We in social networks


Events Calendar


About Heavy Weapons and Peacekeepers in Abkhazia and Kosovo

26.05.2008 11:49

Western ambassadors to NATO continue discussing in Brussels the decision taken by the Russian military and political leadership on reinforcement of the peacekeeping force in the zone of Georgian-Abkhaz conflict within the specified limits.

In so doing, US Ambassador V. Nuland especially emphasized a ?destructive? role of the Russian peacekeepers in the region. In her opinion, the heavy weapons of the Russian peacekeepers discredit a peaceful nature of their tasks.

You may agree with the US Ambassador if you don?t know what is the heavy weapon and what arms are available with the CIS Collective Peacekeeping Force in the zone of Georgian-Abkhaz conflict. In fact the Russian peacekeepers are armed with 14.5-mm machine guns mounted on APCs, as well as mortars (100 mm maximum) and 23-mm self-propelled anti-aircraft guns ZSU-23-2.

These weapons are not classified as heavy, and their availability with the peacekeepers fully complies with Resolution ?On Collective Peacekeeping Force in Zone of Georgian-Abkhaz Conflict? effective since August 22, 1994.

On the other hand, the NATO contingents in Kosovo in violation of the current international standards and rules of peacekeeping operations are actually armed with heavy weapons (100 mm and more). But the leaders of the NATO states and USA in particular are not embarrassed by these circumstances. Ms V. Nuland deliberately avoids this matter and simultaneously blames on Russia for violation of the peacekeeping rules in the zone of Georgian-Abkhaz conflict forgetting that the American ?peacekeepers? in US Base Bondsteel (also Kosovo) are equipped with the most up-to-date means of warfare.

Or may be due to her poor professional knowledge she just fails to understand the heart of the matter, and only airs the texts prepared by the State Department.

And there is nothing to be surprised with. The ?double standard? policy still remains a cornerstone principle for many states of the ?democratic? West in promotion of their own interests. So, to achieve the required results they have to unconditionally adhere to principle ?lay your own fault on somebody else?s door?.