Armchair General small spacer
Armchair General magazine mastheadGo to Weider History GroupSubscribe to Armchair General MagazineLearn about latest issue of Armchair General

Smoking Gun in a Brushfire? Welcome to The War in South Ossetia

Brian King September 17, 2008  | one comment  | Print  | E-mail

It has been more than a month since the brief but bitter war between Georgia and Russia over the disputed Caucasian territory of South Ossetia.  Now, after all the fighting, all the diplomacy, and all the name recognition (and name calling), both sides are in a continuing struggle to prove definitively who fired the first shot.  Even in the era of cell phones, real time satellite data, and round the clock news chatter, neither side has been able to deliver a knockout blow when it comes to finger pointing.  As a civilian reading everything possible on this issue – there are few solid leads…but there are indeed some clues.

Subscribe Today

Speigel Online has an article addressing culpability entitled DID SAAKASHVILI LIE? The West Begins to Doubt Georgian Leader. It provides some fascinating insights into the conflict from the perspective of military analysts at NATO.  Surely with all their high tech gadgetry and intelligence gathering machinery they would have some idea of the sequence of events? 

The NATO experts did not question the Georgian claim that the Russians had provoked them by sending their troops through the Roki Tunnel. But their evaluation of the facts was dominated by skepticism that these were the true reasons for Saakashvili’s actions. 

The details that Western intelligence agencies extracted from their signal intelligence agree with NATO’s assessments. According to this intelligence information, the Georgians amassed roughly 12,000 troops on the border with South Ossetia on the morning of Aug. 7. Seventy-five tanks and armored personnel carriers — a third of the Georgian military’s arsenal — were assembled near Gori. Saakashvili’s plan, apparently, was to advance to the Roki Tunnel in a 15-hour blitzkrieg and close the eye of the needle between the northern and southern Caucasus regions, effectively cutting off South Ossetia from Russia.

Initially when the Georgian army moved into South Ossetia there was no public mention of a need to stop the Russians at the Roki tunnel and the stated goal of the Georgians was to restore “constitutional order” to South Ossetia.  It wasn’t until weeks later the tunnel story started to get into the blogosphere and mainstream media as the Georgian raison d’etre of the whole affair. Why the long wait before divulging this point? Some believe that the Georgians intentionally misled everyone so as to obfuscate the real targets of their offensive which were the Roki Tunnel and the advancing Russians. As stated in the article, when you are at war you don’t tell the enemy the goal of your troop movements. But were the Georgians launching a first strike, or where they forced into action to head the Russians off “at the pass” so-to-speak? 

There are stories floating around which are used to bolster the Georgian claim the Russians moved first, including one radio interview of a wounded Russian Captain who apparently said the Russians were on the move into South Ossetia well before Russian officials claim. This captain later said he misspoke due to his injuries. Another report making the rounds recently is declassified Georgian intercepts of cell phone conversations from workers at the Roki Tunnel itself, which seemingly corroborate an early Russian advance through the tunnel (Russian officials strongly deny this). Still another story suggests the Russians pre-planted reporters in South Ossetia to bolster their own view of the war, giving them apparent credibility as the only reporters on the scene.  Finally, did the artillery exchanges between Georgian and South Ossetian separatists in the days before Russian involvement represent the first punches in this brawl?

Pages: 1 2

Tags:

  1. One Comment to “Smoking Gun in a Brushfire? Welcome to The War in South Ossetia”

  2. Brian,

    A very reasoned and balanced assessment, in my opinion. I believe that right now we need to conentrate on asking the right questions — it is naive to assume that we already have all the right answers.

    By Frank Chadwick on Oct 4, 2008 at 1:03 am

Post a Comment

Please note that Armchair General Staff cannot respond to requests for research of any type. Please visit our research forum to post research questions. If you have a question about our magazine, please use the contact us form.

Related Articles



Armchair General Spacer

SPONSORED SITES




Armchair General Spacer

OPINION POLL

Q: Which of these two conquerors do you rate as the greatest?

View Results

See previous polls

STAY CONNECTED WITH US

RSS Feed
 
Daily Armchair General Update
 
 

Armchair General on Twitter Armchair General on Myspace Armchair General on Facebook

What is Armchair General?

Armchair General (ACG) and ACG online feature a unique, interactive editorial approach that invites the reader to decide the course of action in challenging historical scenarios, to step into the shoes of a battlefield commander. Leading historians and contributors lend integrity and credibility to this fresh presentation of historical and contemporary events.

Armchair General is the INTERACTIVE history magazine where YOU COMMAND and decide the course of action!

Armchair General's Feedburner Link Get our RSS!
Weider History Group Newsletter Newsletter Signup

What We Write About

Our Other Magazines

Weider History Network:  HistoryNet | Armchair General | Great History | Achtung Panzer!

Copyright © 2004-2008 Armchair General L.L.C., All rights reserved.