Subject: Comments Regarding C.J. Chivers Article in New York Times [re: Russo-Georgian War]
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008
From: Alexander Melikishvili
Research Associate
James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies
Monterey Institute of International Studies
Washington, DC 20005
I would like to ask you to consider publishing the following comments regarding the article by C.J. Chivers “Georgia Claims on Russia War Called Into Question” (The New York Times, November 7, 2008/Johnson’s Russia List, Issue No.203, Friday, November 7, 2008). Please note that the comments below do not reflect the views of the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies or the Monterey Institute of International Studies.
- First of all, let me just say that the publication of this article I attribute to the shifting editorial guidelines at the major U.S. news outlets, including The New York Times. I think that with the advent of the Democrats, there will be more articles critical of Saakashvili's handling of the conflict in South Ossetia. The timing of the publication is indeed peculiar as it coincided with the opposition demonstration in Tbilisi on the one-year anniversary of the violent dispersion of opposition demonstration on November 7, 2007. I do not believe in this sort of coincidences.
- Secondly, C.J.Chivers bases most (if not all) of the narrative on the observations of the three-member group of OSCE monitors, who were in the conflict zone on August 7-8. This OSCE group of monitors consisted of Finnish major, a Belarusian airborne captain and a Polish civilian. They insist that Tbilisi's claim about the shelling of the Georgian villages, which was used as a formal pretext for the subsequent large-scale operation against South Ossetian separatists, was false. However, if you read carefully, you will discover that while the two of the Georgian villages, which Tbilisi claimed came under fire, were indeed located near the OSCE observers' office in Tskhinvali, the other two villages were not. Thus, the three OSCE monitors could not have possibly heard whether the other two villages were under fire or not. Moreover, as C.J.Chivers writes himself, the residents of the Zemo Nigozi (one of the four villages) stated that they were under heavy fire from 6:00 PM on, which supports the Georgian claim.
- Thirdly, apparently the observations of the OSCE monitors were incorporated into two confidential briefings for the (Western, I assume) diplomats. These briefings took place in Tbilisi in August and October. The summaries from these briefings were shared with The New York Times by people, who attended both. In addition, as C.J.Chivers writes, the details were confirmed by three unnamed Western diplomats and a Russian. This just sounds too circuitous for me and it certainly does not add any credibility. Why were the observations of OSCE monitors kept secret? Why they were not shared with the public at large? How would some unnamed Western diplomats be able to confirm or deny the authenticity of the information presented by the OSCE monitors when they were not even in the conflict zone to begin with?
- Fourthly, the roles played by the Captain Ryan Grist and Wing Commander Stephen Young are also quite murky. Being on the phone and in constant communication with all sides is still no substitute for actually being physically present in the conflict zone and witnessing the combat as it unfolds. Other than the observations of his three subordinates what else did Captain Grist know that led him to vociferously deny the Georgian account? Why did he resign under unclear circumstances? More importantly, why did OSCE turn down a formal request to interview the three monitors at the center of this controversy?
- Fifthly, with regard to the order to restore constitutional order in South Ossetia, which was allegedly given by President Saakashvili, in recent days more information on this appeared in the Georgian and Russian media and for whatever reason C.J.Chivers decided not to include any of it in his article. Here's the compilation of relevant facts, as they appeared in the Georgian and Russian news reports:
- On October 27, 2008, Temuri Yakobashvili, State Minister for Reintegration, testified for the Parliamentary commission studying the August events. When asked about whether President Saakashvili used the term "restoration of constitutional order" while giving orders to the Georgian military, Yakobashvili responded that no such order was issued. Those words were indeed used at night on August 7, 2008, by the commander of the Georgian peacekeepers in South Ossetia, General Mamuka Kurashvili. Kurashvili stated in the televised statement that the Georgian law enforcement authorities were launching an operation aimed at restoring the constitutional order in South Ossetia.
- And here's the relevant story by the Interfax:
Gen. Kurashvili reprimanded for disinformation at beginning of Georgian offensive on Tskhinvali Interfax, October 27
South Ossetia was attacked only following the "confirmation of the information" on the Russian aggression, and the statement of the Georgian Peacekeeping Force Commander Gen. Mamuka Kurashvili on the start of the Georgian offensive "was not sanctioned," Georgia said. "Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili took a decision to counter- attack in Tskhinvali region on August 7 several hours following the National Security Council session which confirmed the information that the Russian forces and so called militia from the North Caucasus began a mass intervention through the Roki Tunnel," Georgia's National Security Council Secretary Alexander Lomaya told a temporary parliamentary commission for the examination of the August events on Monday. Mikheil Saakashvili made up his mind to attack South Ossetia "only after the Georgian villages in the Tskhinvali region came under fire," he said. "The president did not call the Security Council on August 7 and contacted the General Staff and Defense Ministry leadership," Lomaya said. Kurashvili's statement, which he made late at night on August 7, saying that the Georgian troops had begun an operation on bringing constitutional order to the Tskhinvali region was false. "This statement by the commander was not sanctioned by the supreme leadership of the country, and so Kurashvili was reprimanded for this," Lomaya said. "The scale of Russian aggression was shocking not only for the Georgian leadership but also for the world community at large," he said.
- Finally, for me the key statement qualifying the observations of the OSCE monitors is that of Martha Freeman, a spokeswoman for OSCE. C.J.Chivers tucked it away at the very end of the article. Freeman cautions that "monitoring activities in certain areas at certain times cannot be taken in isolation to provide a comprehensive account." So, in other words, upon closer examination the entire crux of the argument falls apart as the observations by the three OSCE monitors are certainly insufficient to draw an overarching conclusion about the truth or falseness of the Georgian version of events.