I want to add to this that Medvedev also met in Sochi with Pridnestrovie’s (Transnistrian) President Igor Smirnov.

http://www.nr2.ru/pmr/193065.html

But I don’t know what was the outcome of this important meeting.
Ron.

I talked with a friend who lives in Tbilisi. The majority of people that surround him feel better after US fleet entered the Black Sea.

It’s quite sad that they fail to realize that the only one who benefits from this conflict is still the US. Neither Russia, nor Georgia will “win” in this situation.

What is not different is the Realpolitik. And two more principles: (1) the territorial integrity (whatever that means) and (2) the right of self-determination. Sometimes they are in conflict. So, whoever is mightier usually wins. Very simple.

Kosovo – the US and the NATO carved out a new map from an existing territory (the purists would argue about Milosevic or Serbia’s history and cradle and this and that. Go right ahead) because of geopolitical and security interests.

South Ossetia + Abhkazia – Russia carved out a new map from an existing territory (again Saahkasvhili is a saint and Medvedev/Putin are the twin devils, etc.) Oddly enough the map was arbitrarily drawn by Josef Stalin – the worst tyrant and human monster.

But here the NATO and the US are hypocritical when they talk about “international law” and “territorial sovereignty” then dismember Serbia, and now they oppose Russia dismembering Georgia.

the statement by the co-chairmen on the 23 February 1999 [said] that the negotiations have led to a consensus on substantial autonomy for Kosovo, including on mechanisms for free and fair elections to democratic institutions, for the governance of Kosovo, for the protection of human rights and the rights of members of national communities; and for the establishment of a fair judicial system. They went on to say that a political framework is now in place leaving the further work of finalizing the implementation Chapters of the Agreement, including the modalities of the invited international civilian and military presence in Kosovo.

ex-secretary of State Henry Kissinger declared that
The Rambouillet text, which called on Serbia to admit NATO troops throughout Yugoslavia, was a provocation, an excuse to start bombing. Rambouillet is not a document that an angelic Serb could have accepted. It was a terrible diplomatic document that should never have been presented in that form.
—Henry Kissinger on Daily Telegraph, June 28th 1999

On March 23, the Serbian assembly accepted the principle of autonomy for Kosovo [1] and non-military part of the agreement. But the Serbian side had objections to the military part of the Rambouillet agreement, appendix B in particular [2], which it characterized as “NATO occupation”. The full document was described “fraudulent” because the military part of the agreement was offered only at the very end of the talks without much possibility for negotiation, and because the other side, condemned in harshest terms as a “separatist–terrorist delegation”, completely refused to meet delegation of FRY and negotiate directly during the Rambouillet talks at all.

Sources are available in Wikipedia article. Also, all humanitarian crisis which is today used as basis for Kosovo independence happened after NATO started bombing Serbia. If NATO was more willing to negotiate and retract some dubious appendixes, showing goodwill to address Serbian points. Did they really need unhindered access to whole territory of Serbia, with complete immunity? Immunity which extends to even simple crimes. In Macedonia, NATO (Norway) soldier was driving in wrong direction on divided freeway and killed Macedonian minister Radovan Stojkovski, his wife and daughter. Later, Norwegian court released the driver, with all charges dropped. This is not atypical for NATO and US in general. In Macedonia, six people were killed in accidents caused by NATO drivers and typically perpetrators are given very light sentences or acquitted of all charges in their home countries.

It is true that the Albanians signed the ultimatum to Serbia at Rambolliet and that Serbia refused foreign occupation of their entire country, including unrestricted access to the country’s defense sites. This is something that no country would accept. The EU and NATO knew that. It was very much an imperial-style ploy (similar to what Austria did in WWI) to provide a reason to attack and occupy a sovereign nation. That is, the agreement at Rabolliet was an ultimatum that they knew Serbia couldn’t accept.

EU and NATO Policy towards breaking apart sovereign nations: Start a crisis by fostering a guerilla insurgency, start a PR campaign for it, and deliver an ultimatum. Then, break the nation apart without consulting the UN.

Russia can use that in Ukraine and the EU and NATO should be fine with it. China should also be able to use it with EU/NATO being fine with it. The African nations can use it there too.

I hope the EU and NATO countries are prepared to accept all the refugees their policy will cause in the future. They should be stepping up to take Georgians right now. Kosovo’s ripples will continue for years into the future.

How can the EU expect the remaining minorities in Kosovo to live under an Albanian government that doesn’t treat them in their hospitals, killed thousands, has not provided for the return of over 200,000 minorities, excludes refugees from voting, and keeps them at a 70% jobless rate. I suppose you support UDI for them too. Right? According the the EU double standard in Georgia and Kosovo, I think you don’t support that. It’s double standards, Sui Generis, and intolerable.

The EU/NATO paved the road to Georgian crisis. These are the ripples of Kosovo that we are seeing in Georgia. They will be to blame for the rest that follow too. But not only them, those that carry their propaganda and twisted logic as though it’s a biblical truth or otherwise the word of an Almighty.