Clarity in the Georgia and Russia Conflict

3 Comments + Add Comment

• 
  Ken September 1, 2008 at 2:50 pm

  I think the question of clarity has a real effect on human rights issues here. When this issue first reached our news in NZ I was struck by how biased the reporting was – the Georgian attack on South Ossetia was effectively ignored and we were presented with a story involving only a Russian attack on Georgia. Similarly the human rights issues involved in the initial Georgian attack (the deaths and refugees) were ignored and we are presented only with stories involving Ossetian attacks on Georgians.

  It seems to me that we are seeing an escalation of cold war mentality and this prevents our news media from fairly reporting the issues. I’m also struck by how attitudes from the old cold war have been transferred so easily. We now seem to have an almost racist attitude which means that whenever Russians are involved they are automatically the aggressor.

  This is sad – for us as much as anyone else. Because cold war will mean limitations on our access to knowledge and our freedoms – as well as feeding the flames of regional conflicts that could cause outbreaks of major wars.

  Unfortunately escalation of a new cold war seems inevitable. Russia seems to have recovered from its weakness of the 1990s and is bent on restoring at least part of its old geopolitical positions. They won’t accept the current US attitudes which claim areas like Georgia and the Ukraine in their own sphere of interests. I don’t think the US can maintain its recent hegemony as the sole super power for very long, but the neocons seem determined to do so. China is already challenging this and will be a lot more assertive in the future.

  Given the inevitable future international assertion of interests by several superpowers I think countries like New Zealand must protect and assert their own independence. We can’t do this if our news media slavishly follows a biased approach as they have in the Ossetia/Russia/Georgia conflict.

  Nor can we support real meaningful human rights actions if we choose to ignore the plight of one or more parties (like Ossetia and Abkhazia) because they are not on “our side.”

  If we are going to have a new cold war – let us, at least, try to avoid the cold war mentality.

  Reply
• 
  Frank September 1, 2008 at 3:04 pm

  Good observations, Ken.

  Yes, the media has been very quiet on Georgia’s initial hostilities towards South Ossetia.

  At the moment I am trying to find some credible information on the status of refugees and IDP’s related to the conflict.

  Reply
• 
  Kate September 2, 2008 at 5:05 am

  South ossetia got it’s name and autunomy after the communists occupied georgia and it was an occupation (read modern history books). it’s a historical part of georgia and is called Samachablo. Every country has ethnic minorities living on their territories and they must be respected as citizens and minorities have to respect countries they are part of territorial integrity. When enthnic conflict happens who is right and who is wrong? who can make that decision? If you havn’t lived there and don’t have a clue about Georgian history how can you make an comment about something you don’t know about …If you really want to know what’s really is going on there, please go an read history… not only Geogia’s, Russia’s too – trust me it will be very helpfull to everyone.
  If you are an american or citizen of any democratic country, consider this: what if chinatown in NYC or San
  Francisco or LA decided they wanted to be a part of mainland china do you really think the US would let that happen? US had the civil war. do we need a civil war in Georgia. it’s already a democracy. And this country and democracy needs the help of the democratic countries to help them survive this Russian outrages attacks on the democratic country of Georgia.
  Who has the balls to help when Georgia really needs it.
  K. Gaprindashvili

  Reply