Sep
11
Levy Lies
September 11, 2008 | 50 Comments
Bernard-Henri Levy, France’s conservative philosophy guru, is a big fat liar. As soon as war broke out in Georgia, Levy rushed there hoping to reproduce his fabled war zone reporting from Bosnia. It turns out, however, the article he wrote for Le Monde and the Huffington Post about what he saw in Gori was all his imagination. Here’s his description of Gori:
After crossing through six new check points, one of which consists of a tree trunk hoisted up and down by a winch commanded by a group of paramilitaries, we arrive in Gori. We are not in the center of the city. But from where Lomaia has dropped us, before taking off in the Audi to collect his wounded, from this intersection dominated by an enormous tank as big as a rolling bunker, we can see fires burning everywhere. Rockets lighting up the sky at regular intervals, followed by short detonations. The emptiness. The slight odor of putrefaction and death. Most of all, the incessant rumbling of armored vehicles. Almost every other car is an unmarked car jammed with militia, recognizable because of their white armbands and their headbands. Gori does not belong to the Ossetia which the Russians claim they have come to “liberate.” It is a Georgian town. And they have burned it down, pillaged it, reduced it to a ghost town. Emptied.
John Rosenthal writes in the World Politics Review that Levy never got into Gori. “The problem with this account,” Rosenthal says, “is that Lévy appears not to have seen what he reported seeing. In fact, as has since been confirmed by other members of the group and even conceded by members of Lévy’s own entourage, Lévy never made it to Gori.”
Hat tip to SRB commentor Kolya for the article.
Popularity: 4% [?]
Comments
50 Comments so far
Guess who said that!
The former US ambassador to Russia said that.
http://www.moscowtimes.ru/article/1009/42/370834.htm
at the bottom
Whoops. Well, the ambassador (Matlocke?) said practically the same thing.
So Russian prisons are as good as Yale and Harvard then
Apart from my personal blog, I can not think of any other reliable source of information. Mental mark: “Don’t read Le Monde”.
It’s important to understand that President [Dmitry] Medvedev had no other choice given situations on Aug. 8 and Aug. 26, and made the only possible decision.
There is a problem with this line of thought and conclusion – it is based on the limited information that is available to the masses. Only a select few people in corridors of power know when Russia made their decisions and what their goals were. Russia prepared for those war games in the region months in advance and left those troops in a state of readiness for what was about to happen. I don’t see this as coincidental or simply lucky.
Likewise, Georgia had to take some days or weeks to bring their additional artillery forces into the region.
One should ask what other steps might have been done to prevent the hostilities before August 8th, particularly as many parties certainly seemed aware something was about to happen, and why they were not done (what the motives were). The truth is, letting Georgia act rashly (provoked or not) played into Russian goals in the region.
To paint Medvedev and the Russian government as humanitarians whose hands were forced demonstrates an infantile grasp of the timeline and decisions that were made.
Finally, as I have said before, I do not think Russia was alone in this game. Certainly, Georgia had to be thinking about the “what if” scenarios, and formed the conclusion, for example, that two out of three possible end scenarios were good for the Georgian government. The US as well, although I suspect US suffered from a lack of intelligence gathering in the region.
Has anybody else read the comments of Michael Wynne, former US Secretary of the Air Force, regarding what he believes the US should have done in response to the events of August 8th?
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/09/08/former-af-leader-on-georgia-what-must-be-done/
“I don’t see this as coincidental or simply lucky.”
The likeliest explanation in my opinion is that somebody had done an analysis — either based on intelligence obtained inside the Georgian government or military or just by looking at Tbilisi’s rhetoric and actions — that such an attempt by Georgia was likely. Saakashvili has, after all, used military action against these regions before and, it appears, was shipping heavy weapons into Abkhazia under the guise of “police.”
If they hadn’t been prepared, right now we would be talking about the great Russian intelligence failure.
“Has anybody else read the comments of Michael Wynne, former US Secretary of the Air Force, regarding what he believes the US should have done in response to the events of August 8th?”
This is so badly written I have difficulty believing it’s really by Wynne.
The likeliest explanation in my opinion is that somebody had done an analysis — either based on intelligence obtained inside the Georgian government or military or just by looking at Tbilisi’s rhetoric and actions — that such an attempt by Georgia was likely.
Sure, but you have to take that to the next step. Could Russia have prevented a Georgian military action? Were Russian actions before and after April of 2008 making a Georgian action more or less likely?
And I believe, yes the Russian government could have prevented this, certainly inflamed the situation even more with some of their policies, and had an end result in mind for quite some time, that we are seeing today (incorporation of South Ossetia and Abkhazia into the Russian federation).
I don’t draw any conclusions that Russia is evil in this regard, but neither would I suggest they are being great humanitarians. They are simply following a strategy that makes Georgia weaker (and therefore Russia stronger) in the region.
In effect though, I think this could accelerate Georgian de facto membership to NATO. Certainly the US seems to be treating it that way – if they aren’t actually going to be members of NATO, the US is certainly going to treat Georgia as though they were in terms of military support in the future.
And if Russians were crying about a few hundred million worth of military support to Georgia over the past few years from the US – they ain’t seen nothing yet.
“Could Russia have prevented a Georgian military action? Were Russian actions before and after April of 2008 making a Georgian action more or less likely?”
Well, could they? How? They had already stated that Georgian actions against S. Ossetia would lead to military intervention — which Georgia would be sure to lose unless they sealed off Roki tout de suite. How can you be more persuasive?
Were the Georgians unaware of Russian military preparedness? Maybe it was meant to send a signal.
Really, I think that often (possibly in this case) the need to look for an ulterior motive behind everything sometimes leads to red herrings.
“And if Russians were crying about a few hundred million worth of military support to Georgia over the past few years from the US – they ain’t seen nothing yet.”
I really don’t think so — but then, I also think the “pipeline politics” element of both US and Russian foreign policy is greatly exaggerated. The new Great Game is actually a sideshow.
I mean, think about it.
Is the US going to ramp up supplies of military hardware to a country that has attacked regions that are now full of Russian and EU troops? This strikes me as the nec plus ultra of dumb.
Is the US going to ramp up supplies of military hardware to a country that has attacked regions that are now full of Russian and EU troops? This strikes me as the nec plus ultra of dumb.
It’s already basically a done deal, as near as I can tell. The US government is not discussing IF they should rearm Georgia, but HOW MUCH. The relationship in jeopardy here is not US-Georgia but US-Russia.
Where are you reading any quotes from the US government suggesting we aren’t going to rearm Georgia?
Sure, it seems dumb to us, but that is the path our government is on right now. I’m not even sure that an Obama presidency would derail that, as Dems would go on and on about Democratic Georgia and paint Russia as a totalitarian aggressor.
Call me what ever bad word you choose, but when I read Russian government officials predicting there will be Marines stationed in Georgia, and I read former US defense officials saying “We should have deployed Marines to Tblisi” it leads me to conclude that the US Military is going to use this to station some small base in Georgia.
We have similar bases in Kosovo, Bulgaria, and Romania. US likely won’t be at Manas in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan much longer. Tblisi is probably the next closest candidate for a US airbase for support of troops in Afghanistan. Also puts US forces closer to the Caspian Sea basin and to the north of Iran, effectively encircling Iran with US forces.
Also, I just have seen zero evidence that anyone in the US government cares what Russia thinks on any issue. In fact, quite the opposite. I would suggest our government has concluded that what cooperation we’ve had with Russia is so little and so conditional, that there is little point in considering Russian interests or concerns.
“Where are you reading any quotes from the US government suggesting we aren’t going to rearm Georgia?”
Quotes don’t matter. Those are for public consumption. How could they say otherwise? “We totally fucked up in supporting Georgia” doesn’t go over very well, nor does “Russia kicked our asses.” The thing is, unlike in Kyrgystan, US forces in Georgia will be perceived by everybody as being anti-Russian, and the number 1 US priority with respect to Russia for decades has been never ever ever ever to risk a military confrontation, because that has apocolyptic potential.
I don’t doubt there will be some rearmament. I just doubt it will be on a grand scale. I’ve been wrong before though.
“Call me what ever bad word you choose”
Buttmunch
Assclown.
This reminds me .. this might amuse some people:
http://www.insultmonger.com/swearing/russian.htm
The English lists are here:
http://www.insultmonger.com/slang/index.htm
Ah, I don’t attribute much subtlety to the US government, especially these days. I think what the US government is thinking about … is how to best support Georgia and send a clear message of future support to Ukraine and Azerbaijan.
I think that translates into boots on the ground.
The US thinking is more likely, “the Russians would never have pulled this stunt if we had troops in the region” than “we risk confrontation with Russia.” Certainly, confrontation with Russia was not a concern regarding the ABMs in Poland or bases in Kosovo, Romania, or Bulgaria that I previously cited.
Time will tell. Our predictions on record – time to start laying bets!
The thing is, unlike in Kyrgystan, US forces in Georgia will be perceived by everybody as being anti-Russian, and the number 1 US priority with respect to Russia for decades has been never ever ever ever to risk a military confrontation, because that has apocolyptic potential.
The US risked war with Russia on a daily basis in Berlin. The priority for the US was do not start a military confrontation with Russia; risking a confrontation, and demonstrating willingness to fight it attacked, underpinned US policy towards the USSR for 50 years.
“Certainly, confrontation with Russia was not a concern regarding the ABMs in Poland or bases in Kosovo, Romania, or Bulgaria that I previously cited.”
Sure, but the ABMs in Poland and the bases are not specifically and explicitly targeted against Russia and none of those countries have attacked Russian citizens, you cornhole.
To put it another way — what happens if there is a US base there and Saak or some successor decides to attack the Russian and EU forces? This going to get out of control pretty quickly.
(Also, the US doe not have the ability to bring Georgia into NATO unilaterally, and I doubt Germany is going to go for it.)
“The US risked war with Russia on a daily basis in Berlin.”
No, because Berlin was unlikely to attack the Soviet Union.
I think you are better off thinking of the US government as acting with the fervency and blind certainity of actions of crusaders.
In other words, I think these idiots often believe their rhetoric regarding bringing democracy and freedom to the world, etc. They see NATO membership of Ukraine and Georgia as not just being inevitable, but as like some holy mission from God, from which we must not be dissuaded.
This is my opinion anyway, and how I judge the words coming out of the mouths of US government officials in Washington. They sound like zealots than pragmatists in this regard, to me. The message is much less “we regret the actions of our Georgian partners” and much more “we will support the brave Georgian people against the aggressive ambitions of the Dark Lord, Vladimir Putin and his evil minions.”
However, from my standpoint, I fail to see how expanding NATO does anyone any good, except for arms manufacturers. New markets for NATO standard armaments! Hip-hip hurray!
They sound like zealots than pragmatists in this regard, to me.
I should say, they sound more like zealots than pragmatists. I hate catching such mistakes after I hit “submit comment”.
No, because Berlin was unlikely to attack the Soviet Union.
Khruschev, being encouraged by Ulbricht, came perilously close to attempting to force the US out of west Berlin, something which would have resulted in the US going to war. I’d give you the full details, but I don’t have the books with me on the platform.
The US stationed thousands of soldiers in western Europe for the explicit purpose of discouraging the USSR from invading NATO countries. As a method of deterrence it was rather successful, but it doesn’t appear to be the result of a policy of not risking war with Russia under any circumstances. Such a policy would probably have kept the US at home in isolationist bliss.
To put it another way — what happens if there is a US base there and Saak or some successor decides to attack the Russian and EU forces?
NATO is not obliged to intervene if one of its members attacks first.
“The US risked war with Russia on a daily basis in Berlin.”
Spending most of my teenage years as an Army brat in West Germany, I remember quite clearly how close we all thought we were to war with the USSR at any given moment, and in particular during the Solidarity trade union strikes of 1980-1981 (I was 15 or 16 at this time). My father was part of the 3/32 Armored Division stationed in Friedberg Germany … and at one heightened period of tension the base was in lock-down, we were all restricted to our homes, and there were rumors of the Soviet Union sending forces into Poland. This was a period of about 48 or 72 hours as I recall.
There was no discussion regarding backing away from or avoiding confrontation with the Soviet Union. In fact, I would say the opposite. Everyone was prepared for it and almost certain it was going to happen.
Also puts US forces closer to the Caspian Sea basin and to the north of Iran, effectively encircling Iran with US forces.
I think this is one of the most important pieces in the whole puzzle.
I would suggest our government has concluded that what cooperation we’ve had with Russia is so little and so conditional, that there is little point in considering Russian interests or concerns.
A rare case where I can’t and won’t argue with anything in Wally’s post. I also think that US all but written Russia off in terms of cooperation.
Furthermore, this current crisis I am afraid will prove to be a strategic blunder for Russia, no matter how well it plays tactically for Putin’s clan currently in power.
“…the number 1 US priority with respect to Russia for decades has been never ever ever ever to risk a military confrontation, because that has apocolyptic potential.”
CC-ARF echoes Putin on CNN here when he was talking about finding the passport. So in Putin’s eyes US entering Georgia means face-to-face confrontation, which would be escalation beyond anything seen in the Cold War. That was his main point on CNN, I think.
Spending most of my teenage years as an Army brat in West Germany…
It took me years to find out what this term actually meant, as opposed to what I assumed it meant. Most weirdly, I found out after watching The Fast and The Furious: Tokyo Drift.
So in Putin’s eyes US entering Georgia means face-to-face confrontation, which would be escalation beyond anything seen in the Cold War.
I think even Putin would by now have heard of the Soviet pilots dogfighting with the US pilots during the Korean War.
Sure, but the ABMs in Poland and the bases are not specifically and explicitly targeted against Russia and none of those countries have attacked Russian citizens, you cornhole.
Give me a break with this Russian citizen stuff, felcher-breath. Since when is giving passports to people within the internationally recognized borders of another country make those citizens, YOUR citizens? It was a tactic required to lend legitimacy to the illegitmate actions Russia had planned in response to any Georgian move to reclaim those territories.
I can not see the US government (or any government other than Russia and a few vassal states) considering South Ossetians as “Russian citizens”.
If your concerns had legitimacy, there would not have been US Coast Guard and Navy ships docked in Georgia. Some future placement of 2,000 Marines in Tblisi will be discussed in terms of a “deterrent to Russian aggression” or some similiar language.
In reality, what is Russia going to do about it if the US were to place a base in Tblisi and use it as a replacement for Manas? Maybe stop selling titanium to US aircraft firms or withdraw from certain chemical or nuclear weapons agreements … I think that is about the only leverage they have remaining with the US.
It took me years to find out what this term actually meant, as opposed to what I assumed it meant.
Yes, it is just a self-depricating term of affection for dependents of Department of Defense personnel, or more specifically US Army personnel (although it is used more widely, even for other US Armed Services.)
My father was in the Army for 21 years, including two tours in Vietnam. I’d like to take my parents on a trip to Russia sometime, I actually think they would find it immensely interesting.
I only narrowly avoided (or escaped) joining the Army (or more likely, Air Force) myself. At the time of the early 80s, the US Army was not particularly impressive to me, as most of the GI’s that I knew were not in the service as career choice, but saw it as a means to avoid something else.
“Yes, certainly, we will become part of Russia … and we are not going to make some independent Ossetia, because our ancestors made this choice” – Eduard Kokoity 9/10 morning
::phone call from Medvedev, Putin, or Lavrov::
“I have probably been misunderstood. We are not going to relinquish our independence, which we won at the cost of colossal sacrifices, and South Ossetia is not going to become part of Russia.” – Eduard Kokoity 9/10 afternoon
Well said.
One question
Could you recall some details?
Do YOU expect USSR to attack you? Or do YOU expect NATO/US to “protect” Poles from USSR by attacking first?
since passports were invented
From this point Russia could attack Iceland anytime now (I guess I should ask to double my salary or…). There are hundreds of Russian citizen with Icelandic passports.
I think you should check all Russians in US!!!
Returning million of Georgians living in Russia back to Tbilisi?
Do YOU expect USSR to attack you? Or do YOU expect NATO/US to “protect” Poles from USSR by attacking first?
Fair question. I expected that we civilians, children and wives of US Armed Forces, would have been in a mad rush to get the hell out of Europe.
I think the primary concerns for regular Army personnel were that Soviet Forces once mobilized into Poland, might for strategic reasons continue to push into Germany to occupy West Germany, specifically the Fulda Gap. Much of European war strategy at that time was tied to conventional land forces (tanki, tanki, tanki) and control of the Fulda Gap. The idea of Soviets moving to control the Fulda Gap was one of multiple scenarios. Soviets would have wanted to control the gap to prevent NATO armed forces moving east .. NATO wanted to control the gap to prevent Soviet armed forces moving west, etc.
Of course, I was living at the Southwestern end of this gap, near Frankfurt (my high school was in Frankfurt).
Much of my information just comes from conversations with my father, years later, after he had too many beers (not an infrequent event, mind you). I don’t want to sound like he is some high ranking officer, my father was a First Sergeant (E7).
I can say that German news reported for a short while that the Soviets had invaded Poland, to squash the Solidarity strikes, which proved to be false.
I guess the short answer to what you asked is .. it was expected if Soviets moved into Poland, for strategic reasons they might keep attacking to control the Fulda Gap.
Thanks, Shedd.
BTW, you told even a shorter answer – “which proved to be false.”…
I don’t know about 50-60s military doctrine but when I was training it was “Hold on first strike then counter-attack” Attacking first was never mentioned as possible scenario. Well our instructors might have lied to us but they were doing that really believable.
“Of course, I was living at the Southwestern end of this gap, near Frankfurt (my high school was in Frankfurt).”
Kannst du Deutsch reden?
My mother is from around there.
I’d like to see more of her awesome cleavage, that’s Pulin’s most valuable asset. The rest is not worth any attention.
Attacking first was never mentioned as possible scenario. Well our instructors might have lied to us but they were doing that really believable.
USSR always maintained they would never strike first and sold that to its citizens, but in the fog of war, how can you expect Soviets to really know who was attacking who?
In any case, what I was describing with the Fulda Gap has more to do with strategy of war, and how to control an area or region. Similiarly, Russian pushed into Georgia to ensure they controlled enemy access to South Ossetia and limited Georgian ability to respond.
Kannst du Deutsch reden?
Ja, Ich spreche Deutsche. However, I’ve lost probably 90% of my German language skills. My Russian is better than my German at this time. My high school in Frankfurt was an American school for US dependents stationed in Germany (Army, Air Force, and others). But I studied German throughout high school and had many opportunities to practice it (for example, talking to cute girls and smoking cigarettes near the German school across the street from our apartment).
Now that I think about it, my affection for foreign women has deep roots. I had a fling with a French woman from Bordeaux, France and a South African woman from Capetown also. Hmmm.
Also attended US schools when we lived in Herzogenaurach (home to Adidas and Puma shoes) and Nürnberg/Fürth. All told, we lived in West Germany for about 6 years.
expect Soviets to really know who was attacking who?
Should say, Soviet citizens (or military personnel).
“Ja, Ich spreche Deutsche.”
Here’s my mom’s hometown: http://www.altensteig.de/ceasy/modules/cms/main.php5?
I think my time living in Germany has influenced my politics and made me more of a Socialist, in ways that most Americans can’t and won’t think.
For example, I am convinced that trains can be timely, inexpensive for passengers, and widely used, if properly supported by government. Americans hear this and presume a poorly managed boon-doggle. I say it depends on the managers.
In other words, living in Germany teaches you that the government doesn’t have to be incompetent, and that tax dollars can be used to provide meaningful and useful services. These ideas have zero traction in the US.
American citizens consider every dollar you give the government to be pissed away on something worthless (unless it is spent on a tank, fighter jet, or missile).
I have lots of stories from my teenage years living overseas, but most of them aren’t useful for this forum.
PS you can listen to Levy debating Zizek here: http://www.nypl.org/research/chss/pep/pepdesc.cfm?id=4685
Cool! I’ve been collecting Zizek talks for the last week or so. Now when I read him I hear his voice!
Wow! NYPL’s event coordinator must be reading my facebook updates! LOL.
Thanks for the link.
Check it out, Sean — somebody has graffitied “My s vami, Jean Baudrillard!” on the sidewalk in front of my metro station.
Take a picture for me! in other Zizek news, he was on Open Source radio yesterday. http://www.radioopensource.org/slavoj-zizek-what-is-the-question/