- In 2008 Saakashvili launched an attack against Russian peacekeepers in the breakaway Georgian Republic of South Ossetia
- His appointment as Odessa governor places him in the immediate vicinity of Russian peacekeepers in the breakaway Transnistria
- Transnistria is geographically vulnerable to blockade or war: exposed to its enemies and isolated from its friends
- Saakashvili could be tempted to start a war expecially since it could draw Russia into a fight with NATO
While the situation in the Donbass appears to be currently “frozen” in something of a “violence during a ceasefire” situation, events in the southwestern Ukraine have taken a sharp turn for the worse.
By now, you must have heard that Saakashvili has been appointed governor of the Odessa region and, like everybody else, you must have had the giggle when you read that. So did I. But besides the comically ludicrous aspect to this nomination, there is a much, much more ominous aspect to it. Three things in particular are extremely worrisome in this context:
First, Odessa is considered as the single most potentially dangerous city by the Kiev regime and Ukrainian nazis themselves. The reason for that is that the city and the surrounding areas are solidly and massively pro-Russian and anti-nazi. Most of the nazis have, in fact, been imported from other regions, so we are talking about a few hundred Ukrainian nazi deathsquad members at most.
Yes, they currently are in firm control of the city thanks to their Gestapo-like methods, but they still are despised and hated. A much more powerful local force is the mob, most of which is still controlled by Kolomoisky who, according to many analysts, is the target of this bizarre nomination.
Indeed, Saakashvili is a US puppet and thus will not negotiate some kind of deal with Kolomoisky. In fact, Saakashvili will execute any anti-Kolomoisky order. In other words, we have have the Ukranian nazis and the US-controlled mobsters fighting for power against a backdrop of a largely pro-Russian population. A perfect recipe for violence.
Second, ask yourself the following question: what are Saakashvili’s credentials? It is pretty obvious that his only “qualification” is his rabid hatred for Russia and Russians and his willingness to execute any US order. That, and his willingness to massacre civilians and peacekeepers (more about that later).
So what this nomination is is not just simply a crude attempt at catering to the ultra nationalists. It is also an attempt to place Odessa firmly into US hands. Of course, Odessa is now a vital port for the rump-Ukraine for economic reasons, but what it also offers is a port for any military vessel, including USN ships. Why might the USN want to dock in Odessa? Here is why:
Third, Odessa is less than 100km away from the Transnistrian city of Tiraspol, which is located at the southern end of long “Transnistrian corridor” between the Ukraine and Moldova. See for yourself:
Thus, not only can Odessa be used to reinforce or resupply any Ukrainian attack on the Transnistrian Moldovan Republic (TMR), but it can also be used as a base to try to prevent any Russian attempt to resupply her forces in the TMR.
Transnistrian Moldovan Republic
The TMR is currently facing a blockade on all sides: from the West the TMR is blockaded by the US-controlled Moldova (backed by the US colony of Romania) and from the East by post-Maidan Ukraine.
One look at the geography of the TMR is you will see that it is impossible to defend, especially on both sides at the same time. Sure, in the war for the independence of the TMR in 1990-1992 the Russian 14th Army did force an end to the hostilities, but at that point the Ukraine was neutral/indifferent and Moldova very weak. Moldova is still very weak, and just like in the Donbass, the army of the TMR is better equipped, better trained and much more motivated, but this time around the threat is really on both sides.
Kiev and the paramilitaries have been preparing for a TMR “attack” for a year. Just like in the East, they have also started to dig and “anti-tank ditch” as if the tiny TMR (population: 500’000) was about to attack the immense Ukraine (population: 44’000’000). Needless to say, the true purpose of such “defensive” measures is to create a sense of danger crisis which is ideal for a false flag or a “pre-emptive counter-attack”.
There are also Russian peacekeepers in the TMR. And now, the post-Maidan Kiev has appointed Saakashvili as governor of Odessa – a man with a proven record of murdering Russian peacekeepers and starting crazy wars.
Unlike in the Donbass were geography gives a huge advantage to Russia, in the TMR all the advantages are on the Empire’s side. Compare the two regions:
|Border with Russia||yes||no|
|Size of defense forces||large||small|
|NATO proximity||far away||nearby|
|Ability to sustain itself||excellent||poor|
|Length of line of contact||manageable||immense|
|Control of airspace||Russia||NATO|
|Can be blockaded||no||yes|
|Could Russia be forced to intervene?||unlikely||yes|
|Ease of possible Russian intervention||easy||very hard|
It appears that on the TMR the West holds all the cards. While in theory Russia has the means to mount an airlift operation similar to the one mounted by the USA during the Berlin crisis, in practice these two situation are dramatically different: in 1948-1949 nobody really wanted a war, but in 2015 the Ukronazis are desperate for one.
Still, there is no doubt that the junta does not have the military means to prevent a Russian airlift to the TMR, but what if Moldavia declared that its territory has been “invaded” by Russia and the Ukraine declares that its airspace is being violated? What if NATO decides to provide Patriot missiles or, God forbid, aircover by a “coalition of the willing” for a no-fly zone? I personally do not see NATO directly going to war with Russia over the TMR – what they probably really want is a proxy war – but the risk is much more real than in Novorussia.
For months now I have been saying that NATO does not have a military option in the Ukraine, but for all the same reasons, I don’t see any viable Russian military options in the TMR. But what if Russian peacekeepers are attacked? At this point Russia would have no choice and would have to intervene. And even if Russian peacekeepers are not attacked, will they just stand by and watch how the local population suffers the terrible consequences of a blockade?
Yet again I come back to the same thing I have been repeating over and over again: there is not “Novorussian solution” to the Ukrainian crisis. The only real solution to the war(s) in/around the Ukraine is regime change in Kiev followed by a de-Nazification of the country. There is no other solution.
Some will suggest a rather naive “solution”: let the Novorussians take Maripol, open a land corridor to the Crimean Peninsula, from there mount a land and naval attack to liberate Nikolaev and Odessa and finish the triumphal march with a quick dash towards the TMR border. In theory this all looks simple, but in reality this would be a major and clear act of war by Russia, it would require a full-scale intervention of the Russian military, and it would be a dream come true for NATO and the AngloZionists. Not to mention that there is no support for anything like that in Russia herself.
And yet, some very qualified folks are of the opinion that Russia will have no choice. Just listen to Lieutenant-General (Ret) Leonid Reshetnikov (KGB/SVR) foreign intelligence:
I personally doubt that Russia will agree to recognize the TMR and then sign a defense treaty with it. For one thing, Putin was not elected to save the world, not even Syria, the Donbass or the TMR. Putin was elected first and foremost to stand up for the interests of the Russian people from and in Russia.
It is all very well to say that the Russian military “must” intervene here or there unless, of course, you are the one having to explain grieving families why their loved one had to die far away from home. I have also said this here a million times, there is *no* support in Russia for any form of imperialism, including the “humanitarian” one.
Finally, while we in the West are used to dismiss international law as a useless and hypocritical concept which nobody has to pay any attention to, the folks in the Kremlin take international law very seriously and the all these “grand plans” for the “easy” resolution of the TMR crisis have major legal implications, to put it mildly.
The only option left for Russia is covert, behind-the-scenes, actions. The usual mix of threats, bribes, influence, economics and other asymmetrical measures to try to delay/soften the effects of the current blockade. This is not much, but that is all that Russian can do right now.
Having Saakashvili in Odessa is a very ominous development. hile right now a shooting war is not imminent, the situation there has potentially some very dangerous implications and could result in a full-scale conflict. Should violence blow-up in Odessa or Transnistria we can count on the “hurray patriots” to demand that Putin take immediate military action and, when he refuses to, they will declare urbi et orbi that “Putin sold out Odessa” and/or “Putin sold out Transnistria” (just check those who are, again, saying that “Putin sold out Syria”). And if open violence does not break out, and the population of the TMR is condemned to slowly accept a Gaza-like “open air concentration camp” situation, Russia will also be accused of doing nothing.
There are no good option for Russia right now and all Russia can do is to work as fast as possible to achieve regime change in Kiev. If the US foreign policy towards the Ukraine suffers a crushing blow, Uncle Sam will probably have little stamina left to engage in yet another major effort in Transnistria, especially if the Ukraine finally slips out of the USA’s grip. But until then the TMR is in a very bad situation indeed, and time is not on its side.