Newsweek - National News, World News, Health, Technology, Entertainment and more... | Newsweek.com

Checkpoint Baghdad

Full Post
Posted Sunday, August 10, 2008 1:31 PM

In Iraq, Georgian Troops Wait to Join the Fight Against Russia

Newsweek

By Lennox Samuels

Scores of soldiers loiter on one side of the expansive grounds of Baghdad's Al-Sijud Palace, some in full uniform and others wearing brown T-shirts tucked into their camouflage pants. Nearby, dozens of backpacks stuffed with gear stand upright, as if at attention. The troops smoke and chat in small groups, the talk mostly about the violent drama unfolding back home. These are members of the Georgian Army, waiting to be re-deployed to their country in the Caucasus to join the battle against a historical foe they believe is trying to re-conquer their nation. "We look on TV and see the Russians bombing our country and we know what we have to do," says one sergeant who does not want to give his name. "We have to go back and fight."

Russia's military campaign may be designed to eject Georgia from the secessionist republic of South Ossetia, but it also is forcing Georgia to drastically reduce its presence in Iraq. A longtime stalwart of the American-led coalition in Iraq, the small European/Asian nation will send back at least half of its 2,000 Iraq-based troops to help on the home front. Georgia, a small nation of only 4.5 million people, currently supplies the third-largest contingent of forces in Iraq, after the United States and Britain. "The Georgians are redeploying the majority of their troops," says Rear Admiral Patrick Driscoll, a spokesman for the Multi-National Force in Iraq. "We wish them well."

The Georgians, who have been in Iraq since 2004, currently spend much of their time providing security and medical services to Coalition personnel. They have been a familiar sight around Baghdad's Green Zone, manning checkpoints. Many have served on security details along the Iranian border, trying to help prevent smuggling and reduce the flow of potential insurgents into Iraq. Most recently, some companies have been working alongside American and Iraqi troops in their latest drive to kill or expel Al Qaeda in Iraq from Diyala Province. "In the near term their [departure] will have some impact as we adjust operations," Driscoll concedes without elaborating.

For the soldiers waiting on the compound of the massive, blue-domed Al-Sijud, the change of fronts is not only sensible; it is essential. They mill around the compound, which is now called Forward Operating Base Sakartvelo (Georgia's name in the native Kartuli language) and where the distinctive red-and-white, five-cross Georgian flag is mounted at the entrance. As they wait for the Americans to arrange their transport out of Iraq, the troops talk about what they see as Russia's long-held desire to rule Georgia, a former Soviet republic that became independent in 1991, 70 years after it was absorbed into the U.S.S.R. They know that Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili has tried to navigate a careful course between establishing closer relations with the U.S. and European Union and expanding cooperation with Russia, the nation's powerful—and suspicious—neighbor to the north and east of the Caucasus Mountains. "They've always wanted South Ossetia and Abkhazia [another separatist region in Georgia]," says another soldier, getting up and stamping away.

The men figure that they can employ the battlefield skills picked up from fighting terrorists and insurgents in Iraq to battle the Russians. One lieutenant says the Iraq contingent can play an important role among Georgia's 32,000-strong armed forces, given its Mideast experience. But for now, they must wait to hear when the U.S. will expedite their departure for home. "We have orders to pack but no firm deployment orders yet," says 1st Lt. Nukri Rezesidze, commander of Bravo Company. "It all depends on the Americans." A bearded Georgian Orthodox priest in a black cassock nods as he listens. He's heading home as well, he says. But as Moscow announces that it will send reinforcements into South Ossetia and rejects a ceasefire offer from Tbilisi, many of the troops are hoping they don't fly out too late.

Advertisement
You must be a registered user to comment.  Click here to register.  Already a user?  Click here to login.

Member Comments

Posted By: Castagnera (August 20, 2008 at 9:09 AM)

The Russians have romped through Georgia.  When taken to task, they asked rhetorically, if Uncle Sam can invade Baghdad, why can’t the Bear invade Tbilisi.  Secretary of State Rice retorted that this was not Czechoslovakia in 1968.  With all due respect, Dr. Rice drew the wrong analogy.  Cold War thinking isn’t helpful here.

     To find an accurate historical analogy to today’s situation, she would do better to hark back to 1885.  For decades British India and Tsarist Russia had been playing a chess game in Central Asia.  The Russians had designs on a vast region, which they considered a natural part of their sphere of influence.  Victorian Brits feared that Russian aspirations extended beyond the Caucasus and the Steppes.  In their minds, India, the jewel in their queen’s crown, was the ultimate stake in the game.

    Early in the game, Britain tried to control Afghanistan as a buffer to perceived Russian lust for the Indian subcontinent.  The first Anglo-Afghan War (`1838-42) ended in an English disaster.  From a column of some 16,000 British troops retreating out of Kabul, only one survivor emerged to tell the grizzly tale.  The Brits later took their revenge, razing Kabul.  The second Anglo-Afghan War (1878-81) was a win for the Lion.

     Four years later, the Empire was ill prepared to counter Russian incursions in Central Asia.  In 1884 General Sir Peter Lumsden, a member of the Joint Afghan Boundary Commission formed by the two “super-powers,” warned that the Russian Bear was stirring in the region once more.  Then, in January 1885, came the news from a relief force sent south along the Nile from Egypt that Khartoum, capital of the Sudan, had fallen to a self-proclaimed Islamic Mahdi.  Worse, the British icon, General Charles “Chinese” Gordon, who had organized the defense of Khartoum, had been killed.  Although the British, who effectively ruled Egypt, had planned to abandon the Sudan in the face of the fanatical Islamic forces, Gordon’s death left them honor-bound to avenge him.  Lumsden’s warning, that the Russians would be on the move “as soon as a large portion of our forces are locked up in Egypt and the Sudan,” proved itself prophetic.  

      The Russians seized some additional Central Asian territory, the British issued diplomatic warnings and marshaled troops along India’s northern border, and in the words of historian Peter Hopkirk, “the tremors of the crisis were being felt throughout the rest of the world.”  He adds, “In America, where the news had rocked Wall Street, all talk was of the coming struggle between the two imperial giants.”  However, no repeat of the 1854-56 Crimean War occurred.

     In his 1992 book, The Great Game, Hopkirk --- a London Times reporter who traveled extensively in Central Asia --- referred to the 1979-89 Russian debacle in Afghanistan, when he introduced his account of the 19th century: “If [my] narrative tells us nothing else, it at least shows that not much has changed in the last hundred years.  The storming of embassies by frenzied mobs, the murder of diplomats, and the dispatch of warships to the Persian Gulf --- all these were only too familiar to our Victorian forebears.  Indeed, the headlines of today are often indistinguishable from those of a century or more ago.”

      Now, some 20 years after the Soviet Bear departed Afghanistan, tail between its legs, we are hearing the same echoes reverberate down the long corridors of history from those distant days when Great Britain --- our only staunch ally today in Afghanistan and Iraq --- fought a sometimes-cold, occasionally-hot, war for control of the vast land of the “Stans.”  As in 1885, and in 1979-89, Western and Russian forces will not clash directly with one another.  Rather, we will work to outmaneuver the Bear.  Russo-Ursus  will work just as hard to regain its earlier influence in those oil-rich lands, which broke free in 1989-1990, when the USSR crumbled like the Berlin Wall.  The Great Game will go on, the 21st century continuing the patterns of geopolitical power struggle that characterized Central Asia in the 19th and 20th centuries.


Posted By: frog (August 13, 2008 at 3:32 AM)

What can I do to stop the bloody war?


Posted By: ajaxtheleast (August 11, 2008 at 1:53 PM)

GREAT POST DMITRIY!!!,,,MAKES SENSE TO ME.

ALL SHOULD READ IT CLOSELY.


 
The Peek
 
 
STRATEGIES

Isn't it ironic: Xerox is hoping it can profit by teaching companies how to reduce their printing.

Sponsored by
 
 
 
 
Sponsored by
 
 
 
loadingLoading Menu