http://www.ruvr.ru/main.php?lng=eng&q=31052&cid=58&p=13.08.2008
Voice of Russia August 13, 2008 FORCING PEACE UPON GEORGIA IN LINE WITH PEACKEEPING METHODS WORKED OUT BY NATO -According to the scenario of the exercises, international troops are urgently moved in to force peace upon [a] country. The Americans were rehearsing this scenario in 1997 and Saakashvili enacted in August 2008. -I asked whether this was a personal opinion or the official position of the United States. The answer was that this is fixed in official U.S. documents. Yet, commenting on the latest events in the Caucasus, American politicians prefer speaking about sovereignty, not about human rights.... An operation launched by Russia to force Georgia to accept peace in the Caucasus is in line with modern peacekeeping tactics designed for critical situations when urgent interference is necessary to stop bloodshed and prevent a humanitarian catastrophe. These tactics are not aimed at destroying or occupying a state that committed the aggression but at forcing it to obey the universally accepted principles of international law. Forcing a peace is not Russian know-how as some Georgian politicians tend to interpret it. The Vice President of the Russian Peace Committee Major General Vladimir Vorozhtsov explains: I saw elements of forcing a peace at an officer training school at the U.S. Air Force base in Florida. This was in February 1997. Russia’s operation in South Ossetia fully matches the methods, technologies and political planning worked out by the United States and NATO. In Florida, there was a training game – the authoritarian ruler of a hypothetical state uses military force to suppress ethnic minorities. According to the scenario of the exercises, international troops are urgently moved in to force peace upon that country. The Americans were rehearsing this scenario in 1997 and Saakashvili enacted in August 2008. Ten years ago, the Americans did not doubt that such actions were justified. To my question how these approaches agree with the principles of sovereignty, I got the following answer: the principles of international humanitarian law, the observance of human rights and freedoms have priority over the concept of national sovereignty. I asked whether this was a personal opinion or the official position of the United States. The answer was that this is fixed in official U.S. documents. Yet, commenting on the latest events in the Caucasus, American politicians prefer speaking about sovereignty, not about human rights, General Vorozhtsov concluded. ------------------------------------ =============== Group Moderator: [Е-ПОШТА ЗАШТИЋЕНА] page at http://magazine.sorabia.net for more informations about current situation in Serbia http://www.sorabia.net Slusajte GLAS SORABIJE nas talk internet-radio (Serbian Only) http://radio.sorabia.net Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sorabia/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sorabia/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[Е-ПОШТА ЗАШТИЋЕНА] mailto:[Е-ПОШТА ЗАШТИЋЕНА] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [Е-ПОШТА ЗАШТИЋЕНА] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
