Thursday, January 27, 2011

Saakashvili's Agenda

A suicide attack on a crowd at a public place, Monday's bombing of the Domodedovo airport had all the trademarks of a jihadist operation. Several comments on my essay about it, however, cautioned that one had to make a distinction between actual jihadists, and terrorists in the service of Empire.

Then Prime Minister Putin made a enigmatic statement yesterday that the attack was not connected to Chechnya. Were the terrorists, as the Russophobic Washington Post speculated, from Ingushetia or Dagestan instead? Could it have been, as Lilia Shevtsova of Carnegie's Moscow office speculated for the WaPo the other day, a "Russian nationalist"? (Shevtsova seems like a Russian analogue of Serbia's Sonja Biserko and Natasa Kandic, so I didn't take her seriously.)

Enter Mikhail Saakashvili, the tie-chewing American satrap of Georgia, gloating over the attack and calling it "payback" for the August 2008 humiliation Moscow's border garrison inflicted on his NATO-trained military.

Yet from his remarks to the The Independent, it seems Saakashvili was just enjoying the opportunity to stick it to Moscow, rather than claiming responsibility for the attack or knowing who was behind it. Crass, sure. But even a bumbling idiot such as Saakashvili ought to know that offering oneself up as a possible perpetrator of a terrorist attack against Russia - or cheering the terrorists on, for that matter - is pure idiocy. Especially since Putin told him that Moscow would "crush" the terrorists "like cockroaches."

So, what is he trying to accomplish, then?


Suvorov said...

You are entirely correct about Shevtsova. She has been among the attendees of the Bilderberg Group and she once called on NATO to intervene in Chechnya.
As to the attack itself, what we can all agree about is that, whoever perpetrated it, had some agenda or reason for carrying it out. Considering that the Russian state has not used the last several attacks of such nature in Russia to strengthen itself or repress the opposition invoking the state of emergency, one is left to wonder what would the Russian government have to gain from these tragedies? Also, both the president and the prime minister of Russia even before the last attack still had the approval rating that any political leader in the West could only dream of. That is why I doubt that it was an inside job.

Eugene Costa said...

Ah, Gianfranco Sanguinetti is beginning to sink in.

Neither Debord nor Sanguinetti were clowns, as was so long the popular verdict even in France.

Very nicely modulated, Sir.


jack said...

I wouldn't be so sure that he didn't have a hand in the attack.

After all the post of the 2008 conflict which was initially uncovered by Russian intelligence prior to the conflict that Georgian intelligence (which is a proxy of Mossad, CIA and MI6) was attempting to establish Ingush terrorist cells and ethnic Georgian army personal in the Russian army and that MPRI military instructors were training Georgian forces in sabotage techniques with the obvious purpose to Russia bogged down in guerrilla conflict in Georgia and destabilise the entire North Caucasus.
Classic Brzezinski trap like Afghanistan in 79 or the 2 Chechen wars.

jack said...

Carnegie is the main western NGO responsible for coordinating other NGO activities like Soros Human Rights Watch in Russia.

In 2008 a former Carnegie affiliate Andrew Kuchins wrote a paper “Alternative Futures for Russia to 2017” in which Russia is engulfed in civil war for Centre for Strategic and International Studies.

Could it have been, as Lilia Shevtsova of Carnegie's Moscow office speculated for the WaPo the other day, a "Russian nationalist"?

The ever present “Russian nationalist” popularised by Tom Clancy and the modern warfare games are now so nuts they are willing to blow themselves up by Shevtsova logic instead of actually targeting large areas of non ethnic Russians like a mosque.

I think she might have been influence by the airport scene in Modern Warfare 2.

Here is videos of Ilyas Akhmadov and Mariam Lanskoy's book: 'Chechen Struggle: Independence Won and Lost' presentation on the National Endowment for Democracy website.

kapetan Mile said...

one thing is sure. where there is a russian friendly government, theres american-british destabilizing units not too far

Eugene Costa said...

The AP story today by David Nowack reporting the Russian identification of the bomber as from the Caucasus has the usual anti-Russian spin, including this:

"The attack stained Russia's image at a vulnerable time, coming just before Medvedev's appearance at the Davos World Economic Forum to try to woo international investment. The explosion also called into question Russia's ability to safely host major international events such as the 2014 Winter Olympics and the 2018 World Cup."

So it is a matter of "image" then?
Which easily translates, after Debord, into "spectacle".

It is so nice of Saakashvili to have stepped up to the plate, don't you think?

Even leaving aside the aspect of sneak attack on Russian peace-keepers, which is no longer in doubt save in some western media,
Saakashvili is patently a terrorist simply for attacking what he argued were Georgia's own civilians, no?

Nor does this ever get into the western media.

NATO aside for the moment, if one really wanted to isolate a variance with the Falcon, it might be in the degree of discomfort engendered by the statement, however one wishes to interpret it, that the US, Britain, and Israel, specifically in Georgia--though also elsewhere--have done yeoman's work in rehabilitating Josef Stalin.

1389 said...

More folly in Georgia:

Why is Georgia allowing a Turkish settlement?