriers Monday.

"We probably broke a world record in terms of getting a military monitoring mission on underway. A few rules had to be bent," he said.

By ANDREW OSBORN

August 23, 2008; Page A6

KHETAGUROVO, Georgia — Grigory Mamiyev says his father, Pyotr, was standing in front of his two-story house in this tiny Ossetian village when shrapnel from a Georgian shell tore part of his head off, killing him instantly. His father’s blood still stains the sidewalk outside.

Locals say an elderly woman named Tamara Mamiyeva (no relation) was burnt to death when another Georgian shell ignited a fierce fire in her home, opposite the Mamiyevs’. The squat brick house where she lived is now a blackened husk.

On the next street in this sleepy village of 150 houses, Eteri Dzhioyeva mourns her husband, Aslan. She says shrapnel hit the pensioner in the back of the head, killing him about a yard from the cellar he was trying to reach.

As the world wonders why Russia and the tiny pro-Russian statelet of South Ossetia are so sure the fierce blows Moscow dealt Georgia this month were proportionate, the devastation wrought in this village offers important clues. A visit to Khetagurovo, just five miles from Tskhinvali, the South Ossetian capital, turned up evidence of indiscriminate shelling of civilian targets and accounts of the kidnapping of noncombatants. Some of the survivors’ stories were independently confirmed; others couldn’t be.

"We have a saying," says Mr. Mamiyev, standing amid the ruins of his home. "Build a home, plant a tree, and raise a son." Now, he says, there should be a new line: "And then the Georgians come along and turn everything into ash and cinders."

Locals say eight villagers were killed in a Georgian attack that began on Aug. 7 and triggered the massive response from Russia. That number could not be independently confirmed, though several freshly dug graves were found in Khetagurovo’s cemetery, set in the grounds of a handsome 12th-century stone church. The churchyard is littered with Georgian soldiers’ empty ration packs, Georgian cigarette packets and shell casings.

In an interview, Giga Bokeria, Georgia’s Deputy Foreign Minister, denied civilians had been deliberately targeted. He said that Khetagurovo had been hit because it had been an artillery "fire point" used by Ossetian militia to fire on three predominantly Georgian villages. "We’re sorry," he said. "We obviously regret any loss of civilian life." He confirmed that Grad missiles had been fired at the area around the village but insisted that Georgian soldiers had not committed any atrocities there. The only people who had been taken prisoner were combatants and Ossetian spies, he added. Ossetian claims that women had been seized were, he said, "a complete lie."

South Ossetia, an enclave in the shadow of the Caucasus mountains about the size of Rhode Island, is a patchwork of ethnic Georgian and Ossetian villages. The war was the latest bloody chapter in years of ethnic conflict between the groups. After Russian troops drove Georgian forces from the area early this month, vengeful Ossetians burned Georgian villages like Avnevi to the ground. Five ethnic Georgian villages to the north of Tskhinvali have also been systematically bull-dozed, burnt and looted.

Khetagurovo’s dusty, unmade streets are filled with the detritus of war. Villagers’ kitchen gardens and roads are pocked with large craters where shells fell, often close together.

Standing outside his windowless shell-damaged house, Gamlet Gigolayev, a member of the local militia, says the attack began with small-arms fire and was followed by sustained shelling with Grad missiles. Then, he said, came the tanks.

"You could only hide," Mr. Gigolayev says.

As his mother picks up pieces of roof covering and shrapnel from the front porch behind him, Mr. Gigolayev wonders where he is going to live. "This is it, there is nowhere else," he says. "I don’t know how, but we have to fix this place up before the winter sets in."

The village is still dangerous, as it is littered with unexploded and abandoned ordnance. In the back yard of a house nearby, locals force open a crate of Georgian hand grenades with a crow bar before filling their pockets.

South Ossetia’s prosecutor, Taimuraz Khugayev, singles out Khetagurovo as a place where Georgian soldiers committed "war crimes." He says it was occupied on Aug. 7 and 8. "When we liberated the village, we found a car filled with spades abandoned in a field," he says. "We assume the Georgians wanted to organize a mass burial."

Georgian soldiers took civilian hostages from the village, residents say. Mr. Mamiyev says he was one of six hostages taken to the Georgian town of Gori and then on to the Georgian capital, Tbilisi. He says he was released unharmed.

Sitting in her yard drinking coffee with friends, Rita Tegkayeva, another resident who says she was taken hostage, says she is still waiting for news of her husband, Oleg, a colonel in the statelet’s traffic police. Locals say they are holding three Georgian soldiers to barter.

In about a dozen interviews, locals say the attack has strengthened their resolve to become part of Russia. "How many years have we been suffering?" says Ms. Dzhioyeva, who lost her husband. She says Russia is South Ossetia’s only chance of a peaceful future. "Who else will fight the Georgians?" she says.

As U.N. Action

On Georgia Dims

By ALEX FRANGOS

August 22, 2008; Page A6

UNITED NATIONS — Russia and the U.S. appeared headed for a diplomatic showdown, as prospects for United Nations action on the Georgia conflict dimmed under a cloud of veto threats.

Russia proposed a U.N. Security Council resolution late Thursday to codify the so-called six-point cease-fire plan. But the resolution omits reference to Georgia’s "territorial integrity," language the U.S. and its European allies, including France and the U.K., have insisted must be included to protect Georgia’s currently recognized international borders.

Alejandro Wolff, the deputy U.S. ambassador to the U.N., said the "resolution as it stands now would not be supported by my government." He made clear a U.S. veto was possible: "We would be prepared to oppose it."

A Security Council veto would reinforce the sense that Russia and the U.S. have fallen back into the Cold War stance of years ago that often stymied the U.N.

The five permanent members of the Security Council — China, France, Russia, the U.S. and the U.K. — hold the power to block resolutions. A veto wouldn’t be necessary if a majority of the 15-member body opposes Russia’s resolution, a prospect that could dissuade Russia from calling a vote on the matter.

In this particular case, U.N. action is seen as critical to move the peace process in Georgia forward. The six-point plan, negotiated by French President Nicolas Sarkozy, includes a clause that says Russia can continue to perform "security measures" in the area until the "establishment of international mechanisms." It is widely seen by the parties that the term international mechanisms refers to the U.N.

Russia raised the stakes on talks here by proposing its resolution formally at the Security Council, making it possible that a vote could come as early as Friday.

Thousands Rally

In Abkhazia to Push

For Recognition

By GUY CHAZAN

August 22, 2008; Page A6

SUKHUMI, Georgia — Tens of thousands of Abkhazians staged a defiant rally for independence Thursday amid rising hopes that the war in nearby South Ossetia has boosted their chances of finally winning international recognition for their breakaway statelet.

In a show of national pride fueled by Russia’s military victory over Tbilisi, the so-called national congress, a traditional form of decision-making in the mountainous Black Sea region, backed an appeal to Russia and the rest of the international community to recognize Abkhazia’s independence. Nearly 50,000 people attended, officials said, with many of them bused in from distant hillside villages and coastal resorts. Undeterred by the 95-degree heat, they stood for hours on Freedom Square in front of the bombed-out ruins of the Abkhaz parliament, destroyed during a war with Georgia in 1992-93.

"I had a dream last night that Saakashvili was standing on this square crying because he knew he had lost Abkhazia forever," said Masik Avidzba, a young civil servant waving a red, green and white Abkhaz flag, referring to Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili.

Yet there were almost as many Russian flags in the crowd as Abkhaz ones — an indication of how the war in South Ossetia has made Abkhazia even more dependent on Russia.

Many in the crowd feared that the dream of Abkhaz sovereignty is a chimera, and the region’s likely long-term fate was to be absorbed de facto into an emboldened Russia.

"Of course we’d prefer independence, but being part of Russia wouldn’t be a bad idea either," said Nikolai Achba, a businessman. It was an unpopular opinion in the square. One man who overheard Mr. Achba shouted angrily: "We will never be with Russia! Only independence!"

The Russian presence in Abkhazia is already striking. Russian investors have poured into the region, buying real estate, building hotels and leasing farmland.

A region once known as the Soviet Riviera is booming, as Russian tourists flood its resorts and beaches.

The tourist business has suffered this summer, a casualty of the conflict between Moscow and Tbilisi that broke out when Georgia tried to take back the separatist region of South Ossetia and Russia counterattacked, pushing deep into Georgian territory. The war triggered one of the worst crises between Moscow and the West since the end of the Cold War.

Yet Abkhazia sees itself as one of the war’s few beneficiaries. "We hope this has convinced people once and for all that we just can’t live with Georgia," said Sergei Shamba, the Abkhaz foreign minister, in an interview.

Abkhazia is now banking on recognition from Russia, which it hopes will finally lay the legal foundations for its independence bid. Russia’s parliament is already taking steps toward recognition of both Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and the Kremlin seems to be softening its long-standing opposition to the idea, though officials haven’t confirmed any plans. If Russia does grant recognition, Mr. Shamba hopes Turkey, Jordan and Syria, which all have Abkhazian diasporas, will follow suit.

Agence France-Presse/Getty Images 

About 1,000 local Abkhazian residents attended a rally in Sukhumi, Georgia, Thursday as hopes rise that they could win international recognition for their breakaway statelet.

One of the many small nations that make up the ethnic patchwork of the Caucasus, Abkhazia traces its statehood back 12 centuries. But its history of independence is much shorter. In the bitter war with Georgia in 1992-93, Abkhaz forces drove Georgian forces from the region. Some 250,000 ethnic Georgians fled or were driven from Abkhazia. Most never returned.

Abkhazia refused to return to the Georgian fold and was stuck for years in a twilight world of nonrecognition. In recent years, Russia has granted Abkhaz passports and strengthened ties, stopping short of full recognition.

Russian support grew even stronger after Europe recognized Kosovo this year, over Russian objections. In March, Russia dropped formal trade restrictions on Abkhazia, triggering an influx of Russian investment.

The evidence is everywhere in Sukhumi, Abkhazia’s balmy seaside capital. The city of Moscow is building a huge business and cultural center close to the beach. A Russian company is about to open a big hotel, the Intourist, in the city center. Russian steamrollers are paving roads in the capital and Russian money is helping to fix up Sukhumi’s oleander-lined esplanade. A joint Russian-Abkhaz company has been set up to supply construction material for the winter Olympics, scheduled for 2014 in Sochi, 25 miles up the coast.

Russians are snapping up property, often by teaming up with local businessmen to get around laws that restrict ownership of real estate to Abkhaz citizens. "If Russia recognizes Abkhazia, real-estate prices here will go through the roof," says Alexander Mkrtchan, manager of the Ritsa hotel, one of Sukhumi’s biggest.

Russia’s military presence also is expanding, and Abkhaz officials want it to stay. "The only country that can protect us is Russia," said Mr. Shamba, the foreign minister.

Locals have noticed a massive buildup of Russian troops and equipment in the southern district of Gali, which has emerged as a major forward base for Russian operations in Georgia.

One man said he had seen 300 tanks and other armored vehicles pass into Gali over the last 10 days.

"Of course there’s a danger they could swallow us up," says Mr. Shamba. "But we tried to have relations with other countries too — and no one wanted to have anything to do with us."

By MARC CHAMPION

August 22, 2008; Page A6

TBILISI, Georgia — Indira Gamakharia lives with her extended family in a single, partitioned room in a disused Tbilisi hospital block for people displaced by war. She is 22 years old now. She was six when she fled her home in western Georgia.

A refugee from an earlier war in Abkhazia, one of Georgia’s two pro-Russian separatist territories, Ms. Gamakharia, her two young children, her husband and his parents are now among an estimated 330,000 displaced people in Georgia waiting to go home. Most, like Ms. Gamakharia, have been waiting 15 years already.

As Moscow moves closer to recognizing Abkhazia and South Ossetia, a move that would create new de facto international borders under the protection of Russian troops, it looks increasingly as though Georgia’s internal refugees may never go home. Georgia’s government says this is a creeping ethnic cleansing sponsored by Russia.

Ms. Gamakharia and her family fled their home in Ocamcire, a coastal town in Abkhazia, during fighting in the early 1990s as the region broke from Tbilisi’s control. More than half the area’s population, the vast majority ethnic Georgians, fled Abkhazia at the time. Few have been allowed back.

Since Russia’s Aug. 8 military intervention in Georgia, about 110,000 more people have been displaced from their homes, according to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Many could soon return to Georgian cities such as Gori. But about 15,000 are ethnic Georgians who fled South Ossetia for Georgia proper, joining the 10,000 who fled the area in the early 1990s, and may never return. An additional 2,000 have fled Abkhazia in the latest fighting.

South Ossetia’s two top officials have both said in recent days that they don’t intend to allow back the ethnic Georgians who fled when militias torched their homes in the aftermath of the fighting, triggered when Georgian troops stormed the South Ossetian capital Tskhinvali. Russia intervened with overwhelming force, driving the Georgian army into retreat.

"Every month you think, next month we’ll go back, next month it’ll happen. March, April, May….Suddenly 15 years have gone by and I have four grandchildren," says Ms. Gamakharia’s 51-year-old mother-in-law, Eteri Dzagania. "I still believe we’ll go back. It’s like a sickness for us."

Ms. Dzagania fled the Abkhaz capital, Sukhumi, with her son, Gela, when he was 16. Her husband trekked seven days through the mountains to escape capture. They lived two years at a military barracks in western Georgia, recently occupied by Russian troops. Life there was hard and armed gangs made it a dangerous place to bring up children, recalls Ms. Dzagania. They moved to Tbilisi after two years.

Ever since, the family and 76 others like it have shared the same crumbling hospital block, with broken window frames and huge fissures in the red brick walls. They built a partition to make a bedroom. A gauze curtain separates the kitchen. New families displaced by the latest fighting in South Ossetia are moving into the block next door.

Politics are keeping many of Georgia’s refugees, about 7% of its population, stuck in Georgia.

Many of Georgia’s displaced people, including Gela Dzagania, now 31 years-old, are unemployed. He supports his family by doing minor car repairs in a makeshift garage outside the hospital block. Georgia’s government has done little to help people like the Dzaganias to integrate into Georgian society, aid workers say, keeping them in short-term accommodation to avoid any impression that Georgia’s partition is permanent. The government denies that, saying it lacks resources.

"In Sukhumi we have a home, beaches. We could go back tomorrow, we had no problems with our neighbors, they saved us," Mr. Dzagania says.

In total, the U.N. commission for refugees says there are still 210,000 Georgian refugees from the conflict in Abkhazia in the early 1990s waiting to go back. Georgia’s displaced people are spread around 1,900 collection centers like the hospital block, the agency says. In total, they account for about 7% of Georgia’s population.

Georgia’s nationalist government at the time of the Soviet Union[e]’s collapse responded with brutal force to political efforts by Abkhazia and South Ossetia to secure more autonomy and ultimately independence. A 1995 Human Rights Watch report on the two-year war describes how Georgian soldiers and militias swept through southern Abkhazia, killing and terrorizing ethnic Abkhaz and driving them from their homes to areas north of Sukhumi. Armed by Russia and backed by Chechen and Cossack volunteers, the Abkhaz later struck back with the same tactics more effectively, the report says.

Returning displaced people to conflict zones is always hard, aid workers say. Fear and suspicion can make it difficult to accept neighbors back. For example, in Croatia, about half the 250,000 Croatian Serbs who fled Croatian army attacks aimed at retrieving separatist Serb territories in 1995 have returned home.

In the 1989 census, the last before war broke out in Abkhazia, ethnic Abkhaz made up 18% of the population in the region, Georgians 46%, with the remainder ethnic Armenians, Russians and Greeks. If the Georgians return, their numbers could make them politically dominant, threatening a return to Georgian control.

The U.N. commission estimates that 45,000 Georgians, a fifth of the total, have been allowed to return to an ethnically compact Georgian area of Abkhazia, Gali. Abkhazia’s government has opposed repopulating other areas. The Georgian government also has slowed the returns, according to people familiar with the process. They say Tbilisi is worried that if a significant number — but not all — of the displaced people return, that would reduce pressure on the Abkhaz government to allow the rest in. Without all Georgian refugees returning, they might not make up a big enough slice of the voting population to tip the balance and give political control to pro-Georgians.

Georgian officials deny that claim.

Leader of Belarus,

Others Hesitated

In Backing Kremlin

By JEANNE WHALEN and DARIA SOLOVIEVA

August 20, 2008; Page A13

MOSCOW — The president of Belarus, usually a reliable supporter of Moscow, waited well into the Georgian conflict’s second week before declaring Tuesday that Russia had acquitted itself "beautifully."

The delayed praise from Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko mirrors a hesitance among some Russian allies in the former Soviet Union[e] about backing Moscow on Georgia. Nursultan Nazarbayev, the president of Kazakhstan, issued a statement expressing sympathy for the victims but stopped short of endorsing Moscow’s view that pro-Russian territories of Georgia should never return to Georgian control.

The caution is striking because countries such as Belarus and Kazakhstan are usually quick to jump to Moscow’s defense when it comes under fire in the West. While the U.S. and Europe expressed concern about harassment of opposition politicians during Russia’s presidential vote this year, these countries congratulated the winner, Dmitry Medvedev, for a convincing victory. They have also joined a Russian-led military bloc.

Russia, keen to avoid the appearance of isolation after its Georgian campaign was condemned in the West, has expressed annoyance at the silence of its allies. On a Russian state-controlled television channel, where newscasts are closely vetted to reflect the Kremlin’s line, a newscaster declared the response "puzzling." And last week, Russia’s ambassador to Belarus criticized Mr. Lukashenko for failing to publicly back Russia.

The next day, Mr. Lukashenko voiced his condolence for victims of the fighting but said little else.

Finally on Tuesday, Mr. Lukashenko delivered the endorsement the Kremlin had been waiting for, at a meeting with Mr. Medvedev in Moscow. The Belarusian leader praised Russia for acting "very calmly, wisely and beautifully" and added, "Peace has been established in the region, and it will last."

Mr. Lukashenko runs an authoritarian regime that, despite occasional spats, is essentially a client state of Russia. He and Mr. Nazarbayev haven’t offered explanations for their reticence. According to one view, these nations are in no hurry to endorse Russia’s advance into Georgia because they fear Moscow could use similar tactics against them — by rousing ethnic conflicts, reviewing disputed borders or using its might to extract economic concessions.