標題:'Russia Is Preparing for the Endgame in the Caucasus'
On Tuesday Russian President Dmitry Medvedev ignored all Western pleas and
recognized the independence of Georgia's breakaway regions. German
commentators are divided on how far Moscow is really prepared to go in its
determination to regain its sphere of influence and many warn that isolation
could cost Russia dearly.
Moscow seemed intent on a collision course with the West on Tuesday after
President Dmitry Medvedev announced that he was recognizing the independence
of the Georgian breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
Relations had already reached a post-Cold War low because of Russia's
continued presence in parts of Georgia proper weeks after signing a peace
deal to end the brief war. Now the Kremlin has ignored all warnings from the
West and recognized the independence of both Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the
breakaway province Russia had defended after Georgia attempted to retake
control of it by force.
On Tuesday in a televized statement Russian President Dmitry Medvedev
announced: "I have signed the decrees on the recognition by the Russian
Federation of the independence of South Ossetia and the independence of
Abkhazia."
In doing so the president was ignoring US President George W. Bush's calls
not to recognize the regions, both of which have run their own affairs beyond
Georgia's control since separatist wars in the early 1990s. On Monday Bush
called on "Russia's leadership to meet its commitments and not recognize
these separatist regions." He said: "Georgia's territorial integrity and
borders must command the same respect as every other nation's, including
Russia's."
On Tuesday the reaction from Tbilisi was unequivocal. Georgia's Deputy
Foreign Minister, Giga Bokeria, described the Russian move as an "unconcealed
annexation" of Georgian territory.
Meanwhile, the White House has announced that Vice President Dick Cheney is
to visit Georgia next month in a show of solidarity. And the US is sending
two warships to deliver aid to the port of Poti, where Russia has maintained
a military presence far from its buffer zone. And tensions continue to simmer
despite the fragile cease-fire. Georgian and South Ossetian forces were
reported to be facing off on Monday in the village of Mosabruni, on the edge
of the breakaway region.
On Tuesday German commentators, writing before Medvedev's announcement, were
divided on whether Russia is really seeking further escalation in its
conflict with the West.
The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes:
"This spring one could still have been certain that the Kremlin would not be
drawn into the fatal step of recognizing independence. One can no longer be
sure. A justifiable decision to come to the aid of an attacked neighbor has
turned into a case of geopolitical land reallocation."
"Russia can only lose in the long term: its state TV might like to dismiss
the international threats with macho gestures, but an isolated Russia cannot
prosper either politically or economically. The recognition of the rebel
provinces would show other Caucasus peoples, who have only been pacified with
much effort, that separatism does actually pay. And Russia is forcing NATO,
and perhaps also the EU, into a united position that Moscow would usually
have tried to prevent. No one knows how far Russia will really go for
Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Recognition would be the wrong move. However,
making mistakes is not something that is unique to Russia. The precedent of
Kosovo is now Russia's best argument."
The conservative Die Welt writes:
"One can now bet that Georgia's two breakaway provinces will become
independent in the not too distant future. Their first official act may well
be their last. It is quite possible that the Abkhazians and Ossetians will
ask to join Russia."
"The Europeans would be powerless to stop this and they should admit that
openly. Instead they are trying to hide their lack of influence with a lot of
empty phrases. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev is unlikely to be swayed by
this. Moscow has never been impressed by the criticism of world opinion,
whether it be Prague Spring, or mass murder in Chechnya. Only one threat
would sway the last colonial power on the European continent to change its
policies: a military display of strength. However, no one in Europe wants to
or is in the position to go to war against the nuclear power Russia on behalf
of Georgia. Are we prepared to do so for NATO members Estonia, Lithuania or
Latvia?"
"One thing is clear: Russia is anxious to recover the Soviet Union's lost
power. Under these circumstances the Germans would be well advised to finally
end their debate about getting rid of military conscription."
The left-leaning Berliner Zeitung writes:
"Western politicians would be better off holding back on the cries of
indignation and instead react calmly, because the parliamentary vote changes
nothing. Russia has long nominally recognized its separatist neighbors. And,
despite paying lip service to the territorial integrity of Georgia, through
years of passivity the West has got used to the idea of the breakup of the
Caucasus republic."
"It would not only be ridiculous but also counterproductive to want to
isolate Russia. The global scarcity of natural resources and the resulting
high prices have turned Russia into an economic superpower. The country was
still a great power militarily and politically because of its veto power on
the UN Security Council and its nuclear weapons arsenal. One cannot isolate
great powers. They are always required as major players. Without Russia there
would be no diffusing the world's most dangerous trouble spots, no solution
for Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, North Korea or Pakistan, if the situation there
gets more serious."
"The West will get further if it stops considering Russia as a bear that has
gone wild and instead sees it as a political and increasingly an economic
competitor for influence and markets. Russia has great aims and also great
problems that it cannot master alone."
The Financial Times Deutschland writes:
"The 'independence' of a tiny statelet like South Ossetia will mean nothing
other than its eventual annexation by Moscow."
"Therefore politicians from the EU and the US were right to protest against
the Duma's resolution. If Medvedev goes along with the parliamentarians'
vote, then Russia will have created a legitimization for the annexation of
part of another state."
"Nevertheless, the resolution is a clever piece of gamesmanship. The fact
that Russia will control Abkhazia and South Ossetia is a scandal -- but it is
not a new scandal. The Georgian central government had already lost control
of the breakaway territories in the early 1990s. Moscow's recognition will
only cement this reality."
"A protracted dispute with Russia over the status of the provinces will only
be a waste of energy. It is far more important that Moscow should be made to
stick to the peace plan that it has signed. …. The current situation, which
sees Russia trying to control Georgia proper, has to end as soon as possible.
The government in Tbilsi will only be able to start work on reconstruction
when it has control over the country. There is no point in trying to
negotiate with Russia about anything if it won't even stick to the current
agreement."
"When the Russian troops have pulled back to the separatist areas, then the
Georgian leadership will see that they have lost these regions for ever. They
can complain about this situation but they won't be able to do anything to
change it. However, they can still make their country into a model of success
-- something they had already begun to do before the war. The EU should help
them to achieve this."
The business daily Handelsblatt writes:
"Russia is preparing itself for the endgame in the Caucasus: With the call by
the Russian upper and lower house for Dmitry Medvedev to recognize the
independence of … South Ossetia and Abkhazia, the President has a new trump
card for his negotiations with the West."
"Medvedev would do well to wait. If he were to create the facts on the ground
unilaterally, then Russia's relationship with the West would be further
damaged. The voices in the EU, that are still arguing for a compromise with
Russia would become much quieter, the country would have maneuvered itself
further into no-mans land."
"Politicians in the EU and the US must realize that the chances of
reintegrating the two provinces into Georgia have become much slimmer. The
split was there before the war. At least in Abkhazia the virtual separation
from Georgia in the 90s has seen the establishment of a political system,
which, despite the dependence on Russia, could form the basis for
independence. These are facts that the West should not be allowed to
disregard. The stubborn insistence on Georgia's territorial integrity may be
correct in the face of the Russian army's presence in Georgia proper.
However, it doesn’t help in dealing with the future of the two disputed
territories."
"Moscow can have no interest in further escalation. … Medvedev must realize
that a growing confrontation with the West could be costly for Russia,
despite all its oil billions and energy resources. The country may seem
strong after its military victory. However, it still has all the old domestic
problems: an ailing infrastructure, inflation, corruption, legal
uncertainties and a lopsided economic dependency on the export of natural
resources. … Russia can certainly hold out as a 'fortress' for some time.
However if Medvedev and Putin want to prepare their country for global
competition, then they will require international cooperation."
The center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung writes:
"In the light of the various nationality conflicts within Russia it would
seem a law of nature that Moscow would have no interest in the example that
the secession of the restive provinces of Georgia could provide. However, the
Kremlin is creating its own precedent with its tanks in Georgia: Whoever does
not listen to Moscow will be occupied."
"The West has also been given a lesson: The reconstruction of the Russian
sphere of influence is more important to Moscow's dual leadership than
maintaining the 'strategic partnership.' …. NATO and the EU still have no
concept about what to do should Russia reemerge as an aggressive power that
does not consider peaceful dialogue with the West to be a priority."
The left-leaning Die Tageszeitung writes:
"The European Union should take what is happening in the Caucasus very
seriously because Russia is playing with fire in a dangerous way in an
unstable region. … Brussels will only be able to deal with Russia's thirst
for power in its old sphere of influence if it acts decisively. The EU has to
offer … neighboring Russia closer cooperation, if it wants this. The
examples of the neglected Ukraine and forgotten Abkhazia show exactly how
things should not be done."
"Like its arch enemy Georgia, (Abkhazia) is looking across to the Black Sea
toward the EU. … Economic aid and a willingness on the part of the EU to
recognize Abkhazia's independence would diffuse the conflict between the
region and Georgia and at the same time would force Russia to step back and
be moderate. Unlike South Ossetia, Abkahzia is viable and has long realized
that Russia is no Soft Power …."
-- Siobhán Dowling, 1:05 p.m., CET
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,574486,00.html
新聞來源: (需有正確連結)
--
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 118.169.28.144