The Financial Times is reporting that two US military contractors, MPRI and American Systems, provided combat training to 80 Georgian commandos a few months before Georgia’s attack on South Ossetia. However, “here is no evidence” FT states, “that the contractors or the Pentagon, which hired them, knew that the commandos they were training were likely be used in the assault on South Ossetia.” According to one unnamed US military official, the training program began in 2006 after Georgia offered to send commandos to Afghanistan. Nevertheless, the revelation will give more weight to Putin assertion on CNN of US involvement in orchestrating the war.
This isn’t the first time MPRI trained commandos have used their skills in other matters. According to the FT,
MPRI was hired by the Pentagon in 1995 to train the Croatian military prior to their invasion of the ethnically-Serbian Krajina region, which led to the displacement of 200,000 refugees and was one of the worst incidents of ethnic cleansing in the Balkan wars. MPRI denies any wrongdoing.
I would imagine that the Georgians used some of its training to a similar effect in South Ossetia.
I would also like to stress the connection between government, military, and capital in all of this. MPRI and American Systems were contracted out “to help supplement its own trainers because of a lack of manpower.” It is clear all things can be outsourced. Even the nation state’s monopoly on violence is for sale.
Moscow has claimed that American mercenaries were fighting with the Georgians, though no credible evidence has been found of direct involvement. Apparently MPRI and American Systems trainers did arrive in Georgia on August 3, but as one former contractor told FT, “They would have only seen the inside of a hotel room.” FT inquires to both companies have remained lacking specific details.
MPRI and American Systems aren’t the first mercenary corporations to arrive in the region. American mercenaries have been in Georgia and the Caspin Sea region since 2003. In his Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army, Jeremy Scahill writes that the American government launched a project called “Caspian Guard” in Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan. A similar plan was launched in Georgia which included $135 million to “create a network of commando and special operation forces that would protect the lucrative oil and gas exploration being plotted out by transnational oil corporations.”
In early 2003, Cubic, a private Washington military contractor, received a three year, $15 million contract, writes Scahill quoting the Guardian, “to equip and advise the former Soviet republic’s crumbling military, embellishing an eastward expansion that has enraged Moscow.” The impetus at the time was the supposed presence of “Chechen terrorists.” The real reason wasn’t lost on a Georgian security official who said, “the Cubic team would also improve protection of the pipeline that will take Caspian oil from Baku to Turkey through Georgia. Georgia has already expressed its gratitude by agreeing to send 500 troops to Iraq.”
The most notorious and lucrative American mercenary outfit, Blackwater, entered the Caspian region in early 2004. Their focus was to form “a SEAL team for Azerbaijan” to patrol oil interests, joining a U.S. corporate smorgasbord which included Bechtel, Halliburton, Chevron-Texaco, Unocal, and ExxonMoboil.
Given all of this, is it too much to at most suggest or in the least ask questions of direct American involvement in this war? Maybe Putin isn’t crazy after all.
It is no surprise that US Vice President stopped in both Azerbaijan and Georgia this week. He had a special present for Saakashvili. A guarantee of $1 billion from American taxpayers. Was this aid or really a payment? I only wonder how much of this money will be whisked away into Saakashvili and his people private coffers.
What a well oiled scam. The American corporate-political-military establishment has ensured its position in Georgia as protector and partner. Saakashvili got fat paper stack for playing the victim. And once again the American taxpayer didn’t even get a reach around.
“The funny thing, though, is that after that war, after being badly and easily defeated, he, time and again, claimed victory. I guess some Georgians are doing the same now.”
In fact, they’re doing it in the same way. “We’re still here, so we won!”
BTW if you can get it, I really recommend Primakov’s last book on the Middle East. He discusses Saddam’s psychology in some detail.
For example, just recently Israel inflicted summary punishment on the whole of Lebanon for the actions of Hizbollah that Lebanese gov’t had no power to restrain.
To Israel’s credit they did an investigation of this war and ruled that Olmert messed up bad. I’m happy to see that he might end up on trial for corruption. At least that country has some accountability.
To be fair, Russia was quite possibly within its rights to invade Chechnya to get to Khattab and Basaev.
Can Russia invade itself? Can the US invade Florida? When I go from the living room to the bedroom, am I invading my bedroom?
Language gets used in such sinister fashion during such events. Genocide, blitzkreig, ethnic cleansing, and (in this example) invasion. US is as guilty (or maybe more guilty) as anyone … “regime change” or “nation building” being used to camouflage invasion and installation of favorable governments. Discussions of “military action” against Iran, a camouflage for an act of war.
Likely a long-winded rant on an errant word, but sometimes these word choices are glossed over and readers (and writers) don’t examine what is said and why.
To Israel’s credit they did an investigation of this war and ruled that Olmert messed up bad. I’m happy to see that he might end up on trial for corruption. At least that country has some accountability.
Imagine Bush impeached for (mis)leading the country into war and corruption.
Imagine Bush tried for war crimes.
And no religion toooo.
What STEP is he – Eric Edelman, the under secretary of defense for policy, on September 9 – talking about?
“Imagine Bush impeached for (mis)leading the country into war and corruption.
Imagine Bush tried for war crimes.
And no religion toooo.”
You, you, darn hippie!
It’s your right to believe that Yale can install brains into heads
“А это мысль!” (с) Have no objection of such end for Saak.
As part of idiot vs. wise discussion would you read and comment following US MoD comments
http://civil.ge/eng/article.php?id=19455
(at least it relates to the topic)
So georgia just decided to “suppress firing positions” according to US MoDuki…but keep status quo…
Irishman! Are you scared to death by Russian might? You should (according to US)
Kolya, what is your opinion?
Is this delusion, cretinism or pure PR? And where did the study this?
PS. as I said – I was getting information from the guys on the ground from the very first minutes. So guys – be careful with mAss media shit when answering
“Imagine Bush tried for war crimes.”
Speaking of loose use of language.
I’m pretty sure that for Bush to be guilty of a war crime, he would have had to have deliberately ordered or encouraged the killing of civilians, which, despite my intense dislike of Bush, I doubt he has done.
Yes, by all means let’s not forget to denounce Bush. He was notoriously absent from this discussion where he most certainly belongs.
Are you sure Bush was behind all those decisions? Somehow I doubt it.
”Irishman! Are you scared to death by Russian might? You should (according to US)”
Not at all. Let loose Kilkenny senior hurlers on them:
http://www.rte.ie/sport/gaa/championship/2008/0907/kilkenny_waterford.html
they’d sort out the Russians!
Speaking of loose use of language.
Actually, not loose language at all. War Crimes are “Any of various crimes, such as genocide or the mistreatment of prisoners of war, committed during a war and considered in violation of the conventions of warfare.”
You could make a case against Bush based upon both jus ad bellum (laws regarding legitimacy of war) and jus in bello (laws regarding the conduct of war).
It is not going to happen, however, because victors are not put on trial for war crimes, victors write the rules and laws judging those who are defeated. However, men have been tried and convicted of war crimes for less than anything Bush has ever authorized.
I mean, Bin Laden’s driver was convicted of a war crime. And how many civilian deaths have occurred in Iraq to date?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_convicted_war_criminals There is a list for you to chew on.
So, I was very specific with my language.
You, you, darn hippie!
Aren’t you the one living in Vermont?
To sum up, this post argues that American mercenaries (contractors) are in the region to secure American oil & gas interests. [This seems entirely believable to me.]
“Given all of this, is it too much to at most suggest or in the least ask questions of direct American involvement in this war? Maybe Putin isn’t crazy after all.”
It isn’t logical to assume that American contractors were involved in starting this war since it would go against the very reason you gave for their presence: to secure oil & gas interests. You are essentially contradicting yourself. A war (against a numerically superior opponent) would put those oil & gas interests at risk.
Maintaining the status quo — Russia in the breakaway regions only — would be the best way to keep those interests secure. Wars are after all, unpredictably destructive (potentially to pipelines) and also produce political uncertainty (which could also put control of pipelines at risk).
As for the link between Pentagon-sponsored training and other military invasions … there is a big difference between correlation and causation. Let’s say I went to a third world country and taught people English and computer skills. Subsequently, these people ran internet scams that bilked a lot of people out of money. Does that mean I caused the internet scams? Am I responsible for the criminal conduct of those I taught?
Does that mean I caused the internet scams? Am I responsible for the criminal conduct of those I taught?
First, I actually don’t think that the Americans orchestrated the war. I believe worse: that the Americans have been duped by all of Saakashvili “democracy” rhetoric.
I actually think the heart of this war had to do with Georgia, South Ossetia, and Abkhazia. Russia and the US were a consequence.
However, to say that the Americans had no role is difficult to deny. American tax money was used to train and arm Georgian troops and give private war companies in some cases no bid contracts to do the work. For these facts, America does have a role.
If we apply computer example across the board, then we should probably dump the notion of not recognizing the difference between terrorists and the states that support them.
Look at it this way, would the US or Israel hold Iran to blame if they airlifted in 2000 Hezbollah soldiers to fight Israel? Absolutely. And rightfully so.
Actually, the real intent of the post was to point to military contractors’ role in training Georgian troops. I would be much more at ease if American military personnel were doing this directly. I’m incredibly disturbed with the corporate privatization of war especially by companies that have strong political ties to the state.
If the US didn’t return the Georgian soldiers home (or delayed them by refusing to transport them), it still would have been taking sides in the conflict — but against Georgia. The US would have been impeding the Georgian military’s ability to defend their own country. From your perspective, damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
Your Hezbollah-Israel analogy doesn’t work. Iran would be transporting soldiers to attack another country. The US transported soldiers back to their country of origin AFTER that country was invaded. The situations are different, not analogous (offensive versus defensive actions). Also, waving scary words like Iran and Hezbollah isn’t going to salvage your weak argument.
Terrorist groups that are organized enough to be supported by states have clearly stated intentions that are usually something along the lines of a “declaration of war on” or intention to “kill Americans/Jews/etc”. For the computer skills example to be analogous, my students would have said to me, “Gee, I’m really poor. But, I heard about how someone can make lots of money over the internet by scamming rich Westerners. Will you teach me English and computer skills so I can do this?” In this situation, I would be responsible since I know how my students will use this knowledge.
Yes, Americans were training and arming the Georgians. But, was it for action against the breakaway regions? Very few countries are willing to send their soldiers to Iraq, but the Georgians were willing. Thus, they got training and equipment.
The Russians were financially supporting those breakaway regions and handing out Russian passports. Were they also arming the Ossetian irregulars? It seems like they did. Russia had a lot more to gain from this war.
The American government wound up with a rapid, unexpected drawdown on forces in Iraq at a time when the American public is calling for a reduction in American forces in Iraq. Presumably, American soldiers will now have to stay longer to replace the Georgian forces that left.
Amen, Sean. I agree with what you wrote:
“I actually don’t think that the Americans orchestrated the war. I believe worse: that the Americans have been duped by all of Saakashvili “democracy” rhetoric.
I actually think the heart of this war had to do with Georgia, South Ossetia, and Abkhazia. Russia and the US were a consequence.
However, to say that the Americans had A role is difficult to deny.”
All I can say is that in terms of leaders since its independence, Georgia had terrible luck.
“So, I was very specific with my language.”
Damn you and your point-by-point refutations, Shedd!
“If the US didn’t return the Georgian soldiers home”
Which by some odd coincidence they did when fighting was over, after hemming and hawwing for several days. Hmmm.
“All I can say is that in terms of leaders since its independence, Georgia had terrible luck.”
In my opinion, Georgia’s main problem is nationalism, all that “we are a freedom-loving mountain people with great traditions who were great once and we will be again” bullshit.
Contrary to what that Lenin guy said, the worst, most putrid nationalisms are those not of the big guy, but of the little guy, or rather of the little guy with respect to his own little guys. Kind of like the Chechens, in fact, and the Ichkerian “we are the natural leaders of the North Caucasus” line.
Sort of like the kid who beats up his little sister because Dad likes her more and he hasn’t gotten his allowance.
To Israel’s credit they did an investigation of this war and ruled that Olmert messed up bad.
That must have been the shortest investigation in history.
In my opinion, Georgia’s main problem is nationalism, all that “we are a freedom-loving mountain people with great traditions who were great once and we will be again” bullshit.
Take out “freedom-loving mountain people” and you’ve just described the prevailing opinion in Russia. All I keep hearing these days is bullshit like “we’re back” and “we’re gonna…” and “everyone will have to…”
One of my translators was telling me that Crimea rightly belongs to Russia and that Ukraine will have noticed what happened to Georgia and that unless they want the same they’d better get ready to ghand back Crimea in a few years. Worrying thing is, if Putin was stupid enough (which he most certainly isn’t) to announce a full-scale invasion of the Crimea tomorrow in order to make it part of Russia again, I think most Russians would think it was brilliant. At least half of the US opposed Bush going into Iraq, I think Russians would go along with pretty much anything right now.
Contrary to what that Lenin guy said, the worst, most putrid nationalisms are those not of the big guy, but of the little guy
A Russian warning of the dangers of small-country nationalism whilst downplaying big-country nationalism?!! Whatever next?!!
“A Russian warning of the dangers of small-country nationalism whilst downplaying big-country nationalism?!! Whatever next?!!”
That’s the opposite of what Lenin said. Since I’m not Russian, you can’t mean me.
Tim, who have actually been the perpetrators of pogroms in the fSU? Hacking people apart with axes, ethnic cleansing, and stuff like that? HINT: not Russians.
That’s the opposite of what Lenin said.
Ah, okay.
Tim, who have actually been the perpetrators of pogroms in the fSU?
Why, court-appointed not-so-Russia-friendlies, of course. Who else?
Lenin argued that the main enemy was “Great Russian Chauvinism” and asserted, at least rhetorically, that small nations should have the right of self-determination all the way to secession. That’s why the Chechens supported the Bolsheviks. He also had that things about “oppressor nation nationalism” (bad) and “oppressed nation nationalism” (good).
“Why, court-appointed not-so-Russia-friendlies, of course. Who else?”
Nice photos
http://vif2ne.ru/nvk/forum/0/co/1692330.htm
US servicemen training Georgians the art of hand-made mines?
A thought on the Crimea. Would the Ukraine be tempted if Russia bought it back? They could either do this by announcing energy price rises (but for you sir, 20% less over 10 years in return) or providing the locals with the cash to buy up as much land as possible? What am I talking about? The Ukranian law on property rights is as clear as mud. Bugger.