|
||||||||
|
« Amir Taheri on Biden's crank ideas on foriegn policy |
Blog Home Page
| Obama, Biden and the Daley Machine »
August 25, 2008 Security Zones and Check Points
Points of views vary regarding military withdrawal from Georgia, because the Russian government states it is in compliance, while Georgia and the US at the very least, do not concur.
Russia says it has fulfilled a pledge to withdraw its combat troops from Georgia in line with a ceasefire deal.
It's been said that an aggressor always sets the terms, but an added rub is "the extraordinary vagueness of the EU-brokered ceasefire deal, which speaks only of "additional security measures" in "the immediate proximity of South Ossetia" - proximity being defined as a distance of "several kilometres"." Not surprising, there is now a difference of interpretation. "[A] a senior Russian general said the situation remained unstable," but again, it's all about interpretation. The Russians accuse "Georgia of planning further military operations," while it has already been recognized that the Georgian military is in no position resist anyone following the Russian four day blitz, and Georgia simply wants the invading force out.
Russia is staking out positions far beyond the bounders of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
The port city of Poti is a strategic site and has undergone a $200 million port development project. Russian soldiers have set up check points and continuingly patrol the city. "Russian forces also set up a checkpoint near Senaki, the home of a major military base in western Georgia," and far deeper in the interior of the Georgia nation. If setting up multiple check points and categorizing large swaths of land as security zones is the Russian government's interpretation of compliance, the US and the West better start advancing their own game of compliance before Georgia is "complianced" out of existence.
|
Recent ArticlesBlog Posts
|
|