Since 1999 prospective Nato members have had to follow a roadmap known as the Membership Action Plan (MAP) to qualify for membership. At a Nato summit in Bucharest in April President George Bush pressed for Ukraine and Georgia to be awarded the MAP, but he was defeated by Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany who argued that such a step would increase friction with Russia.

The summit agreed a contradictory compromise, denying the two countries the MAP while stating they would eventually become Nato members. The summit instructed today’s meeting to review those decisions. With British and east European support, the Americans argued last night that the deadlock could be broken by pushing ahead on the membership path outside the MAP.
Germany, Spain, Italy and others disagreed, contending that there could be no Nato membership process without it.

“The whole discussion around the MAP has become so politicised that it has lost its sense. It has turned into something of enormous political symbolism,” said a senior US official. “We should just try to put it aside.”

The British have sought to bridge the divide by proposing that the MAP procedure remains valid, but that Georgia’s and Ukraine’s membership bids be processed through two separate commissions between Nato and the applicants.

The main European countries reject this. On balance they view Georgia as the bigger villain in the August war with Russia, regard Georgia’s president Mikheil Saakashvili as untrustworthy, believe that political instability in Ukraine makes it unsuitable for Nato, and are anxious to avoid further confrontation with Moscow.

“There is no consensus,” said a senior Ukrainian official. “The MAP will not be given to Ukraine. The issue has been removed from the agenda.”
Rather than enhancing Nato security, both post-Soviet countries represent a security risk for the alliance, argues the west European camp.

Diplomats and analysts say that the transatlantic split is such that today’s session will produce a formula that effectively replicates the conflicting signals sent in Bucharest. They add that the Bucharest decision was a mistake that contributed to the Caucasus crisis in August.

The issue of Nato membership for the two countries is intimately linked with western policy towards Russia, currently incoherent and contradictory.
President Nicolas Sarkozy of France earlier this month backed Russian calls for a major summit next year to try to redefine Europe’s “security architecture.” An international foreign ministers’ meeting in Helsinki later this week could see Germany, France, Russia, and Finland supporting the summit, which is also opposed by the US and Britain.

“We have good European security institutions,” said the senior US official. “The institutions that exist are sound. I am not convinced we need a new architecture.”

A senior European diplomat said the Russian proposals could be considered but that the Americans had to be involved in any discussion about European security.

“The first thing the Russians need to do is explain what they have in mind.”

Miguel D’Escoto Brockmann, a former foreign minister of Nicaragua, pledged in his opening address to the session to dedicate his year as president to representing the interests of “the dispossessed of the world” and fostering solidarity between peoples and member states.

“Georgia was the one who invaded Ossetia. Look at the situation, look at how the whole thing began. I think that Georgia did commit agression against South Ossetia,” said Brockmann.

Apart from Russia, Brockmann’s native Nicaragua is the only country to so far formally recognise the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

Brockmann’s election to the rotating presidency, as well as Nicaragua’s recognition of the new republics has lately catapulted the South American country to the world stage.

Russia’s ambassador to the UN Vitaly Churkin said Tbilisi has been asking international organisations not to offer humanitarian aid to South Ossetia if it doesn’t become part of Georgia again.

“We mourn for the innocent deaths of everyone, regardless of their ethnic origin – peaceful Ossetians, Georgians and other people of that multi-national land,” Churkin said.

Churkin called for the United States to issue visas to officials from South Ossetia and Abkhazia so they can attend a Security Council meeting in early October.

The mandate of the UN observer mission in the Caucasus expires next month, and Russia has insisted its extension is impossible without hearing from all parties in the conflict.

With no clear thoughts on who started the war, the Senate was quick to pick a name for the hearing – “Russia’s aggression against Georgia”, which echoes America’s policy towards Russia in the Georgian conflict. To nobody’s surprise, the Georgian Ambassador to the U.S. was present at the hearings. However, there was no one from the Russian side and the only person attempting to present both sides of the spectrum was the former U.S. Ambassador to Russia, William J. Burns.

He said that “Georgia’s decision to use force to reassert its sovereignty over South Ossetia against our strong and repeated warnings was short-sighted and ill-advised”.

This statement comes after Russia spent years telling Georgia that a military venture on South Ossetia would be suicidal for Georgia, and that Russia would protect the people of South Ossetia.

Perhaps not all Senators have a full understanding of what happened but in the end they seems to be aware they need to mend ties with Russia – a country which “can play an important role in the 21st century” as Acting Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Affairs Committee Christian Dodd noted. He also said: “We want them to be a part of that cooperation.”

It seems that some in the U.S. are wondering whether it is worth risking the country’s relationship with Russia. Even though some U.S. officials continue the wave of criticism against Russia’s actions in Georgia, they admit they will have to find common ground.

President Medvedev revealed in a frank talk with members of the Valdai Discussion club how news of war in South Ossetia came to him, why Russia will not deal with drug-addicted Georgian president Saakashvili, what George W. Bush said in his latest phone call, and why he won’t let Russia turn into a state behind an iron curtain.
 
<b><i>’I'll never forget that night’</i></b>

“I was on vacation. They say, Russia was preparing for war – that’s a lie! The Defence Minister called me at 1 a.m. and said, the Georgians have told the Ossetians that they were starting a war. And while all those troops were moving towards South Ossetia, I took no decision and hoped those dimwits would have enough brains to stop. They didn’t! We held ourselves until they started firing rockets, shelling residential blocks, and shooting at peacekeepers. And only after that real attack I had to give an order to respond.”

“I’ll never forget that night. It was very hard to order the use of force, while knowing the consequences. We did everything right. And I’m proud of it. Our response was symmetrical and proportional.”

“There were many illusions in the early 1990’s and, as the country developed, many of them just got blown away. Unfortunately the latest events mean those illusions are no more. Illusions that the world is just; that a security system based on current political resource distribution is optimal and keeps the world in balance.”

“For me, as well as for a big part of Russian society, it was the loss of the last illusion – that the current world security system is reliable. We must create a different security system.”

“The world has changed almost in an instant after those events. It came to my mind that for Russia, August 8 is almost like 9/11 for America.”

“The war took the whole last month of my life, and there were more productive ways to spend it. We didn’t want it, didn’t want it at all! For 17 years we’ve being mending what had broken apart a long time ago. And they didn’t thank us for that – rather they started shooting at us.”

“Russia was not expected to react like that. Georgia got the idea: do whatever you want, Russians won’t meddle. That’s a diplomatic mistake that belongs to textbooks for diplomats. It’s a mistake, from the US side, from Georgia’s side – but for Georgia it’s also a crime.”

<b>George Bush would do the same</b>

“I have spent so much time speaking to world leaders on the phone over the last month, my ear wouldn’t work. You know – after an hour’s conversation…”

“When I talked to Bush on the phone last time I told him: you’d have done the same in a situation like this, just in a more harsh way. He didn’t argue.”

“Bush asked me: ‘Why do you need it? You’re a young president with liberal background!’ I don’t need it at all. But there are situations where image is nothing and real actions are everything.”

<b><i>‘I don’t want to live behind an iron curtain’</i></b>

“We discussed the rearmament of the Russian armed forces yesterday. We’ll have to change some priorities, but all the rest remains the same. We don’t need a closed, militarised country behind an iron curtain. I don’t want to live in a country like that. I used to. It was boring and dull.”

“They should have invited Russia into NATO a long time ago. Were they afraid? Now we’d certainly have fewer problems. That was a serious mistake. And the second mistake is that any country prepared to be rude to Russia gets the right to be in NATO.”

“If Georgia had a NATO membership action plan by August 8, I would have done the same without a second thought. And what would the consequences have been? They would have been way more complicated.”

“The situation was humiliating for Russia some time ago, and we can’t take it any more. It’s a difficult choice for us, but we can’t take it.”

“I don’t think the confrontation phase will last long. From our side, we’re definitely not interested in this. On the contrary, we’re ready to go as far as our partners will. If you look at the five principles [of Russia's foreign policy] I have named, one of them says we would like to develop friendly relations with the U.S. and other states, with Europe. We don’t want to create new alliances just to frustrate Europe and America. What’s the point? There isn’t any. Foreign policy should be pragmatic”.

“The concept that the U.S. State Department embraced is pure ideology. We all need to take effort and drive ideology away from foreign policy. The current U.S. administration’s problem is that they have too many sovietologists.”

“If you think that Russia has decided to change its vector of development, that’s not true.”

<b>Saakashvili is a drug abuser</b>

“When I first met Saakashvili as a president I told him our policy regarding the territorial integrity of Georgia remained the same”.

“He was fussing around like a pooch, saying: let’s meet and discuss, I will come to Sochi. I said: OK, let’s do it. I would be glad, maybe we’ll sign an agreement on non-use of force”.

“Then our close partner Condoleezza Rice arrived, and the boy became like a changeling. He stopped calling, and declared ‘We don’t need to meet in Sochi, maybe we’ll do it at the end of the year’. Well – that’s your choice. He started getting ready for war”.

“It won’t come as a surprise if I say that the decision on recognition [of the two breakaway republics] was of course made after the military action began, when we realised that there is no other way to protect the South Ossetians and Abkhazians, that once he has tasted blood, he won’t stop unless he’s dealt a good heavy blow.”

“The Georgian head of state is not just a man we won’t do business with. He’s an unpredictable pathological and mentally unstable drug abuser. Western journalists, that interviewed him not so long ago, know it! A two-hour-long interview on the high – that’s over the edge for a head of state. If NATO needs such a leader – go ahead.”

Asian ties bring stability to West
 
“We will do everything we can to diversify our energy routes to Asia, but with no harm done to our European partners. On the contrary, it will ensure greater stability. This is about oil deliveries, gas deliveries, and the development of nuclear energy.
 
“I laugh when I read from time to time that Russia doesn’t have enough gas to provide even European needs. We know it’s not true. Russia is a big gas nation. If we see that there’s a market in the East, we’ll develop new fields. Be sure about that. Naturally, it must be balanced and must not cause economic disasters.”

‘To fight legal nihilism, we need to fight habits’

“My strong conviction is that unfortunately, there is no understanding of the value of law in Russia. I have devoted much time to studying this area both in theory and in practice. This problem can be found everywhere: in everyday matters, in business, on the level of state employees and even on the level of the state itself. That’s why during the election campaign one of my key points was fighting legal nihilism. We do have certain advantages here. Ours is a country with a developed law system, with good law schools; a country that has been developing within the European law system for three hundred years. So the foundation is not bad. The issue is really the habits that have been acquired – this is the most difficult thing”.

“We understand that it is possible to create motives for non-corrupt behaviour, it is possible to put corrupt people in prison, that’s not the most difficult thing, though sometimes it isn’t that easy either. It’s much more difficult to make people observe the law on an everyday basis”.

“Let’s imagine two scenarios. A Russian businessman and a businessman from the West are offered to pay for their contract in cash. The first question that most civilised and well-prepared businessmen would ask is, what does it all mean. “Will the tax people find out? Will I be filmed by a hidden camera? Will it all end in prison for me?” The motives of a large part of our own businessmen, unfortunately, would probably be different. I can speak about such things with confidence, because unlike my predecessors I was in business for ten years. This is not because they are criminals by nature, but because they don’t think that by breaking this law they are doing anything bad. “So what if no tax is paid on this money? The state isn’t perfect. Why should I share with this state? It doesn’t defend me, it’s trying to get something out of me”. And this is where the main difference lies.

“I don’t want to idealise anything. Many Western businessmen would take the cash. But their number is considerably less. And this will also depend on the traditions and habits in this or that country. I won’t name any countries, we all know who has what habits. The problem is that we have lots of such habits. That’s why I think legal nihilism is one of our most serious problems”.

The Russian­Georgian war became the perfect opportunity for Ukraine’s embattled president, Victor Yushchenko, to kill two birds with one stone. The first was to draw attention to what he believed was the West’s historical error during the NATO summit in Bucharest by not granting Ukraine and Georgia the Membership Action Plan they needed for a future place in NATO. The second was to continue his full­court press on discrediting the government of Yulia Tymoshenko. Which goal took priority is difficult to say with any certainty.

The Ukrainian leadership knew full well that its options were severely limited. To dispatch Ukrainian armed forces to fight alongside its unofficial Georgian allies was immediately ruled out of the question. A hasty statement threatening to prevent warships from the Russian Black Sea Fleet to return to their base in Sevastopol until the conflict was settled was seen as a bad joke by the Russian military command. It was so bad that two weeks later the Ukrainian side was forced to admit that it “had no conflict with Russia” and rescinded its “threat.”

Ukrainian support for Georgia was symbolized by Yushchenko grandstanding in Tbilisi, alongside Georgia’s President Mikheil Saakashvili, while his administration issued statements that Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, by keeping silent on the Georgian issue, was nothing less than a traitor. Tymoshenko, according to the dubious Yushchenko scenario, was selling herself to Moscow allegedly to win the Kremlin’s support in her future bid for president.

Yushchenko’s main show of support for Georgia, once boiled down to its essence, was to declare war on Yulia Tymoshenko.

Only poorly informed optimists expected Western armed forces to come to Georgia’s aid in its war with Russia. And while most Western governments properly condemned Russian behavior, nobody in his or her right mind could understand why Saakashvili chose to knowingly subject his country to such punishment by sending Georgian tanks into South Ossetia. The Russian response was evident and most likely premeditated. A wiser leader would have taken measures to prevent such a tragedy.

Instead of moderation, the Georgians opted for confrontation and lost. Their Ukrainian “allies” proved to be fair weather friends – big on words but incapable of deeds.

And while the Georgians might have been provoked by Moscow to go to war, this does not absolve them of irrational behavior. National suicide is not the best method of defending a country’s independence.

Many observers were quick to point out that had Georgia been a member of NATO, the alliance would have been obligated to come to the country’s defense and, by doing so, precipitating a war with Russia. Others, however, believe that membership in NATO would have prevented a Russian invasion. This debate will, no doubt, continue for years to come. Ukrainian political analysts should follow this debate carefully.

Will Ukraine become the next victim of Russian aggression?

The prevalent speculation in Ukraine and in the West is that “liberating” the Crimean Peninsula’s Russian population will be the next pretext for Russia to expand its grip on the post­Soviet space and gobble up Ukraine.

It is a scenario which needs to be carefully examined since it is feasible, but not probable, in the short run. The factors that should be considered are:

Ukraine will not become a member of NATO in the foreseeable future and therefore cannot count on Western military support.

Ukraine is not Georgia and any provocation aimed against Ukraine will be seen as a direct threat to the West. By the same token, the West will be hard­pressed to prevent any Russian move aimed at limiting Ukraine’s independence. Western security guarantees for Ukrainian territorial integrity are not likely to be concluded and will remain merely soothing phrases.

Ukraine might be forced to cut off Russian gas supplies to Europe as a weapon of last resort to force the Europeans to come to their assistance. This, in turn, would most likely evoke a harsh Russian response and could lead to an all­out war.

The Ukrainian military is not prepared or equipped to win a war against Russia.

If Russia were to “play the Crimean card,” it would require an occupation of the peninsula to be successful. The prospects of this succeeding are slim at best, given that Crimea depends on Ukraine almost totally for its fresh water supplies. By turning off the spigots, the Crimeans could be brought to their knees within days.

Ukrainian leaders must remain pragmatic and concentrate their efforts on consolidating the economic and diplomatic gains they have made over the past 17 years. Kyiv’s pro­Georgian and anti­Russian flag waving is not likely to produce any meaningful results. Offers to lease radar stations to NATO members on Ukrainian territory is no guarantee that, in case of war, NATO will rush in to defend the owners of the lease.

The era of romantic Ukrainian nationalism should be remembered and revered, but past heroism cannot be the basis for a modern foreign policy. The days of the Ukrainian Partisan Army (UPA) are over. The tragedy of the Great Famine should be solemnly commemorated and not used to provoke endless fights with Russia.

Ukraine should abandon its futile tactic of trying to equate the famine – holodomor, or murder by famine – with the Jewish holocaust by outlawing “holod deniers,” getting the United Nations to pass resolutions declaring the famine “genocide,” and other such impractical initiatives. They will not generate public sympathy for Ukraine, which will somehow translate into support for Ukrainian policy goals or speed up Ukraine’s Atlantic integration.

Last but not least, the president of Ukraine should abandon his closest policy advisers and come to grips with reality. If the prime minister is indeed a “traitor,” she should be fired on the spot. If a “kitchen cabinet” is whispering in Yushchenko’s ear to make virulent nationalism state policy, then this lobby should be dispersed.

Roman Kupchinsky is a partner in AZEast Group, a political risk consultancy based in the United States. He can be contacted at Kupchinsky@AZEast.com

Nicolas Sarkozy said the meeting will play a key role in the relations between Russia and the European Union.

The announcement was made after further discussions on a partnership deal between Europe and Russia were postponed at the EU summit. At an extraordinary summit in Brussels, the leaders condemned Russia’s actions in the Caucasus, but promised to maintain contacts with Moscow and continue existing ties.

Moscow says it regrets the European Union’s decision to put off talks on a basic Russia-EU agreement.

“If the talks about the basic document have indeed been put off, there is nothing else we can do but express our regret,” a Russian Foreign Ministry source told Interfax.

Vladimir Putin commented on the aftermath of the EU summit during his stay in Tashkent, Uzbekistan:

“We know that there were many emotional, radical and even extremist statements made prior to the summit. Fortunately, common sense prevailed. No radical decisions were made. That’s very good.”

Humanitarian aid to victims of the conflict

On Monday, Nicolas Sarkozy said the EU would also call an international reconstruction conference for Georgia. The EU will also provide economic assistance to Georgia. The European Commission has so far provided 7 million euros to Georgia. Another 9 million euros have been provided by individual EU countries.

For his part, the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, said on Monday that he was extremely concerned over the situation in the region and that he was maintaining permanent contact with representatives of all the involved sides. The UN chief also noted that officials of the organisation’s structural units are ready for active work to distribute humanitarian aid.

“I have made it quite clear that the UN stands ready to provide good offices and also we will continue to provide humanitarian assistance to the affected people, including in South Ossetia,” the UN chief was quoted as saying by Reuters.

The aftermath of the EU summit

Although the EU has condemned Russia’s actions, it seems not all of its members share the same opinion.

In an interview with Austrian 01 TV channel on Monday the country’s Chancellor Alfred Guzenbauer said the Union should not play the role of judge in the conflict between Russia and Georgia.

“To be a judge in the conflict between Russia and Georgia is no role for Austria and the European Union,” Guzenbauer said.

He noted at the same time that “Georgia’s territorial integrity, taking into consideration all the errors made by the country’s leadership, should be observed.”

Analysts have stated that the results of Monday’s summit are positive for Russia.

German expert Alexander Rahr told Russia’s daily Rossiiskaya Gazeta that the EU “is not in confrontation with Russia.” This is why they only sent observers instead of troops to the conflict zone, he believes.

“EU’s mild reaction to Russia’s actions in Georgia means that in recent days Brussels has received extensive evidence of Georgia’s President Mikhail Saakashvili’s role in initiating the conflict. If anyone in the EU had doubts about this, their reaction would have been much tougher,” Rahr said.

He even voiced an opinion that eventually the European Union will recognise independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, “but maybe not openly.”

The Deputy Speaker of the State Duma, Russia’s lower chamber of Parliament, is convinced “nothing extraordinary happened” at the EU summit on Monday.

“Russia and the EU are continuing dialogue, which only strengthens the position of our country,” he said.

He added this meeting also demonstrated that relations between Russia and the European Union have not changed

The international organisation says it has received an official letter form Georgia’s Defence Ministry that acknowledges the use of the M85 cluster munition near the Roki tunnel linking South Ossetia with Russia.

The M85 is the same weapon that was used extensively by Israel in its 2006 war with Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Human Rights Watch has also said that Russia used the widely condemned weapons in several places during the conflict. Moscow has rejected the accusations

Russia crushed its southern neighbour in a brief war last month after Georgia tried to recapture by force its pro-Moscow, separatist region of South Ossetia. It drew Western condemnation by pushing far beyond the disputed area, bombing and deploying troops deep inside Georgia proper.

“Through its response to the Georgian aggression, Russia has set a kind of standard for reaction, which fully complies with international law,” Lavrov told students of Moscow`s diplomatic college in a speech to mark the start of the new academic year.

“Russia has returned to the world stage as a responsible state which can defend its citizens.”

Any doubts about this should have been dispelled by its action in Georgia and recognition of two pro-Russian provinces as independent states, said Lavrov, whose harshest words were addressed to Washington and NATO.

“America needs to acknowledge the reality of the post-American world and start adapting to it,” Lavrov said. “An attempt to live in its own unipolar world has gone on too long, and this is dangerous in every respect.”

He added: “There is a feeling that NATO again needs frontline states to justify its existence.”

However, he reiterated Moscow`s commitment to continue dialogue with the United States.

“We will deal with any America,” Lavrov said, urging Washington to exercise “reciprocity and absolute honesty” in ties. “We will continue talking to Washington as long as there is a tiny hope of understanding each other and making a deal.”

“MOMENT OF TRUTH”

The speech, focused on new relations between Russia and the West, was made hours before EU leaders were due to gather in Brussels to discuss a common stance in the Georgian crisis. Lavrov made clear Russia would not bow to any pressure.

He was expounding new foreign policy guidelines set by President Dmitry Medvedev, who despite Western expectations of a softer line has formalised the assertive stance of his predecessor Vladimir Putin.

Medvedev said in a television interview on Sunday that Russia would adhere to international law but not accept a U.S.-led “unipolar world”, and laid claim to specific spheres of national interest that Russia would defend.

Over the past few years, the West has been watching with alarm the increasingly assertive policy of a resurgent Russia, fearing a revival of Soviet-era imperialism.

Russia, in turn, has accused the West of building new lines of division in the world by failing to treat it as an equal.

Lavrov said the conflict in Georgia had come as a “long-cherished moment of truth”, adding that “today`s clarity is better than any ambiguity.”

Europe`s inability to produce a new collective security system, “open for everyone and taking into account everyone`s interests”, was to blame for the Georgia crisis, he said.

“Something should be done because otherwise Euro-Atlantic affairs will keep returning to square one.”

Russia has proposed calling a security conference in Europe, to create new arrangements for neutralising threats in the continent.

It views NATO`s eastward expansion and the deployment of parts of a U.S. missile defence system in Eastern Europe as a direct threat to its security. Plans to grant NATO membership to ex-Soviet Georgia and Ukraine are anathema for Moscow.

“In the absence of a reasonable multilateral dialogue we will be forced to react unilaterally,” Lavrov said. “But we would indeed prefer joint work on European security issues.”

In a report to be published in its Monday edition, OSCE military observers in the Caucasus described detailed planning by Georgia to move into South Ossetia which contributed to the crisis, the German magazine said.

The report also backed up Russian claims that the Georgian offensive was already in full swing by the time Russian troops and armored vehicles entered the Roksky Tunnel, on the border with Russia and South Ossetia, to protect its peacekeepers and the civilian population.

The OSCE report also contains suspected war crimes committed by Georgians, who ordered attacks on sleeping South Ossetian civilians.

Georgia attacked South Ossetia on August 8 in an attempt to regain control over the separatist republic, which split from Tbilisi in the early 1990s.

Most people living in South Ossetia have Russian citizenship and Moscow subsequently launched an operation to “force Georgia to accept peace.” The operation was concluded on August 12.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed decrees Tuesday recognizing South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states and called on other countries to follow suit.

Russia has accused Georgia of committing “genocide” by launching the offensive in South Ossetia. Russia is calling for an international war crimes trial for the Georgian leadership, which Moscow says is responsible for massive loss of life in South Ossetia

Deputy Chief of Russia’s General Staff Anatoly Nagovitsyn showed photocopies of the passport to media in a press briefing on Thursday.

“There is a building in Zemonekozi – a settlement to the south of Tskhinval that was fiercely defended by a Georgian special operations squad. Upon clearing the building, Russian peacekeepers recovered, among other documents, an American passport in the name of Michael Lee White of Texas,” said Nagovitsyn.

Neither the owner of the passport nor his remains were found at the scene, despite a thorough search.

“I do not know why he was there, but it is a fact that he was in the building, among Georgian special forces troops,” Nagovitsyn said.

The briefing was delivered on the same day Prime Minister Vladimir Putin told CNN, “We have serious reasons to believe that American citizens were right at the heart of the military action”. Putin said the conflict in South Ossetian may have been planned to benefit one of the U.S. presidential candidates.