South Ossetia: Inside Georgia but dependent on Russia

[laststeamtrain]

South Ossetia: Inside Georgia but dependent on Russia

By The Irish Times

09/08/08 "The Irish Times' -- South Ossetia is a territory of around 4,000sq km (1,544sq mls), situated about 100km north of the Georgian capital, Tbilisi, on the southern slopes of the Caucasus mountains.

The collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s spurred a separatist movement in South Ossetia, which had always felt more affinity with Russia than with Georgia.

It broke away from Georgian rule in a war in 1991-92, in which several thousand people died, and continues to maintain close ties with the neighbouring Russian region of North Ossetia, on the north side of the Caucasus.

The majority of the roughly 70,000 people are ethnically distinct from Georgians, and speak their own language, related to Farsi.

They say they were forcibly absorbed into Georgia under Soviet rule and now want to exercise their right to self-determination. The separatist leader is Eduard Kokoity.

In November 2006, villages inside South Ossetia still under Georgian control elected a rival leader, former separatist Dmitry Sanakoyev. He is endorsed by Tbilisi, but his authority only extends to a small part of the region.

<more>

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20466.htm

[bemildred]

1. 70,000 is very small.

Way less than Humboldt Country in California, for example. So clearly, this is not about any substantive issues. It's about international dick-waving.

[Glorfindel]

2. Geographically almost exactly the size of Rhode Island

What a pity Georgia didn't say, "good riddance," and kiss it goodbye years ago. Much suffering and death could have been avoided.

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. Ethnically distinct, though, due to the language

Ossetian is Indo-Iranian, and they share that with the area on the north of the Caucasus Mountains; Georgian is the most common language in a group only found in that area of the Caucasus.

[bemildred]

6. The Caucausus is a patchwork of small ethnic areas, has been since antiquity.

There has never been any particular correspondence between the political map and the ethnic map. Wise rulers avoid getting in fights there.

I mean no disrespect for any of the particular ethnic or language groups, and I am a strong proponent of local rule as long as that is consistent with basic human rights and some measure of personal autonomy.

But I stand by the opinion that this has a large component of outside dick-waving and message-sending and the like.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Dover]

5. Thanks for posting this. It was helpful and informative...n/t