CNN quotes Global Voices, honest opinions on South Ossetia abound

Somebody farking pinch me! I had to find this one via my friends in the Russian/Ukrainan LJ-sphere. I have to say that it is a damn good round-up of thoughts regarding Russia-George-South Ossetia. It’s also short and sweet. It’s great that it’s being featured on CNN.

I toast Global Voices with my instant coffee, and tip my hat and snap my garter in their general direction.

12 thoughts on “CNN quotes Global Voices, honest opinions on South Ossetia abound

  1. :)))
    Why there is only one side of the conflict described here?

    Lots of pictures from the Georgia, showing destruction of the civilian houses(the strikes were to the military objects and no civilians as cnn says was harmed), interview of the georgian doctor in the well equipped hospital, lots of speeches from Saakashvili (by the way why he delivers speeches to his people in english?:) lots of Georgian people knows russian but almost nobody knows english…) But please tell me why there was no news directly from Osetia? Why no one tells that war started for about 20 hours before russian troops entered Osetia? Why no one shows here that about a week before the assault Osetia told everybody that Georgia will attack Osetia and evacuated kids from Tshinwali(by the way, directly at this time Saakashvili told to the world that he “…will never use force against my own nation in Osetia…”) Why no one shows here quotations from russian news and internet blogs? Why no one shows here that from night 07-08 lots of e-mails sms and calls went from Osetia to Russia, and the text was “…help us! we are killed by georgians!…”. It was before the communication was closed by georgian troops. I saw message like this on the phone of my osetian colleague.(In the middle of the day all the news and the blogs sounded like “…Russia! why you betrayed your citizens again…” What should Russia do…? Why no one shows pictures from Tshinvali hospital(why the basement – because hospital was bombarded by the georgian troops when they attacked Tshinvali)(by the way in the Tshinvaly hospital there was one wounded guy that told russian journalists that he is american journalist and his colleague was killed…) Why no one shows that georgian troops burned church with those who hided inside? Why no one shows that georgian peacekeepers attacked their osetian and russian colleagues instead of trying to keep peace?

    The Saakashvili’s speech about occupation of Georgia sounds very symphatetic to the western people, but why Russian needs their territory? Fuel transportation??? Russian fuel companies worked working and will work there… and the control of this line belongs to them… Territory of Osetia or Georgia? laughing… there is nothing valuable there except the pipeline…
    The only reason of the why russian georgian and american politics argued in the last 5-10 years that Russia don’t like when NATO weapons and bases surrounds Russia all over. Will USA be pleased and cheerful if russian military bases will appear on Cuba Hawaii and Mexica…?

    Above all the main reason of such heavy actions of Russia(military command wanted to action much harder) that Saakashvili told everybody that he never attack Osetia but denied to sign all russian and osetian peace-keeping documents… and when he told this his troops were deploying fos assault… And he does it after the visit of Mrs Rice… and nobody trusts that he did it without the permission of american government…
    (about 120-150 american military specialists in Georgian army headhuarters, some instructors, and there was some information about killed georgian soldiers … mmm don’t know how to say correctly… african birth…mercs or…?)…

    this conflict is quite dirty from the both sides as every other conflict… But the main goal of the journalists in to show all sides of the truth
    So show it…

  2. CNN как раз показывало обе стороны – цитируя как и грузин так и россиян. У меня тоже есть стремление показать обе стороны. Свой очерк на эту тему я уже написала, сейчас жду статей от грузинских коллег.

    Не понимаю почему Саакашвили выставляют белым и пушистым. Точнее, понимаю, но как-то думать об этом грустно.

  3. Если интересно, вот мой блог – Меня тоже задолбала односторонность западной прессы.

  4. RE: Natalia’s and Mikhail’s English-language comments.

    For Americans in the U.S. who are trying to follow the conflict in the Caucasus through the lens of the American media and the BBC, the problem is not only that we Americans cannot get a less-biased view of military operations in the Caucasus, but we Americans cannot even find out clearly what the U.S. government was telling the Georgian government from Saakashvili’s election onwards. We do know that the U.S. government sent military advisors to train the Georgian armed forces and that Israel, Ukraine, and the U.S. sold weapons and equipment to the Georgian government.

    What we Americans do not know is exactly what Condoleeza Rice told Saakashvili during her visit there in July 2008. The first AP news release that I read online said only that Rice told Saakashvili something to the effect that the U.S. would support the territorial integrity of Georgia. When it was later revealed that Saakashvili somehow understood this to imply that the U.S. would support Georgian military action against South Ossetia, a second AP (or NPR) online news release came out, reporting that not only had Rice assured Saakashvili that the U.S. would support Georgian territorial integrity, but that she also gave him stern warnings not to use force.

    The initial AP release about Rice’s assurance of U.S. support for Georgian territorial integrity at first sounded, to me, suspiciously like an exercise in “plausible deniability,” as it is called in the U.S. In this case, “plausible deniability” means that a statement by a U.S. government official can be “plausibly denied” to have definitely encouraged a certain interpretation — i.e., the statement is worded so opaquely that the actual intention behind the wording cannot be proven, in order that the U.S. cannot be blamed if an intended audience supposedly “misinterprets” the statement and acts on the ‘mistaken’ interpretation, to the dismay of the world.

    “Plausible deniability” comes to my mind because Rice’s first statement sounded suspiciously like U.S. Ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie’s 1991 reply to Saddam Hussein, in response to his question whether the U.S. had any objections to his hypothesized invasion of Kuwait. At that time, Ambassador Glaspie responded that the U.S. had no opinion on the matter. In retrospect, Ambassador Glaspie’s reply seems disingenuous, since the U.S. was well aware that Saddam was a warmongering lunatic and Kuwait at that time (I think) was a U.S. ally. When Saddam later claimed that Ambassador Glaspie’s reply implicitly gave him permission to invade, the U.S. media pooh-poohed that idea, and, last time I checked, the Wikipedia article on April Glaspie suggests that ‘most experts’ (or something like that) agree that April Glaspie’s reply could not reasonably be interpreted as permission to invade. But that’s the ingeniousness of “plausible deniability”: April Glaspie’s reply did not technically give Saddam permission to invade, but, under the circumstances at that time, her reply that the U.S. had “no opinion” in response to a known warmonger’s proposal to invade a U.S. ally could be reasonably interpreted as the U.S.’s deliberate refusal to forbid an invasion, and, considering that the U.S. had previously armed Saddam and supported him against Iran during the 1980’s, Saddam could conceivably interpret such a refusal to forbid as permission to invade. Again, from the American perspective, it is still “plausibly deniable” that Ambassador Glaspie actually intended to give permission because her reply of “no opinion” makes it impossible, after the fact, to tell what her actual intention was.

    For that reason, I can’t help suspecting that Rice’s initial statement to Saakashvili was her only firm statement to him, and that the later reports of Rice’s “stern warnings not to use force” might be fabricated.

    But I can’t see what the U.S. would gain from allowing Saakashvili to believe that America would materially support the use of force against South Ossetia, since the White House must certainly have been aware that Russia was materially ready to respond, within hours, with overwhelming force.

    Perhaps the White House thought that, at the expense of Russian, South Ossetian, and Georgian lives, Georgian aggression would provide an opportunity, not otherwise available, to isolate Russia diplomatically and economically, since the U.S. clearly could not support Georgia militarily.

    My hindsight analysis must seem to be putting the cart before the horse. But I can’t think of any other rationale for Rice’s not making unequivocally clear to Sakaashvili in July 2008 that he was not to use force. Perhaps others can find out what was going on between the U.S. and Georgia before the Georgian invasion.

  5. Closer – Даже не то слово. Уже просто за*бали, пардон май френч.

    Perhaps the White House thought that, at the expense of Russian, South Ossetian, and Georgian lives, Georgian aggression would provide an opportunity, not otherwise available, to isolate Russia diplomatically and economically, since the U.S. clearly could not support Georgia militarily

    That’s what I’m wondering too. I wouldn’t put it past the Bush White House, not at all. And Saakashvili won’t say anything about it now, because even if he was truly duped, where else can he turn?

  6. I think you should take a look at this account.

    Also it pays to tune into and look at Peter Lavelle’s commentary which provides a balance to the obvious bias that is coming out of CNN and the US media.

    If you have been watching closely events in this regions then you should be aware of Saakashvili’s provocations. This is not to condone the actions of Russia. (All violence is a crime against the innocent) But Georgia was without any doubt responsible for the recent conflict. Both Saakashvili and Yushenko are not as democratic as they would like to portray themselves to be.

  7. I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again,

    Yuschenko is a pompous git who doesn’t even have enough sense to keep his spoiled son out of the tabloids. There.

  8. WOW… I have met Germain Greer. And I can tell you a few stories. But best that I do not. I love Ukraine very much and its people. They are like mocking birds in the sun. Podil is my favorite place in Kyiv and I have seen much change in Ukraine over the last 7 to 8 years. I agree Yushchenko is not a good President but I am at a loss to think who should replace him. I prefer Parliaments to Presidents. I eagerly await your next writing and will try and distinguish between fact and embellishment of a creative mind.But I really am impressed with what you have to say.Keep writing and I am glad I came upon your blog.

  9. Mocking birds in the sun, eh? 😉 That’s one I haven’t heard before.

    You’re actually the second person to comment here telling me that they have met Germaine Greer. The previous person posted under their real name, and asked that the comment not be published, so I complied with their wishes. After all, despite reports to the contrary, this isn’t a tabloid. Having said that, they had a lot of praise for Germaine’s wit. As do I. I just don’t agree with her theories, that’s all.

  10. A git is putting it mildly. I see Yushchenko as the problem not the solution. Ukraine is not anti-Russian (Maybe 6% are ultra right nationalists mopst do not support the direction Yushchenko is heading)

    If Ukraine wants to be independent then it should begin to be independent and not trade one master for another. the days of Serfdom are gone (Well it could be said Ukrainians have returned to a new economic form of serfdom). Ukraine needs time and stability more then anything. Evolution not revolution. The people deserve better and hopefully time will give them that.

    Many of the young people I have met lead me to hope. Ukraine is changing fast,some not for the better but change it will. It is a dynamic and inspiring country with extensive history.

    A friend once said to me when I first visited Ukraine”The best way to understand Ukraine is not to understand it at all”

    The people I met are some of the most hospitable and friendliest people. They will forever be a part of my soul. I see more positives then negatives. (That is not to say I haven’t seen the negatives,. the positives are just that much more)

  11. The reference to Mockingbirds was a reference to the the book to Kill-a-Mocking bird. I assume you have read this classic. Yes I also respect Germain Greer’s intellect I met her once when she came to visit the place where I lived. It was a very unique place and full of artisans, thespians, writers, politicians and intellectuals. Barry Humphries often visited also, his wit and humor inspired all. But in all writing there is a degree of truth or at least what is true at the time but time changes outlooks. Principles and values remain.

  12. “To Kill A Mockingbird?” Sure. I even acted as Mayella Ewell once (I was bad for even a student production as I recall, due in part to my horrendous approximation of a Southern accent – I had no excuse, having been a longtime resident of North Carolina by then). I’m not sure how it relates to your thoughts on Ukraine, though, perhaps you can explain further.

    UkrToday, I’m pretty sure that the majority of Ukrainians at present are Ukrainian-speaking and that is enough for some people to automatically brand them as Russia-hating ultra-nationalists, unfortunately. Which isn’t the way I see the situation at all. If someone wants independence from the Kremlin, it doesn’t automatically make them into an ultra-nationalist. I’m curious – where did you get that 6% estimate?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: