Visas to Russia

General requirements (for all types of Russian visas): Valid Passport (only in original and its validity must cover the whole period of intended stay in Russia).

News & Press-Releases

THE SOUTH OSSETIA CRISIS: LESSONS TO BE LEARNT

An article by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov for "Daily Telegraph"

A strikingly biased picture of the last crisis in the Georgia – South Ossetia conflict has been painted in some Western countries. Once again, the truth has become the victim of political calculations.

What was missing in the statements is the decision of Tbilisi to "restore the constitutional order" in South Ossetia through use of crude military force in the dead of night on August 8th. The Georgian army employed multiple rocket launchers, artillery and airforce to lay waste to the sleeping city of Tskhinval, killing hundreds of people in their homes.

Honest independent observers acknowledge that Russia, having been caught by surprise, didn't respond immediately. We started moving our troops in support of our peacekeepers only on the second day of Georgia's full-scale ruthless military assault on the breakaway republic. Yes, our military were striking sites outside South Ossetia. When the positions of your peacekeepers and civilian population they have been mandated to protect are shelled, all sources of such attacks are legitimate targets.

Our military acted in response to aggression efficiently and professionally. Maybe that is what our critics simply cannot forgive us? It was an able ground operation. That was why we could reach our limited objectives so fast. Unlike US/NATO unprovoked operation against Serbia over Kosovo in 1999, which was an inconclusive air bombardment campaign that for lack of military targets degenerated into attacks on bridges, TV tower, passenger trains and other civilian sites, hitting an Embassy in the process.

Russia used force in full conformity with international law, its right to self-defense and its obligations under the agreements with regard to this particular conflict. My country could not allow its peacekeepers to witness acts of genocide perpetrated in front of their eyes, like the UN peacekeepers had to do in Srebrenica.

There is also a moral side to our American and some European partner's shortsightedness. We have not heard condolences from them on the loss of life of hundreds of Russian citizens. And some of the Embassies in Moscow didn't lower their flags on August 13, the day of national mourning in Russia. The Russians couldn't help comparing this attitude with Moscow's reaction to the tragedy of 9/11.

The issue of the victims of the Georgian military onslaught is pushed aside in the West as something of no consequences. They are simply wiped under the carpet. So it is easy to talk in the old-style geopolitics of other perceived consequences - of "Russia's military prowess" sending some message beyond this particular conflict.

When the mantra of the Georgian democratic government is repeated time and again, does it mean that a democratic government is allowed to act in that brutal fashion against civilian population it claims to be its own by virtue of its being democratic? We shall never accept this "license to kill" issued to certified friendly regimes. Formidable was the symbolism of the Georgian attack being overseen by the huge statue of Stalin, a native of Gori, whose maxim was "No person, no problem".

The US Ambassador in Moscow John Beyrle acknowledged in a recent article in the Kommersant Daily that Russia had enough grounds to respond to the Georgian attack on its peacekeepers. Of course, we would have preferred to prevent this deadly crisis through collective effort and thus save lives lost in the fighting. But no joint effort was possible because of the close US involvement with Georgia, including in the military field - supplying modern offensive weapons, sending advisers. The West also ignored our calls on Tbilisi to sign non-use of force agreements with South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

We can only welcome that the US is engaging in a humanitarian effort to help people who suffered from Saakashvili’s insane adventure. It should stop at that and not rearm the unpredictable regime. And it will be good if the US encourage positive endeavors of the Tbilisi government, especially in matters of economy, social policy, fight against corruption and organized crime and, of course, genuine democratic development. Shutting down the opposition media outlets and Russian TV channels is not democracy.

We have no quarrel with the Georgian people with which we share two centuries of common history of friendship. But direct responsibility of the current Georgian leadership is the fact that has to be addressed. It is high time Georgia started turning itself into a peaceful place, a credible and predictable partner. As for national dignity, it can be sustained in the first place by having a decent and caring government. We would always be ready to cooperate closely with honest and sane people like a former Prime Minister, the late Zurab Zhvania, whose mysterious death in 2005 put an end to the process of normalizing relations between Georgia and South Ossetia. Does it do good to democracy to prop up from outside the persons with dubious democratic credentials and thuggish instincts? Maybe they are easier to control. But the events of the past two weeks prove exactly the opposite.

That is why we'll continue to seek to deprive the present Georgian regime of the potential and resources to repeat its military escapades. An embargo on arms supplies to the present Georgian regime would be a helpful move to this effect.

Now NATO has got involved, as if the alliance is again in need of frontline states to prove its relevance. I doubt it was a wise decision to freeze the work of Russia - NATO Council while raising the level of the alliance's relations with Tbilisi. Probably, what was meant was to save the face of some Western capitals that felt humiliated by the events in Georgia following Saakashvili's stupid and dangerous adventure. And, of course, NATO is struggling to ensure its survival, including in Afghanistan. Our international partners, especially those in the West inclined to think and operate in the zero-sum game categories of the Cold War past, will have to understand that Russia did precisely what it took under the circumstances to protect its peacekeepers and civilians who came under military attack.

Our opponents in the West resorted to stalling tactics at the UN Security Council, preventing it from endorsing the six principles as agreed by Presidents Medvedev and Sarkozy in Moscow on August 12. They try to tamper with the language to satisfy Saakashvili. This is deplorable.

The peoples of Abkhazia and South Ossetia would not forget the attacks and humiliation by the Georgian leaders, who cancelled their autonomous status inside Georgia, deprived them of the right to determine their own future when Georgia left the Soviet Union and who several times in the last fifteen years launched armed attacks against Ossetian and Abkhazian cities and civilians. These two republics have learnt their lessons once and for all: they cannot trust the Georgian leadership; they must seek to ensure their security, first of all human security, and their very survival through exercising their right for self-determination. They appealed to Russia, with whom they lived for centuries, to protect them. For Russia, not to recognize the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia would mean betraying the Caucasian nations, including the nations in the Russia's Northern Caucasus. After the Saakashvili's aggression, we didn't have any other choice but to exercise in accordance with international law, our responsibility to protect the people next door to the Russian Federation, not thousands miles away - say, somewhere in the Atlantic Ocean on the Folkland islands.

Our actions were very different from the choice made by those cannot help engaging in the Great Game policies since they wouldn't know anything else about this region and its peoples and couldn't care less.

If our western partners continue in the same vein, it will further erode the trust between us. As a result, the existing opportunities for substantial cooperation on matters of mutual interest will further contract. But that is not going to be our choice. We still hope that sound reason will prevail and our partners will overcome their insensitivity to the sufferings of people who happen not to fit their geopolitical designs and find enough political will to stand on the side of the truth and justice.