Report puts Georgia on the defensive

An EU-sponsored report on the 2008 Russia-Georgia war blames both countries.

David L. Stern and Miriam ElderSeptember 30, 2009 14:02Updated May 30, 2010 12:09

Georgia's ambassador to the European Union Salome Samadashvili talks to reporters in Brussels, Sept. 30, 2009 after the release of an EU-sponsored report on Georgia's 2008 five-day war with Russia. (Francois Lenoir/Reuters)

KIEV, Ukraine and MOSCOW, Russia — Georgian officials found themselves uncharacteristically on the defensive Wednesday, after a long-awaited inquiry into the causes of last year's five-day war between Georgia and Russia concluded that Tbilisi was unjustified in launching the attack that sparked the hostilities.

The report — commissioned by the European Union and overseen by veteran Swiss diplomat Heidi Tagliavini — apportioned equal blame for the conflict, which broke out when Georgian forces started shelling Tskhinvali, the capital of the Georgian breakaway region of South Ossetia, on the night of Aug. 7, 2008.

Running more than 1,000 pages and including the work of over 30 legal, military and diplomatic experts, the report paints a complex and multi-layered explanation for the causes of the war.

It said that Russia was also heavily responsible, pursuing overly aggressive policies toward its southern neighbor before the war, and then reacting disproportionately once fighting broke out.

South Ossetia, with a population in the tens of thousands and an ethnic population distinct from the Georgians, broke away from Tbilisi after the breakup of the Soviet Union. The war last year left dead possibly more than 200 Georgian and 300 Ossetian civilians. Russia reported over 60 of its soldiers killed, while Georgia registered close to 200.

Both sides predictably spun the report to their advantage, claiming it supported their version of events. But a few key sentences clash with Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili’s claim — made actually after hostilities started — that he was repelling a Russian invasion. In that way the report undercut Georgia’s position as a victim and possibly damaged its international reputation.

“Open hostilities began with a large-scale Georgian military operation against the town of Tskhinvali and the surrounding area,” the report said. “There is the question of whether the use of force by Georgia in South Ossetia was justifiable under international law.”

“It was not,” the report concluded.

Further on it stated: “It could also not be verified that Russia was on the verge of … a major attack,” adding that Georgian claims that large numbers of Russian troops were massing in South Ossetia “could not be substantiated.”

Georgian national security advisor Eka Tkeshelashvili, speaking to journalists by conference call immediately after the inquiry’s release, said that while she agreed with the “facts” presented, she took issue with the commission’s “interpretations and analysis,” which she said it was not tasked to arrive at.

“I do have a very serious question about international law,” Tkeshelashvili said, adding that the commission did not deny that regular Russian troops, not peacekeepers, were in South Ossetia in some capacity — a violation of international norms. “What else can be called an invasion? Does Putin have to go on television and say it?”