Nachdem bereits Mitte der Woche die Ergebnisse des von der EU in Auftrag gegebenen Berichts zum Georgien-Krieg 2008 bekannt wurden und Georgien als Aggressor identifiziert wurde ("feuerte den ersten Schuss ab"), ging ein bisschen unter, dass auch Russland eine deutliche Mitschuld in Form von Provokationen in den Wochen vor dem Ausbruch des Krieges gegeben wurde.
Wer sich selbst eine Meinung bilden will: Der Bericht wurde von 30 Experten unter der Federführung der Schweizer Diplomatin Heidi Tagliavini erstellt und ist hier (erster zusammenfassender Teil) zum Download abrufbar. Alle drei Teile gibt es hier.
Don-Kun
Wer es einfacher haben will, hier zusammengefasst ein paar Zitate:
OUTBREAK OF CONFLICT:
"The shelling of Tskhinvali by the Georgian armed forces during the night of 7 to 8 August 2008 marked the beginning of the large-scale armed conflict in Georgia, yet it was only the culminating point of a long period of increasing tensions, provocations and incidents."
GEORGIA ASSAULT UNJUSTIFIABLE:
"There is the question of whether the use of force by Georgia in South Ossetia, beginning with the shelling of Tskhinvali during the night of 7/8 August 2008, was justifiable under international law. It was not."
RUSSIA'S DEFENCE OF PEACEKEEPERS LEGAL:
"There seems to be little doubt that if the Russian peacekeepers were attacked, Russia had the right to defend them using military means proportionate to the attack. Hence the Russian use of force for defensive purposes during the first phase of the conflict would be legal."
RUSSIA WENT BEYOND DEFENCE:
"Although it should be admitted that it is not easy to decide where the line must be drawn, it seems, however, that much of the Russian military action went far beyond the reasonable limits of defence."
ALL SIDES BROKE HUMANITARIAN LAW:
"The Mission established that all sides to the conflict - Georgian forces, Russian forces and South Ossetian forces - committed violations of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Law."
NO GENOCIDE:
"The Mission concludes that to the best of its knowledge allegations of genocide committed by the Georgian side in the context of the August 2008 conflict and its aftermath are neither founded in law nor substantiated by factual evidence."
POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT MORE DIFFICULT:
"The political environment for a settlement of the conflict has in fact become more difficult following the recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent States by one of the sides to the conflict."
THREAT OF NEW CONFRONTATION:
"Even though both sides stress their commitment to a peaceful future, the risk of a new confrontation remains serious."
RECOGNITION OF REGIONS ILLEGAL:
"South Ossetia did not have a right to secede from Georgia, and the same holds true for Abkhazia for much of the same reasons. Recognition of breakaway entities such as Abkhazia and South Ossetia by a third country is consequently contrary to international law."
GRANTING OF RUSSIAN CITIZENSHIP IN BREAKAWAY REGIONS:
"The vast majority of purportedly naturalised persons from South Ossetia and Abkhazia are not Russian nationals in terms of international law. Neither Georgia nor any third country need acknowledge such Russian nationality.
CLAIMS OF RUSSIAN INCURSION BEFORE START OF WAR:
"The Mission is not in a position to consider as sufficiently substantiated the Georgian claim concerning a large-scale Russian military incursion into South Ossetia before 8 August 2008. However, there are a number of reports and publications, including of Russian origin, indicating the provision by the Russian side of training and military equipment to South Ossetian and Abkhaz forces prior to the August 2008 conflict.
ROLE OF SOUTH OSSETIAN FORCES:
"Any operations of South Ossetian forces outside of the purpose of repelling the Georgian armed attack, in particular acts perpetrated against ethnic Georgians inside and outside South Ossetia, must be considered as having violated International Humanitarian Law and in many cases also Human Rights Law."
"Any operations of South Ossetian forces outside of the purpose of repelling the Georgian armed attack, in particular acts perpetrated against ethnic Georgians inside and outside South Ossetia, must be considered as having violated International Humanitarian Law and in many cases also Human Rights Law."
IDENTIFICATION OF WAR CRIMES
"The fact that both Georgian and Russian forces in many cases used similar armament further complicates the attribution of certain acts. If it were not for the difficulties of identification and attribution, many of these acts have features which might be described as war crimes."
Quelle: Reuters
BBC-Video 2008:
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen