Zhirinovsky's Russian Empire

[Pellegrino]

PART EIGHTEEN: A SECOND CHANCE TO MAKE A FIRST IMPRESSION






“My Russia- An Autobiography by former Russian Prime Minister Gennady Burbulis”


Published by Interbook, © 1998


CHAPTER THIRTY

Zhirinovsky was adamant against going to the United States and meeting with Bush. He held a deep-seated distrust of the West, and he was fearful that going to the United States could impact his credibility at home with the Russian people. But with privatization just implemented, coupled with the growing power struggle between Luzhkov and Alksnis, many of the reformers in the Russian government saw this as a golden opportunity to develop stronger ties with the United States.

However, the question quickly became who to send? Luzhkov was unwilling to leave the country, afraid of a possible coup in his absence that would consolidate power behind Alksnis. And quite frankly, he didn’t trust Zhirinovsky. None of us did. If he left the country he feared Zhirinovsky might just switch gears and suddenly back Alksnis. He was already showing a talent for that. Backing hardliners one moment and then reformers the next. He was like a butterfly, floating from camp to camp. But I was more concerned about letting him loose in America. I was afraid he would do more damage to Russian interests if we let him go than if he stayed put. I suppose secretly I was hoping that he wouldn’t go. So much so that when he screamed and pouted like a child when it was suggested to him I actually smiled. I was glad he was making such a scene! Maybe this would convince Prime Minister Ivan Silayev to abandon this dangerous plan.

“We don’t need the West to recapture Dushanbe,” Zhirinovsky screamed at the cabinet. “All we need are 10,000 loyal Russians willing to quash this Turkish rebellion!”

“Mr. President,” Silayev countered angrily, “the United Nations is already preparing to admit Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan in February. We need to take steps to delay that vote. If we can woo the United States they can pressure the UN not to admit those nations.”

“A nuclear bomb will convince them just as effectively,” Zhirinovsky shot back, “and a reminder that we have enough of them to turn all of New York City into a desert of glass.”

“Well, us having a nuclear bomb didn’t stop them from admitting Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania,” Silayev said mockingly.

I stood up to separate the two, it was clear Zhirinovsky was not going to go to the United States. That was fine. We would send someone else, someone less volatile. Perhaps Silayev would go. Suddenly a deep voice interrupted me. I saw Zhirinovsky freeze like a deer caught in the lights of a truck.

“You will go to America,” General Victor Ivanenko said as he walked into the room and dropped a black folder in front of Zhirinovsky, “or you run the risk of losing the support of the KGB and the military. And with all due respect Mr. President, you should remember where you would be right now had it not been for the KGB.”



UIS Presidential Candidate Vladimir Putin in an interview with the BBC on August 1, 2011.

Putin: If there was any questions as to whether or not Lebed and Ivanenko were really in control of the country or if Zhirinovsky was the real leader, then the cabinet meeting of January 21st, 1991 should have extinguished any doubt. General Ivanenko interrupted the meeting, walked right in, and told Zhirinovsky to do exactly as instructed! Like a puppet! He handed Zhirinovsky a script and told him to read these statements to the western media and to give these documents to President Bush when they met. And Zhirinovsky said nothing! He didn’t complain, he didn’t protest! He just took the documents in the black folder and meekly sat down, like a timid rabbit!



60 Minutes on CBS News - “Lebed: The man behind the mask?” from April 23, 2008

Portions of a Mike Wallace interview with Andrei Zavidiya, former Vice President of Russia.

Courtesy of CBS



Mike Wallace: Mr. Zavidiya, let me ask you, did President Zhirinovsky go to the United States in January of 1992 on his own free will, or was he ordered to go by General Ivanenko as Vladimir Putin alleges?

Andrei Zavidiya (long pause): I really don’t know-

Mike Wallace: Wouldn’t the fact that you are not sure indicate that many of you recognized that General Ivanenko and General Lebed were the ones really in charge?

Zavidiya: Not necessarily. Ivanenko was still head of the KGB, and it was still a fully functional agency, despite the growing lawlessness throughout the country. Zhirinovsky didn’t want to cross Ivanenko because he saw what Ivanenko had in the black folder. And I think he went to the United States to prevent Ivanenko from being able to use it against him. By releasing it to the world first he was able to rob Ivanenko of that one, last weapon that the KGB had against him.

Wallace: I’m sorry, what was in the black folder? It was alleged by Putin and former Secretary of State Gennady Burbulis that it was a script that Zhirinovsky was supposed to follow.

Zavidiya: No. I assure you if Zhirinovsky was on a script he certainly wouldn’t have made his “Israeli threat” statement in New York. They didn’t need a script for Zhirinovsky. That was why Burbulis was forced to go with him as well. To control what he said and who he said it to.

Wallace: So what is the black folder?

Zavidiya: The black folder was the file that the KGB had on Zhirinovsky, and more importantly, his father.


Barbara Walters/ABC Interview with Vladimir Zhirinovsky
(January 30th, 1992)



ABC's Barbara Walters: Mr. President, thank you for taking this opportunity to speak with the American people. I would like to start with what your impressions of the United States are?

Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky: Very positive. I have been warmly received in America and I am very impressed with your country.

Walters: You have nonetheless made a few statements that have raised eyebrows since going on this world tour-

Zhirinovsky: There are many enemies of democracy who want nothing more than to embarrass me. But I did err in my choice of words. I should be much more careful in the future and not say things that can be misinterpreted. I want to say here and not, I am not an enemy of the Jewish people.

Walters: Many people feel that your statement in New York City on the 13th, where you said “Russia must be on guard against the threat from Israel” was bordering on anti-Semitic. What did you mean by that statement?

Zhirinovsky: I chose a terrible way to say that. I wanted to stress that we cannot let ourselves be dictated by foreign policy. We must focus on Russia first, and at times, Russian interests may be different that those of other countries. When that happens we must respectfully put foreign policy aside and do what is best for Russia.

Walters: So you reject those accusations that you are anti-Semitic?

Zhirinovsky: Absolutely. I have very warm feelings towards Israel and the Jewish people. Israel is not our enemy; in fact, it is a close, close friend to the UDR. Many Israelis come from Russia; we share a common bond, a common blood. In fact, I myself am half Jewish.

Walters: What?

Zhirinovsky: Yes. My father is Jewish. I hope someday to visit Israel, not as a Russian, but as the son of a Jewish man who is visiting his heritage.



BUSH AND ZHIRINOVSKY DECLARE FORMAL END TO COLD WAR; AGREE TO EXCHANGE VISITS

By MICHAEL WAXMAN
Published: February 01, 1992



President Bush and President Vladimir Zhirinovsky of Russia today proclaimed a new era of "friendship and solidarity" as they declared a formal end to over seven decades of tension, declaring the “Cold War is over.” Both Presidents then agreed to exchange visits in Moscow and Washington in April of this year.


Meeting in casual winter attire at the Presidential retreat at Camp David, the two leaders discussed the recently enacted economic reforms implemented in the UDR and in Russia, as well as the status of Russia and the other republics that make up the successor state to the Soviet Union.


President Bush also discussed growing concerns that both the United States and the international community have over the status of the Central Asian Republics, where UDR control is tenuous, and the status of the nuclear warheads currently deployed there.


“Both President Zhirinovsky and I are deeply concerned with the situation in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan,” Bush said, “and we implore President Alksnis to implement real reform and to work with the Central Asian Republics so that peace can be realized throughout the former Soviet Union.”


President Zhirinovsky also became the first Russian politician to confirm the number of Soviet nuclear weapons, and to confirm that a small handful of these weapons were stationed in Uzbekistan and are now in control of rebel Islamism. He expressed deep concern over the lack of federal control over the nuclear arsenal in Uzbekistan and called on the UN to withhold recognition until the nuclear weapons are accounted for.


“The United Nations is to consider admitting Uzbekistan as a member in two days,” Zhirinovsky said, “but we call on the UN and the international community to withhold recognition until all nuclear weapons have been accounted for and disarmed. Although we still seek a negotiated settlement with the loyal Uzbek citizenry, if independence is unavoidable, so be it. But we cannot have a country which is already establishing dangerous ties to terrorist groups in Afghanistan, and to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, to have over 200 nuclear weapons.”


CNN interview with Jack Matlock, former ambassador to the USSR

August 18, 2000


CNN: How was Zhirinovsky able to win over the West so effectively in January of 1992 with his first visit to the United States?

Matlock: After Azerbaijan, he was vilified in the West, but privatization gave him a second chance to make a first impression. He really came off as someone we could reason with, someone we could work with. He was humble, soft spoken, polite, and even proud of his Jewish heritage. He just won over everyone. And he threw in just enough scare tactics to get what he really wanted: time to crush the Uzbeks and Tajiks.

CNN: Was his infamous “Camp David Speech” by itself the major reason the UN decided against admitting Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan as members in February of 1992?

Matlock: Absolutely. You know, when I was ambassador to the USSR, we really didn’t know a whole lot about our Cold War enemy. We didn’t know how many nuclear weapons they had and exactly where they were located. So when he said that over 150 were stationed in Uzbekistan, America didn’t really question it. And when he started implying that they were looking to sell the weapons to Saddam Hussein, well, it sounded far-fetched, but better to err on the side of caution, right? We thought a little time to let Russia round up its rogue nukes was a good thing, but Zhirinovsky was looking at it in a much different way. At that point all he wanted was time to shore up the military, and he successfully accomplished that. By the time Russian troops marched into Tashkent in 1995, the world realized what his real plan had been all along.

 

[Pellegrino]

PART NINETEEN: MARTIAL LAW







Op-Ed Contributor


After Camp David, the world wonders when Russia will be held accountable

By Frank Johnson
Published: February 6, 1992



Washington — As Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky stepped onto the plane to return to Russia, two things became abundantly clear. First, it appears clear that the United States prefers to deal with the Russian President as opposed to his federal counterpart. And second, that his trip to the United States proved to be a rousing personal success for the ambitious politician. He was able to easily deflect questions about human rights violations in Azerbaijan, blaming it on his federal counterpart, while solidifying his role as the real leader of Russia, and even the UDR. At no point did President Bush even mention UDR President Viktor Alksnis by name at Camp David, and most interpreted the trip as clear proof that Bush not only wants to work with Mr. Zhirinovsky, but that he will do whatever he can to tilt the fragile balance of power in favor of the Russian President.

Mr. Alksnis must have been worried as he watched the news broadcast on CNN showing a smiling Zhirinovsky and Bush discussing plans to privatize property in Kazakhstan. He knew that Kazakhstan is outside of the legal jurisdiction of the Russian President, but that sticking point didn’t seem to deter either man. For the former communist hardliner, it may appear that the winds of change are blowing too hard to resist. Already in Russia a viable alternative is emerging to the UDR, a Union of Independent States which would act as a looser federation held together by a charismatic leader, much like Yugoslavia under Tito. So far five Republics have already agreed in principle to the UIS, and many experts predict that the UIS might be enough to convince some of the breakaway Republics to abandon independence and preserve the badly fractured Union.

All this is good on paper, but at what point will the world really ask the tough questions that need to be asked. Mr. Zhirinovsky is a sorry replacement for the assassinated former Russian President Boris Yeltsin. He has no interest in economic matters, and has yet to release government control of the economy. His plans for privatization appear shallow and limited. He has shown no interest in breaking up the giant state held corporations, instead choosing to privatize a few plots of land. And most damning, he still refuses to recognize the independence of Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania. Those three countries have already been admitted into the UN, and President Bush’s moves to prevent the UN from recognizing the independence of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Kirghizstan has not only damaged America’s prestige in the Middle East, but has even caused many Democrats to question the President.


“We had the perfect opportunity to get Russia to recognize the independent Baltic Republics,” commented presidential candidate Paul Tsongas, “and we gave up one of our most viable negotiating tools.”

If the United States is going to deal exclusively with the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia and its leader Vladimir Zhirinovsky, we shouldn’t refrain from asking tough questions just because they are not communists. It is a philosophy like that which has created problems for this country in places like El Salvador, and Colombia, and Zaire, and dozens of other countries in the world. But none of those countries are Russia. None of them have a stockpile of nuclear weapons and the means to redraw international borders by force. None of them have the capability to allow their conflicts to turn into a world war. Although few deny that Zhirinovsky is a better alternative than Alksnis, we cannot ignore his faults and take comfort in the simple fact that he denounces communism. We need to hold him accountable for the role of the Russian Republic in the Azerbaijani conflict. We need to hold him accountable for the rising crime and emergence of criminal gangs not only in Russia, but in the newly-recognized independent Republics of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. And we need to hold him accountable for what should be apparent to this government: that he is seeking to create a dictatorship in Russia.

Can Zhirinovsky be reasoned with? Most likely he can be. But if we let him push the envelope without calling him on it, why should he be reasonable? Right now he is getting everything he wants, and the only thing he has to give up is some vacant land in Kazakhstan.



OPPOSITION LEADER MIKHAIL ARUTYUNOV CONDEMNS GROWING LAWLESSNESS IN FORMER SOVIET UNION


USA TODAY
Published: February 5, 1992



(MOSCOW)- Popular lawmaker Mikhail Arutyunov, who heads the leading opposition party in the former Soviet Union, has called for the resignation of both President Alksnis and President Zhirinovsky, blaming them for the growing lawlessness in the former Soviet Union. Condemning the “failed policies of Presidents Alksnis and Zhirinovsky,” Arutyunov has called for the immediate resignation of both men in a speech to the Russian Duma yesterday afternoon.

“We have clear proof that Vladimir Zhirinovsky and the Liberal Democrats are giving out Kalashnikovs to any Russian who promises to relocate to Kazakhstan or the Baltic Republics,” Arutyunov said during a session of the Russian Parliament, “and half of those people are just turning around and using the guns to commit crimes here in Moscow.”

Zhirinovsky, who was travelling through the United States, was unable to address the charges personally. However, Russian Vice President Andrei Zavidiya ridiculed the charges against the LDP.

“All over the UDR innocent civilians are being targeted because they happen to be Russian, or Ukrainian, or Ossetian,” Zavidiya said angrily, “but the only thing Arutyunov wants to do for them is to pull back the borders of the UDR and tell them, ‘sorry, but we can’t help you anymore, you’re not part of our country’”.

However, recent independent polls conducted by various foreign news sources have indicated that the growing problem of street crime has become an area of concern for many Russians, and that the popularity of the LDP is suffering tremendously because of it.”

“I understand President Zhirinovsky has a great deal on his plate,” commented a Russian construction worker who attended the session, “and we appreciate that he was able to go America and stop the UN from recognizing the independence of Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. But we can’t continue to support him when it is becoming dangerous just to leave our house in the morning. It seems like everyone is running around with a gun now, and the police don’t seem to care as long as you’re not Uzbek or Chechen.”

The most recent USA Today poll indicated that Arutyunov’s Party for a Free and Democratic Russia would have the support of nearly 40% of Russians in the next election, up from just over 15% back in October of last year after the war with the breakaway republic of Azerbaijan.


Former Soviet Premier Gorbachev mugged in Moscow

Newsweek
Published: March 3, 1992



(MOSCOW)- In a shocking example of the growing problems of crime in the UDR, former Soviet premier Mikhail Gorbachev was mugged yesterday afternoon outside of Lubyanskaya Square after an interview with a German reporter discussing the problems of crime in the former Soviet Union. Mr. Gorbachev told police that three young men approached him brandishing automatic rifles and took his wallet and his watch. He advised that it was the same watch given to him by the Icelandic government during his meeting with President Reagan in Reykjavik in October of 1986. Right before fleeing, one of the men spat on the former Communist Party leader and yelled pro-Russian nationalist slogans as they casually jogged away. Mr. Gorbachev advised that the police took over one hour to arrive.

Crime is quickly surpassing all other issues as the most pressing matter on the minds of most Russians. Citizens have grown increasingly discontent with the growing lawlessness in Russia and the other republics of the UDR. Russian president Vladimir Zhirinovsky has condemned the federal government for its apparent unwillingness and inability to deal with the sudden spike in crime. However, numerous politicians have placed the blame solely on the feet of Zhirinovsky, citing reports that his Liberal Democratic Party is handing out automatic weapons to Russian citizens in preparation for what some fear is a planned intervention in the Baltic republics of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.



“My Russia- An Autobiography by former Russian Prime Minister Gennady Burbulis”


Published by Interbook, © 1998



CHAPTER THIRTY ONE

Zhirinovsky refused to accept any blame for the deteriorating situation in Russia, and was dismissive of the Gorbachev mugging. We tried to tell him that it was an absolute PR disaster; the most powerful man in Russia just six months ago now wasn’t even safe walking down the streets of Moscow in the middle of the day. We told him he needed to get his hooligans under control, but he seemed more concerned about Alksnis than the issue of crime.

“Alksnis has police units at his disposal,” Zhirinovsky said angrily, “why is he not told to do his part? Why is it always me who is to blame?”

I tried to reason with him, to get him to stop handing out Kalashnikovs like they were candy to any Russian who asked for one, but he refused. He was so delusional he assumed that they would all fight for him, that he was creating his own militia loyal to him. What a fool! Most of these people only wanted a gun to either commit crimes or make some money! I was told that at least half of the guns were being sold on the black market to Uzbek, Chechen, and Kazakh terrorists. He was arming those forces that he claimed to be fighting against! But he wouldn’t listen. I was so angry that I didn’t even notice when Vice President Zavidiya walked into the room with a deeply troubled look on his face.

“Mr. President,” Zavidiya said, “Marshal Lebed and General Dubynin have formally seized control of the KGB and declared marital law.”

“What?” Zhirinovsky said as he jumped up, “Get me General Ivanenko on the phone!”

“I already spoke to him,” Zavidiya said, “he told me that the Russian KGB will now only take orders from the Marshal of the UDR.”

Zhirinovsky exploded, he began screaming out profanities and promising to have Lebed, Dubynin and Ivanenko arrested for treason. But I must admit, as much as I feared a military dictatorship, I couldn’t blame Lebed for taking that step. And, I guess I was glad he did. If nothing else it would prevent Zhirinovsky from taking control of the country. I had enough trouble with him in America, trying to control him there and preventing him from saying something irrational and creating an international incident. I looked over at Prime Minister Silayev and I could see in his eyes that he was troubled. The question remained, who would Lebed side with? If it were Alksnis then we were all doomed. But Zhirinovsky was, if nothing else, a clever man. For a man with such little control of his emotions, he could easily suppress them and make rational decisions...when his power was threatened. And again he surprised us by putting emotions aside and making the one call that could prevent his slide into obscurity.

“Call Marshal Lebed,” he said firmly, “and tell him that he has the full support of the Russian government in any police action he deems necessary to restore order.”

Marshall General Lebed shortly after seizing control of the Russian KGB (AP)

 

[Pellegrino]

PART TWENTY: THE MARTYRDOM OF MIKHAIL POPOV

PART TWENTY: THE MARTYRDOM OF MIKHAIL POPOV

Well, we knew that sooner or later the status quo in the Baltics would come to head, and in April of 1992 it finally does. Just a month after the sucessful US tour, events in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania spiral into civil war. However, careful not to inflame the international community outright (keep in mind, the UN recognizes them as independent countries) they undergo a policy very similar to the Yugoslavian JNA after the independence of Croatia and Bosnia. Rather than outright intervention from the UIS and Russia, Russian militias form (with the clear support of Moscow) that lead to a long, drawn out and violent war much like the civil war in Bosnia. In OTL Yugoslavia, the JNA silently pulls out of Bosnia after leaving weapons with the Serb militias. Here the UIS does something similar in Estonia and Latvia.

Some new names we will discuss in TTL:


Kristiine District, Tallinn:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristiine

Haabesti District, Tallinn:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haabersti

Former Latvian President Freiberga in OTL. Prime Minister in TTL
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaira_V%C4%AB%C4%B7e-Freiberga

Former Lithuanian President Vytautas Landsbergis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vytautas_Landsbergis

Evgennii Mikhailov, a LDP politician from the town of Pskov (near the border with Latvia) who in TTL becomes President of Latvia:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09668139998705


Anti-Russian protests in Lithuanian Capital turn violent

What started off as a peaceful rally soon turned violent in the Lithuanian Capital of Vilnius

(VILNIUS, LITHUANIA) A racially charged demonstration against the UDR government's handling of the recent surge in violence coupled with its failure to recognized the independence of Lithuania turned violent Wednesday night as protesters attacked Russian and Belarusian workers and refugees in the Lithuanian capital. Initially the protest involving nearly five thousand Lithuanians appeared peaceful, with protesters chanting anti-UDR and anti-Russian slogans as they marched through Rotušės Square in central Vilnius. However, the protest took a violent turn after the march continued south towards the Naujininkai neighborhood in the south-west district of the city. Naujininkai became home to over ten thousands of Russian who immigrated to Lithuania after the fall of the Soviet Union last year. However, the area has also become a major center of crime and poverty, with thousands of Russians unable to find employment in Lithuania. Protesters began by shattering car windows of vehicles with Russian license plates before turning towards a shop owned by a Russian migrant. Before the Lithuanian authorities were able to restore order over a dozen Russian migrants were seriously injured, with one confirmed dead. Three Russian owned businesses were badly damaged in the violence.

Police spokesman Egidijus Laurinkus said 247 men were arrested and announced that criminal charges would be filed in Vilnius court Thursday morning. They are charged with crimes ranging from criminal damage to property to open counts of murder involving the death of Russian shopkeeper Mikhail Popov. Popov was dragged out of his shop and onto the street, where Lithuanian television recorded him being brutally beaten to death in front of his family, a murder that has already created a firestorm inside of Russia.

The anger at the Lithuanian Government and its inability to control the violence until the following day has raised suspicions with many Russians in Vilnius as well.

“It took that rabble over one hour to reach Naujininkai from central Vilnius,” commented one Russia woman who was injured in the protest (and wished to remain anonymous), “and during that whole time the Lithuanian police did nothing! They let them come here so that they would beat us and frighten us into leaving.”

Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky also condemned the response of Lithuanian President Vytautas Landsbergis, who created a firestorm when he told reporters that “Russia holds a great deal of responsibility for what happened here in Vilnius tonight.” Zhirinovsky called the statement “an evil, hateful and utterly insensitive remark,” and further condemned the international community for recognizing the independence of Lithuania.

“The Lithuanians have shown that their intention is to ethnically clean their Republic of Slavs,” Zhirinovsky said in a press conference today, “but whether they like it or not, they are still part of the UDR, and Russia stands with the federal government in condemning violence against citizens of the UDR. If the Lithuanians cannot control the Nazis in their midst, then perhaps we should go in there and do it for them.”

The perceived lack of response from the Lithuanian government also created a backlash against Lithuania with its two closest allies in the former USSR: Estonia and Latvia. Both republics condemned their southern neighbor’s actions in Vilnius, and attempted to distance themselves from the Lithuanian President.


CNN interview with Jack Matlock, former ambassador to the USSR

August 18, 2000


CNN: How was Zhirinovsky able to turn what is referred to in Russia as the martyrdom of Mikhail Popov into two separate civil wars in Estonia and Latvia? They were, after all, two nations that had nothing to do with the murder of Mikhail Popov.

Matlock: There are so many tragedies in the former Soviet Union, but the murder of Mikhail Popov and the subsequent civil wars in Estonia and Latvia were really two of the biggest. In Estonia and Latvia you had a large pre-war Russian population. The Soviet census of 1989 had the Russian population of those two countries at over 30%. As a result those were two countries that Zhirinovsky had his eye on when it came to creating another “Palestine Plan” similar to the one he implemented in Kazakhstan. He wanted to tip the balance of the population to just over 50% for Russians in those two nations. But in Lithuania the pre-war Russian population was less than 10%. Already Zhirinovsky was exhausting his pool of willing Russians who would up and leave for purely nationalistic reasons, and as a result he somewhat ignored Lithuania and tried to focus on Lithuania’s northern neighbors.

CNN: So how did this policy of leaving Lithuania alone come back to haunt the other Baltic Republics in 1992 after Mikhail Popov was killed?

Matlock: Because of this policy of leaving Lithuania alone and intervening in Estonia and Latvia, what soon emerged were two different types of Russian immigrants. In Estonia and Latvia you had large numbers of Russian nationalists. They tended to be armed with automatic weapons and openly rebelling against the central government in Riga and Tallinn. However, in Lithuania you tended to have purely economic migrants and political refugees. Most of the Russians living in the slums of Naujininkai on April 1, 1992 were people who, ironically enough, fled Russia because of opposition to the Liberal Democratic Party and Vladimir Zhirinovsky. They came to Lithuania because of its close proximity to Poland and most were in the process of trying to obtain Lithuanian passports so they could flee to Western Europe. As a result most of the refugees were caught completely off guard when Lithuanian protesters targeted them.

CNN: Is that why Estonia and Latvia attempted to distance themselves from the Lithuanian government after the murder of Mikhail Popov?

Matlock: Absolutely. They knew that the Russian immigrants in Narva and Riga were a much different type. They were itching for a fight and armed to the teeth. The Estonians and Latvians saw the murder of Mikhail Popov on TV as the straw that was about to break the camels back.

Violence broke out as Lithuanian protesters targeted Russian migrants in Vilnius (AP)

Mikhail Popov as he lay dying after being beaten by a Lithuanian mob live on Russian TV (AP)


The Baltic Cold War?
Russian veterans of the Estonian Civil War find icy reception as they slowly return home

By Marco West

Financial Times
January 13, 2010

Yuri Ponomarev returns to his pre-war apartment in the Estonian controlled section of the city of Tallinn for the first time in 18 years

(TALLINN, ESTONIA)- Yuri Ponomarev never expected a warm homecoming, but even he was surprised at the tension in Tallinn amongst his former neighbors and friends.

“I figured after twenty years that emotions wouldn’t be so raw,” he said as he took a drag from his cigarette in front of what use to be his apartment in downtown Tallinn, “but I guess I was wrong.”

Despite the emotions involved in the Estonian Civil War, Ponomarev was really not much of an anomaly in Estonia in early 1992. Like thousands of others he was a Russian who actually didn’t oppose Estonian independence and openly criticized the Russian leadership in Moscow.

“I actually wanted Estonia to be independent back in 1991,” he said angrily, “I figured Russia was going down the toilet with Alksnis and Zhirinovsky in charge, and Estonia seemed to be on the fast track towards NATO membership and European integration. I didn’t want to be part of an economic backwater; I wanted the same thing the Estonians wanted: freedom and the chance to become rich!”

Ponomarev even reminisces about late nights with his Estonian neighbors joking about the then Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky, and what at the time seemed like his almost comical claims of discrimination of Russians in Tallinn.


“I used to do a pretty good Zhirinovsky impersonation,” Ponomarev sad sadly, “and my neighbors and I would sometimes get drunk and they would tease me until I did the impersonation. I would say in Zhirinovsky’s voice that I knew that Russians were discriminated in Estonia because when I visited Estonia a dog had the audacity to bark at me in Estonian! We laughed all night over that one.”

There is no shortage of tragic tales in the former Soviet Union, but for many the story of Yuri Ponomarev and men like him are some the most tragic. Three months after the night in which he and his Estonian friends were joking about the dog barking at Zhirinovsky, Ponomarev was on the front line of the Baltic People’s Army of National Unity, a Pro-Moscow paramilitary group, fighting in the streets of Tallinn. Across neighborhoods that he grew up in, Ponomarev admits to shooting at former neighbors and friends. He recalled over three years of house to house fighting in the streets of Tallinn as part of one of the most shocking and brutal wars in the 20th century. For many Russians in the self-proclaimed Russian Republic of the Baltic, a quasi-autonomist breakaway republic that encompasses over just over 49% of the Estonian Republic, the war ended in 1995 with the signing of the Helsinki Accord. However, for many Estonians and Russians the bitter memories of the war linger on.

“I know that there are no shortages of bad guys when we talk about the Estonian Civil War,” Ponomarev adds, “but I just wish they would admit their role in the war so we can all move on and live in peace.”

Forgiveness from Estonians may not come easy. During the course of the war, which lasted from 1992-1995, nearly 100,000 Estonians and Russians were killed or wounded and nearly a quarter of a million were ethnically cleansed from what now makes up the Russian Republic of the Baltic. The Helsinki Peace Accord of 1995 was seen by many Estonians as a peace treaty handed to them at the barrel of a gun. In it they saw the front line between Estonian and Pro-Russian troops become the permanent border between their country and an autonomous Republic within Estonia, one which has made no secret of its dreams of breaking away from Estonia and unifying with Russia.

“Although Zhirinovsky formally recognized the independence of Estonia in Helsinki, he successfully destroyed Estonia as a nation and created the seeds of future conflicts,” commented former American Ambassador to Estonia Robert C. Frasure. “Every time there is some minor disagreement in Estonia the Russian Republic of the Baltic threatens to leave the country, prompting fears of the Civil War breaking out again.”

The border between Russians and Estonians has all the makings of an international border between two belligerent countries, despite its innocuous name of “inter-entity border.” Although the Helsinki Peace Accord was supposed to usher in a return of refugees, the UN had no teeth to enforce its provisions. Russian troops moved in almost immediately under the title “UN peacekeepers” and proceeded to militarize the “inter-entity border” and restricted access to the occupied northern and eastern regions to native Estonians. The inability of Estonians to return to their homes behind the inter-entity border prompted many Estonians angrily dub the Russian Republic of the Baltic as “North Korea on the Narva.” Although access has eased since the fall of UIS President Vladimir Zhirinovsky in 2003, tensions still remain high on both sides of the inter-entity border.

“The Estonians claim that we kept them from going home,” Ponomarev said with a hint of anger in his voice, “but they never take accountability for what they did. I couldn’t go home either! I had to move from my home in the Kristiine district of Tallinn to the Haabersti District. I was ethnically cleansed too.”

It is claims of persecution at the hands of Estonians that enflame the passions across both sides of the inter-entity border. For Russians like Ponomarev, they insist upon accountability.

“I saw the Estonians committing war crimes with my own eyes,” Ponomarev said, “Perhaps some Russians did too, it was a horrible, horrible war. But how can we move on when they claim that they never did anything wrong towards us and yet we committed nothing but horrible war crimes against them?”

Most international observers have concluded that the Russians did commit massive human rights violations in Estonia, and that they ethnically cleansed almost all of eastern Estonia in their attempt to create a Russian Republic inside of Estonia. However most Russians feel that they were only doing what they had to do in order to survive.

“When I saw Mikhail Popov killed in Vilnius, I knew things would never be the same,” Ponomarev said solemnly, “he was really no different than I was. He was a moderate; he had no use for the Liberal Democrat’s or Zhirinovsky. In fact, I remember his widow telling the press that he was a strong supporter of (opposition leader) Mikhail Arutyunov, and that before he was murdered he was thinking of running for office as a member of the Party for a Free and Democratic Russia and Lithuania. He felt that strongly for democracy.”

Ponomarev admits that he was on edge after the murder of Popov, and for the first time in his life he started to feel the tension in the streets of Tallinn. Businesses that he frequented suddenly cancelled his store credit, and he was fired from his job at the post office with no explanation given.

“They didn’t give me a reason, but still, they made no secret why I was let go,” Ponomarev said, “they told me that with my experience I could get a job in any post office in Russia. But that there would be nothing for me here in Tallinn.”

But what proved to be the final straw for Ponomarev and thousands of Russians like him was the issue of citizenship. Russians were denied citizenship by the Estonian government, and Ponomarev suddenly realized that as long as he stayed in Estonia he would be nothing more than a second class citizen.

“I realized then that the Estonians were trying to ethnically cleanse us out of the country. The only thing is they did it quietly: they tried to hide it from the world. I started hearing reports of Russians leaving Tallinn for weekend trips. They would fly to Moscow and then be denied entry back in Estonia on the return flight. I realized I had one of three choices. Flee to Russia. Stay in Tallinn and live like a dog. Or fight for my dignity.”

Ponomarev snuck out of his home in late April, and put his wife and infant child in a van with other refugees headed to Narva, a Russian stronghold inside of Estonia on the border with Russia. He then drove across town to what was emerging as the Russian high command in Tallinn: the Haabersti District. As soon as he arrived he enlisted in the Haabersti Militia and began training. He was handed an AK-74 and within two weeks he and thousands of other poorly trained Russians were on the march.

“I didn’t want to take that gun, and I didn’t want to shoot anyone,” Ponomarev said with a sigh, “but as I said, I only had three choices and I chose to fight. The truly tragic thing is that I didn’t want to fight. I wouldn’t have touched that gun if the Estonians just treated me like a human being. They should have known better. You can take the most mild and meek Russian in the world. But threaten his home and threaten his family and he will drive your face into the ground and he will destroy you. The Germans learned that lesson the hard way. And so did the Estonians.”

Ethnic Map of Russians in Estonia in 1989

Estonia today, with the Russian Republic of the Baltic in Yellow and the inter-entity border in red.

Division of the City of Tallinn today, with the Estonian controlled areas in blue and the Russian controlled areas in yellow

Riots plunge Riga into chaos as ethnic Latvians challenge Latvia's Russian President


The Detroit Free Press
June 22, 2004



(RIGA, LATVIA)- For the eleventh straight day, rioters in the Latvian capital protested the latest power sharing agreement between Latvia’s Russian President Evgennii Mikhailov and the ethnically Latvian Parliament, headed by Prime Minister Vaira Vīķe-Freiberga. Despite the increasingly violent turn of the protest, and fears that the conflict could spiral into civil war, Latvians have shown little willingness to extend what most Latvians despairingly call “The Lebanon Compromise.”

“In the last twelve years Latvians have been forced to accept living under a system of near apartheid,” Prime Minister Vīķe-Freiberga said on national television, “but here, today, we can finally remove the last nail in the coffin of Soviet occupation and proclaim ourselves a free and independent nation.”

The Vance-Carrington Plan, which was signed in 1994, formally ended the Latvian Civil War. However, many of the provisions of the plan have proved to be controversial with ethnic Latvians. Most notably, the power sharing agreement that many Latvians claim is modeled after the failed power sharing agreement in Lebanon prior to the Lebanese Civil war in 1975. According to the Vance-Carrington Plan, Russian and Latvian both hold the status of being official languages and ethnic groups in Latvia. Whereas the Prime Minister must always be an ethnic Latvian, the President is always to be a Russian. Under Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the Russian faction of the Latvian government took numerous steps to attempt to disenfranchise the Latvian population. However, since the fall of Zhirinovsky last year many Latvians are calling for a new system of government.

“The parliament is constantly and hopelessly deadlocked under this system,” Vīķe-Freiberga told the BBC in an interview in 2002, “and while the president can veto any law we pass, he can also pass executive orders whenever he pleases. And we cannot challenge these executive orders.”

The latest attempt to revisit the power sharing agreement led to violence when President Mikhailov refused to surrender his right to issue the “line item veto” coupled with his refusal to sign the Freedom and Democracy Act, which would have limited the power of president to issue an executive order.

Although fears of a renewed civil war remain, many Latvians are encouraged by the removal of Zhirinovsky from power in the UIS. With Zhirinovsky gone, the belief is that the UIS will not invade Latvia to prop up President Mikhailov, who retains close ties with former President Zhirinovsky and is seen as a rival to new UIS President Alexander Lebed.



Popular Opposition leader arrested in anti-war protest in Russia



By the BBC
March 27, 1994



(KALININGRAD, RUSSIA) Tatiana Popov, one of the leaders of the anti-Zhirinovsky movement who rose to national prominence in 1992 when her he husband Mikhail Popov was beaten to death live on national TV, was herself badly beaten and arrested at an anti-government rally Monday in Kaliningrad. The beating to death of Mr. Popov, an ethnic Russian living in Lithuania in 1992, in front of his wife and children on national TV was cited as one of the major causes of the Estonian and Latvian civil wars in 1992. However, Mrs. Popov quickly emerged as a vocal critic of the Zhirinovsky regime, and her arrest and beating at the hands of armed thugs connected to the UIS government prompted a fresh wave of condemnation from the international community.

The protest, which condemned Zhirinovsky and called for an end to the Estonian and Latvian Civil War, was brutally cracked down on by supporters of the Liberal Democratic Party. Mrs. Popov, who has emerged as one of the most vocal critics of the Russian President, was reportedly beaten badly before being detained by police, who charged Popov after arriving at the scene. Although the UIS government has prohibited Amnesty International and the Red Cross from visiting her, a local doctor on scene did confirm that she was treated for three broken ribs, five broken fingers, a broken orbital bone, a broken jaw, and six missing teeth. Most disturbingly was his report that he believed she had been sexually assaulted with a baton.

The international community has condemned the persecution of supporters of the outlawed Party for a Free and Democratic Russia, and US President Bob Kerrey has condemned the assault on Tatiana Popov, calling her “a woman of honor who stands for the principles of peace and democracy.”

President Zhirinovsky dismissed the claims of unlawful and excessive force, and has repeatedly made outlandish and unsubstantiated claims against the widow Popov. When she sent her three children out of the country in 1993 to seek asylum in Great Britain, Mr. Zhirinovsky famously claimed that the move was because she found it too difficult to “explain to her children why she was a prostitute,” and that it was easier to get rid of her children than to “stop sleeping with any Latvian or Turk with ten rubles in his pocket.”

 

[Pellegrino]

PART TWENTY ONE: THE HONEYMOON IS OVER




Transcript from The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, October 29, 2009

Guest: James Duncan


Stewart (to audience): I am here with James Duncan, author of “The Son Also Rises: The Rise and Fall of the Second Bush Presidency”-

(Turning to Mr. Duncan)

Stewart: And Mr. Duncan, I appreciate you coming on the show.

James Duncan: Thank you Jon.

Stewart: I have to say, fascinating book. What seems to be so interesting is that George W. Bush seemed almost obsessed with the mistakes made by his father in his presidency.

Duncan: Yes, it really was a driving force of his presidency; in fact I almost named the book “Mistakes of my Father.” But it is strange because there were really two major lessons to learn from the presidency of 41: the first lesson 43 understood very well, and the second one he completely miscalculated on.

Stewart: What was the first lesson?

Duncan: It was ‘do not, under any circumstances, raise taxes.’ Bush was determined not to make that mistake that his father made, and it served him well. But the second lesson he got wrong. He thought the lesson was ‘somehow get Russia under control, make them a deal that they can’t turn down and get them to stop creating havoc all over the world.’ But that really wasn’t the second lesson of the first Bush presidency at all, and the great tragedy is how wrong 43 got it.

Stewart: What was the second lesson then?

Duncan: Basically, it was ‘don’t let the Russians ass-rape you.’


(Audience laughter)

Transcript from CNN’s Crossfire, February 19, 1992
Courtesy of CNN

Michael Kinsley: Clearly we can see after last nights New Hampshire primary that President Bush is more vulnerable that we previously assumed.

John Sununu: I am amazed that Democrats can honestly take last nights results as a sign of weakness. He won nearly 70% of the Republican votes. If I were Paul Tsongas or Bob Kerrey I would be very, very worried right now. George Bush looked unbeatable. Our friend Pat Buchanan spent millions of dollars and focused his entire campaign in New Hampshire and won less than 10% of the vote.

Michael Kinsley: But before he received an endorsement from Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky two weeks ago, Buchanan was polling as high as 40%-

John Sununu: And the Republicans in New Hampshire still came out and supported the President. This is a strong showing that will cement President Bush’s position as he heads into Georgia.

Michael Kinsley: I hope the Republicans, and Bush, believe that! Because nearly a quarter of Republicans in New Hampshire voted for Harold Stassen, which tells me that they are not happy with Bush on his policies regarding the UIS. Harold Stassen went from being one of the biggest jokes in politics to a contender overnight. He is now the man who showed America that Bush has alienated his base. They are mad because he broke his pledge of no new taxes, and they are mad because he is letting Russia play us like a fool.

John Sununu: I resent that. Harold Stassen is not a joke. He was a proud American who served his country in World War II. And the voters of New Hampshire were voting for him out of appreciation for a lifetime of service. He was the man who put New Hampshire on the map, politically, back in 1948. His ‘48 campaign turned the New Hampshire presidential primary into what it is today, and many Republicans simply were voting for him out of appreciation. Sometimes the veteran actor wins the Oscar because voters appreciate all he has done over his career.

Michael Kinsley: So you don’t think that George Bush should take this as a sign that he needs to toughen up on Russia, or perhaps cancel his upcoming meeting with Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky at Camp David next month? As far as I can tell, Harold Stassen’s only platform is ‘don’t trust the Russians’.

John Sununu: Of course not. The voters appreciate that President Bush has ushered this country into a new era of cooperation with our former enemy. I don’t think Mr. Stassen’s scare tactics will change the fact that Americans are happier that we live in a world where Russia is our ally and not our enemy. Mark my word; we have heard the last of Harold Stassen in politics.


Finland closes embassy in Moscow after fighting breaks out in Estonia

BBC

By William Sawyer
April 4, 1992


HELSINKI -- Finland said Wednesday that it had closed its embassy in Moscow and was giving UIS diplomats 48-hours to leave Helsinki.

The announcement came the day after thousands of armed Russian protesters stormed the Estonian Parliament, or Riigikogu, and executed dozens of lawmakers before Estonian policemen and soldiers were able to recapture the building. The Finnish embassy, citing evidence of similar acts of violence from Russian militias across the country, called the storming of the Riigikogu an “act of war” perpetrated by the UIS against the Estonian government.

Other Scandinavian nations have joined Finland in cutting diplomatic ties to the UIS for its support of the anti-government militias emerging across Estonia and Latvia, and numerous European nations have condemned the UIS for the attack.

British Foreign Secretary Gerald Kaufman said the attack could not have taken place without "some degree of consent and support from the Russian and UIS government."


Fighting erupts across Latvia and Estonia as Red Cross declares conflict a ‘civil war’

Economist
April 5, 1992



(TALLINN, ESTONIA)- Riots and ethnic clashes between Russian and Estonian protesters across the country have quickly descended into a full fledged civil war, declared the Red Cross in a statement addressed to the United Nations. The Red Cross cited numerous instances of street to street fighting in Tallinn, with heavily armed Russian militias clashing with Estonian police and military units. Across the eastern portions of the country, where federal control by the Estonian government was tenuous even before the riots began, the Red Cross has declared that there is clear and convincing evidence that Russian fighters have already begun a policy of ethnic cleansing, targeting Estonian villages around the predominantly Russian city of Narva.

“It is clear that this militia is well funded, well armed, and extremely well organized,” the Red Cross said in its statement, “regardless of who is funding and supporting these fighters, we cannot deny that the tragic effect of this organized military operation is to have successfully dragged this country into a civil war that it can ill-afford to endure.”

Riots broke out only three days ago across Estonia and Latvia after the televised murder of a Russian shopkeeper in neighboring Lithuania. However, the Red Cross has cited the clear organized nature of the escalation in violence as proof that the conflict is not a spontaneous protest, but rather a systematic policy of “terror and intimidation.” The Red Cross cited evidence that the militias in Estonia also appear to have coincided their attacks with those Russian militias in the neighboring Republic of Latvia, where fighters have clashed with Latvian forces throughout the capital city of Riga.

However, the UIS government dismissed claims of civil war, claiming that the conflict reflected the legitimate protest of “a clearly persecuted Russian population that seeks only to demand their rights.”

However, UIS statements minimizing the conflict fell on deaf ears across the international community, as Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky was recorded as saying that the Estonian and Latvian people now faced “extermination” during an emergency session of the Russian Parliament. The statement caused an uproar not only in the international community, but in Russia itself. Zhirinovsky has been criticized for what is seen as strong armed tactics used by the Russian government in enforcing martial law declared by the federal government just three weeks ago. The Russians have rounded up over ten thousand people in Moscow alone in the past two weeks, citing violations of the newly enacted gun protection laws, in which Russians who indicate a desire to relocate to volatile regions inside the UIS are entitled to a government issued firearm. The law is widely seen as an insidious attempt to arm pro-Russian militias in Central Asia and the Baltics.



SHOCKER! STASSEN STUNS BUSH IN UPSET!
Former Governor scores primary victory as anger over economy and Russia intensifies

By Paul Thorpe

April 8, 1992
Minneapolis Star Tribune

Former Governor Stassen greets supporters in St. Paul this morning after scoring the stunning win over the President

(ST. PAUL)- In what has already been called the biggest political upset in the 20th century, perennial Presidential candidate and former Minnesota Governor Harold Stassen scored a stunning upset over President George Bush yesterday in the Minnesota primary. With 99% of the precincts reporting, Stassen led with 45.3% of the vote over Bush’s 44.1%. Conservative commentator Pat Buchanan, who, like Bush, has seen his campaign tarnished due to what many Republicans saw as his pro-Russians leanings, finished a distant third with 5.9%, barely beating out write in candidate Ross Perot (whose write in campaign captured 3.6% of the total votes despite the fact that he has already declared his candidacy as an independent).


Representatives from President Bush’s election campaign downplayed the defeat, citing low voter turnout (the Minnesota Secretary of State indicated turnout was the lowest in State history, at just over 13%) and what they called “the swan song factor.” Ari Fleischer, the Bush campaign’s deputy communications director, dismissed the loss, pointing to the President’s insurmountable lead in the delegate count, rendering the Stassen win in Minnesota “insignificant.”


“Minnesotans already knew that Bush was their nominee,” Fleischer told reporters at a press conference, “but they came out and voted for Stassen to tell their former Governor thanks for all his service over the years. Clearly, with over twenty primary victories since New Hampshire, including wins in Texas and Florida, we are comfortable in knowing that President Bush will have a smooth path to the Republican convention.”


However, many Republicans have expressed concern over the sudden collapse of the Bush candidacy and see the mind-boggling emergence of Harold Stassen as a dangerous sign of impending doom. The 85-year old Stassen was widely seen as a novelty candidate, and due to his advanced age, did almost no campaigning outside of a small number of TV ads. Many independent political observers saw the Stassen surge as a serious sign that voters have become discontent with the President.


“President Bush is in very, very serious trouble,” commented University of Minnesota political science professor John Williams on the Today Show this morning, “Considering President Bush has already wrapped up the nomination the only reason people would vote for Harold Stassen in this election, is because they wanted to make a point to vote against the President. He spent less than $100,000 in Minnesota. He did almost no campaigning. This should have been a shellacking. What will happen when George Bush has to run against a viable candidate after the primary?”


Although President Bush has seen his support with Republicans erode over the last six months due to the poor state of the economy, the Stassen victory may reflect a growing frustration over President Bush’s foreign policy measures in regards to the former Soviet Union. Whereas Bush’s strongpoint had always been foreign policy, many Republicans have expressed deep anger over “The Baker Plan”, in which the President authorized billions of dollars in aid to the UIS. When fighting broke out in the former Soviet Republics of Latvia and Estonia last week, many Republicans expressed outrage over what they described as the President’s mismanagement of the fall of the Soviet Union.


“I probably would have stayed home and jut not voted,” commented Rob Kelper, a mechanic from St. Paul, “but when I saw the Soviets shooting those folks on the news, and that same Russian President who Bush was chumming up with three weeks ago telling people he was going to ‘exterminate’ those poor folks, well, I couldn’t stay home. I am a lifetime Republican, never considered voting Democrat. But let me tell you, Reagan sure as spit wouldn’t have stood for what is going on in Russia

President Bush responds to questions from the press a day after his stunning upset loss to former Minnesota Governor Harold Stassen in the Minnesota primary (AP)


CNN interview with James Baker, former Secretary of State under President George H.W. Bush

July 13, 1997


CNN: When did President Bush realize that he needed a different approach to dealing with Zhirinovsky and the UIS?

Baker: Right after things started to spiral out of control in Estonia and Latvia. We gave him every chance, and each time he burned us. But when he called for the “extermination” of the Estonian and Latvian people just weeks after he was smiling and joking with us on CNN at Camp David, well, that was a devastating moment for the President, both politically and personally. After that he called me into the oval office and told me that the honeymoon was over, we needed to play hardball with the Russians.

CNN: In your opinion, is that what caused the upset in Minnesota?

Baker: Although we didn’t admit it at the time, we knew we had problems over the economy. Buchanan was poling pretty high in the New Hampshire primary. And when his numbers plummeted after he received President Zhirinovsky endorsement we also knew that the recent Camp David meeting was not going to play like we had hoped. But our strong point was always foreign policy, and we kept playing to our strengths. After Buchanan fizzled out we figured it was smooth sailing until the general election. We won every primary after that and the election seemed in the bag. By the time the general election rolled around we figured we would have repaired our mistakes in regards to dealing with Russia and we hoped the economy would have bounced back. But Estonia and Latvia exploded right before the Minnesota primary, and that changed everything. After that, everything we did in regards to Russia looked like a feeble response to a bad election. After Minnesota it became clear that we lost our ace in the hole: we lost foreign policy.

CNN: How surprised were you at the result?

Baker: As surprised as everyone else in the country. We already had the delegates we needed. But with Camp David fresh in every Minnesotans mind, well, Zhirinovsky ended up killing us. They were voting against Camp David, not George Bush. But the end result was that it turned George Bush into a very weak candidate overnight, and nothing we did after that could stop the hemorrhaging. We never lost another primary after that, but the damage was already done. There is no recovering from losing an election to Harold Stassen in 1992: nobody was going to take us seriously after that.

 

[Pellegrino]

PART TWENTY TWO: PRUSSIAGATE

PART TWENTY TWO: PRUSSIAGATE

As we see in this update, things go from bad to worse with the West, with Germany now leading the charge agaisnt Russia and Zhirinovsky. Also, the political situation in the US starts to clarify itself, with Bush taking a beating in the press as Nebraska Senator Bob Kerrey emerges as the Democratc nominee.

Just an FYI, the SNL skit is a bit hard to understand if you never saw Dana Carvey's George Bush bit. I would suggest doing a Youtube or Hulu search if you are curious, as those phrases ("na ga da it" and "wouldn't be prudent") were commonly used in his skits where he portrayed the President.


THE 1992 CAMPAIGN: TSONGAS AND CLINTON ABANDON CAMPAIGNS, LEAVING KERREY A CLEAR PATH TOWARD SHOWDOWN WITH BUSH

By ROBERT ROBERTS
Published: March 20, 1992

Clinton thanks supporters in Little Rock as he bows out of the race

Former Senator Paul E. Tsongas of Massachusetts and former Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton withdrew from the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination today, a decision that many in the party said all but guaranteed the selection of Senator Bob Kerrey of Nebraska as the Democratic candidate for President.


Mr. Tsongas announced his departure at a news conference in Boston, where he cited a lack of money in his decision. Clinton announced his departure in Little Rock, citing disappointing results in his native South, where he hoped to score a major coup ten days ago during Super Tuesday.


“We appreciate all the support we received in Louisiana and Mississippi,” Clinton said during a press conference, “but I cannot in good conscience continue this campaign when all it would do at this time is damage Senator Kerrey’s prospects in November.”


Although Clinton was expected to be a major player in the race, personal scandals coupled with his perceived lack of foreign policy experience crippled his campaign. After a disappointing third place showing in New Hampshire, he focused on winning big in the South. However, Kerrey’s win in Florida and Texas on Super Tuesday dwarfed Clinton’s wins in Louisiana and Mississippi, and all but sealed the nomination for the Nebraska Senator.


“While Senator Tsongas played to President Bush’s weaknesses regarding the economy, Senator Kerrey capitalized on his foreign policy blunders in regards to the former Soviet Union,” commented former Senator Eugene McCarthy, who dropped out of the race early on. “As a result, Governor Clinton was really left out in the cold this election. I really think if it were just about the economy, he would have emerged victorious. But once Russia started flaring up, Senator Kerrey was able to ride on his experience in Vietnam and his strong foreign policy background to really derail the Clinton campaign before it had a chance to take off.”


Kerrey’s victory in Florida was seen as a direct result of the situation with Russia, coming weeks after Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky’s bizarre anti-Israel comment in New York City during his visit the previous month.


“It was clear that the Jewish community in Florida were very, very worried about Zhirinovsky,” McCarthy added, “and Bob Kerrey was the man who most comforted the Jewish-American community in regards to Russia. If not for that, I think Clinton might have won Florida, and maybe even this election.”


Exit polls showed Senator Kerrey polling as high as 85% with Jewish Democrats in Florida after the primary election.



Harold Stassen, America’s Winston Churchill, died on March 4th, aged 93

The Economist
Mar 8th 2001

Stassen speaks ot the 1992 Republican National Convention in Houston

Harold Stassen, one of the elder statesmen in American politics and the man who was famously described as the “moral compass of the Republican Party” by former President Ronald Reagan in 1992, died this week at his home in Minneapolis at the age of 93.


Although Stassen’s early political career saw him emerge as one of the most attractive young Republican politicians in the country in the 1940s, his multiple failed presidential runs soon diminished his appeal within political circles. By the time Harold Stassen had announced his candidacy for president in 1992, he had already been relegated to the role of a virtual national joke. After eight unsuccessful campaigns for President between 1948 and 1988, Stassen was better known for the comical “Stop Stassen” movement, which humorously tried to convince the former governor to abandon another impossible campaign. However, by the end of 1992 Harold Stassen mounted one of the most improbable political comebacks in American history and became the elder statesmen of the Party. He famously received the loudest standing ovation during the 1992 Republican National Convention in Houston when he said: “the greatest threat to America today is this new fascist union that has replaced the Soviet Union. Make no mistake, Russia cannot be trusted, they are not our allies.” The statement, and the outpouring of support it created, surprised many political insiders, and was dubbed “Stassen’s Churchill speech” by conservative commentators. Even Ronald Reagan, who spoke after Stassen, was genuinely impressed with the former governor when he said in his speech “I’m glad we have patriots like Harold Stassen on our side.” The line from Reagan also led to a standing ovation from the crowd in Houston.


After the 1992 election, Stassen continued to serve the Republican Party in an advisory role, and in one of the great ironies of politics, turned down an offer by numerous Republican officials to run in the 1996 election, citing his advanced age.


“I really don’t think he was running all those times because he necessarily wanted to be president,” commented a former aid to Stassen who worked with him in his 1992 campaign, “but he had a message, and he really believed if he remained authentic, if he refused to sell out his principles, sooner or later people would recognize he had been right all along and respect his convictions. He always took the hard positions that hurt him politically, such as supporting the Civil Rights Act and Martin Luther King when it wasn’t popular with some Republicans. But in the end, he was proven right, time and time again.”

CNN interview with James Baker, former Secretary of State under President George H.W. Bush

July 13, 1997


CNN: Did President Bush do enough to contain the UDR after the war in Estonia and Latvia exploded?

Baker: I think so. But unfortunately it came during an election, so it looked like everything we did was in response to the poll numbers. When he froze aid to the UDR after the convention, the press called it a shallow attempt to appease the Stassen-block of the GOP. And when President Bush pushed to have Hungary and Poland admitted into NATO most of the media criticized it as a feeble attempt to contain the surging Kerrey movement.

CNN: Do you think the media gave you a bum rap?

Baker: Yes. President Bush was on the cover of Newsweek and he was called a ‘wimp’ in 1987. Saturday Night Live was making fun of him every weekend with some skit about how President Bush was afraid of his own shadow. In 1988 we didn’t have a problem looking like a strong leader compared to Michael Dukakis, but in 1992 the media really unfairly attacked Bush and portrayed Kerrey as this ‘man’s man’ who was going to stand up to Russia and restore America’s place in the world.

CNN: Much like what Reagan did in the 1980 election.

Baker (long pause): Yes, I suppose so. Once Zhirinovsky started creating absolute havoc across Europe, in Romania and Yugoslavia, it became a big problem and Kerrey was able to come out looking like Ronald Reagan and Bush ended up looking like Jimmy Carter to a certain extent. But if the media would have fairly reported what we were doing, I think things would have been different. If the American people saw the steps we took to contain Russia, they would have seen that, in many ways President Bush did an incredible job in stopping the Russian threat. Considering that for eight years President Kerrey was unable to contain the UIS, it was clear that it was a very difficult situation we were in back in 1992.



Transcript from Saturday Night Live
June 20, 1992

Guest: Tom Hanks

Clip features Kevin Nealon as Sam Donaldson and Dana Carvey as George Bush

Donaldson: Mr. President, it was recently announced that the Russian army has invaded Alaska. Senator Kerrey has criticized your response of doing nothing as, and I quote, “being way too French”.

(Audience laughter)

Bush: Now Sam. Not going to send troops to fight in Alaska. Na ga do it. Wouldn’t be prudent. It’s cold up there. Na ga da it.

(Audience laughter)


Twenty Years Later, Prussiagate Still Defines German Foreign Policy


Der Spiegel – English Edition
April 22, 2012 at 11:15 AM EDT
By: Hans Wirth


For Norbert Blüm, Minister of Labour and Social Affairs under former Chancellor Helmut Kohl, he remembered the day as if it were yesterday.


“We were in the middle of a meeting when a young page came in with a personal message from the UDR embassy.” Blüm said as he sipped his coffee, “The Chancellor took it and read it quietly for just a moment. Had it ended there I would have forgotten about it. We receive memos and letters and communications every day. But his response was such that I would never forget.”


Blüm had known the stoic Kohl for over thirty years, and had worked with Kohl in German politics since they were both young men. But never did he see the Chancellor respond the way he did that day.


“He swore,” Blüm said, “In thirty years I never heard him swear. But as he read that letter I heard him loudly yell ‘what the fuck is this?!’ as he crumpled up the paper and threw it in the wastebasket. I didn’t know what the letter said, but I never saw the Chancellor so visibly upset.”


The incident might have ended there had it not been for the Chancellor’s angry response. Across the cabinet whispers began to circulate as to the contents of the letter. And before the end of the day the memo would be removed from the wastebasket, although the culprit would remain a source of controversy to this day. Within two weeks it would be sent to the German press, causing one of the biggest scandals to his the country since the end of World War II.


“Clearly, in hindsight the Chancellor should have responded differently,” Blüm said with a sigh, “but I really believe him when he said he thought it was some sort of sick joke. Today we know what kind of man Vladimir Zhirinovsky is, but in early 1992 we were still discovering what he was. You don’t get a letter like that and assume a sane person would send it to you!”


The infamous Prussiagate scandal started with that personalized, hand written letter, from Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky to Kohl, proposing an alliance to invade Poland and divide the country up between the two nations with the pre-World War I borders (excluding the Kaliningrad enclave). The letter was written in German and full of grammatical errors. It often rambled and in several places made absolutely no sense whatsoever (in one German comedy magazine, a satirical classified ad was posted in which the Russian government was seeking German translators, with the only qualification being that the translator know how to spell “concentration camp”). However, the portions of the letter that could be deciphered were frightening.


“-and for make no Poles in Prussia, and no Poles in Danzig, Germany make to be for in camp of Poles to be die,” the letter chillingly said in one portion, “Russia will to have Poles too much, and not want more.”


The letter caused an uproar in Germany and Poland, with Polish President Lech Walesa furious at what he deemed was a “casual and dismissive response to a call for a second Holocaust.”


“Kohl just underestimated the impact of Polish fears and concerns over both Russian and a unified Germany,” Blüm said. “He already had one gaffe when he suggested in 1990 that the Oder-Neisse line might be open to negotiation as a permanent border once Germany was unified.”


The backlash against Kohl and Zhirinovsky was furious, and in hindsight created one of the most unusual developments of modern Europe.


“Kohl knew he had to do damage control,” Blüm said, “but more importantly, as Estonia and Latvia spiraled into civil war, he also knew that steps had to be taken to stop Russia before they started a major conflict all across Europe. Once he realized the Prussiagate letter was legitimate he championed Polish admission into NATO. In fact, had it not been for Kohl, I doubt the French or Italians would have allowed NATO expansion into Poland and Hungary in 1992. They were worried about provoking Russia, but Kohl’s firm leadership and determination on the issue made it happen.”


However, despite steps taken to lead Western Europe’s opposition to the UIS, Kohl remained on the defensive throughout his career over the Prussiagate memo.


“I think there might have been some overcompensating,” former US Special Envoy to UN Cyrus Vance once famously quipped in 1995, “because the Germans were always refusing to make any compromises when it came to the Russians.”


It is a sentiment that Blüm tends to agree with.


“Kohl was determined to stop the Russians at any cost,” Blüm said, “and it is probably Kohl’s NATO expansion that led to the creation of the UIS and the occupation of the Croatian Krajina by the UIS. In hind sight, we should have told the world about that letter. Then we wouldn’t have to constantly be playing hardball.”



“My Russia- An Autobiography by former Russian Prime Minister Gennady Burbulis”


Published by Interbook, © 1998



CHAPTER THIRTY-FOUR

The cabinet was in a near riot. Even Zhirinovsky’s strongest supporter, Vice President Andrei Zavidiya was furious with the Russian President.

“Why would you send that letter to the Germans?!” he screamed as Zhirinovsky cowered sheepishly in his chair, “not only do we sound like a bunch of Nazis, but we sound like a bunch of retarded Nazis as well!”

Zhirinovsky tried to backpedal, and say that he didn’t mean for the letter to have been made public, as if that was some sort of defense.

“I can’t believe Kohl would do this,” he mumbled under his breath, “I extended my hand to him in friendship.”

“Not everyone is a fucking idiot,” Zavidiya screamed at the President, “they don’t all think like you do!”

I honestly wondered if we the President’s cabinet was going to beat him to death right then and there. I had to hold Prime Minister Silayev back on several occasions to prevent him from trying to hit Zhirinovsky. After Estonia and Latvia the world was already turning on us. The Finns, alongside with the Swedes and Norwegians had cut all diplomatic ties with us, and we knew that after the scandal this letter caused, the rest of the world would follow suit. That stupid letter had turned Russia into North Korea over night. And after all the progress we had made, strengthening ties with the United States and Western Europe just a few weeks ago. For Zhirinovsky to grab a German-Russian dictionary and propose a Hitler-esque invasion of Poland was the most idiotic thing he could have done! I honestly couldn’t believe he was that stupid and reckless. He didn’t even have the common sense to properly translate the letter, making a mockery of our country on top of everything else!

Finally, after everyone had taken turns screaming at Zhirinovsky we finally had to decide how to deal with the problem.

“We better call the federal government” Silayev said angrily, “considering this Republic just destroyed the federal economy.”

I decided we couldn’t deal with this anymore. I know Silayev was worried about Alksnis, but we simply could not have Zhirinovsky in leadership anymore. I knew we had to destroy everything we had been working so hard for under Boris Yeltsin: we had to weaken the strength of the Republics and hand over power to the federal government.

“Gentlemen, I think there is only one option right now,” I said. “We need to let the world know that this madman does not speak for the country.”

The entire cabinet began to shuffle uneasily. They were worried, and understandably so. But if we could marginalize Zhirinovsky then perhaps the international community would not impose sanctions. Perhaps we would still be able to be seen as a responsible member of the international community if we could just convince the world that Zhirinovsky wasn’t really in charge; that he was just some unelected low level regional government official who really didn’t have any say in matters of international policy. I saw them all nod their heads in approval as Prime Minister Silayev stood up.

“I will call Prime Minister Luzhkov,” he said solemnly, “I think that we should only deal with him. I am willing to hand over our country to him, but not to Alksnis.”

We all nodded in agreement, and quickly voted on the matter before Prime Minister Silayev stepped out of the room to make the call we all prayed would never have to be made.

“I hope you know what you’re doing,” Sergei Filatov said to me under his breath, “because if Zhirinovsky is working under the table with Alksnis, then you were just conned. If that is the case then you just handed the entire country over to the fascists and the communists.”

 

[Pellegrino]

PART TWENTY THREE: THE LOST 300

PART TWENTY THREE: THE LOST 300

Well in this update we now are starting to get a clearer picture of how the UDR will become the UIS, and how things in Estonia turn into an absolute disaster for both sides. This is a war that will resemble Bosnia in OTL, not Azerbaijan in TTL. It is not a quick, easy 13 day conflict, but a long, protracted war with lots of casualties on both sides. And both General Tirpitz and DrakonFin brought up a good point on the Finnish reaction to the Russian role in the war in Estonia, and it being somewhat uncharacteristic of the Finnish nation. Hence I decided to do some research and strengthen that angle of the TL. Besides it now being a Scandinavian action, with Norway and Sweden, we also now have the “Lost 300”, which becomes thee major issue regarding Finnish and Russian relations from 1992 onward.

Also, we see Zhirinovsky get spanked by the Russian parliament and the first sign of the emergence of Yegor Gaidar, who in OTL was the man responsible for the shock therapy of free market reform in Russia. With Zhirinovsky marginalized right as Russian militias are getting routed in Estonia and the free-market shock therapy about to get implemented in Russia, coupled with fears of the UDR getting too strong, does Zhirinovsky succeed in insulating himself from the coming crash in Russia by being able to argue that he had no role in all of these Russian “disasters” in 1992? We shall see…

Some new names to emerge in this update…



Yegor Gaidar:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yegor_Gaidar


The Estonian city of Paldiski (on the Padki Peninsula):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paldiski

Belarusian Prime Minister Vyachaslaw Kyebich:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vyachaslaw_Kyebich



Finland angry over Russian ceremony for Finns killed in Estonian civil war


Der Spiegel – English Edition
April 01, 2004 at 07:15 AM EDT
By: Hans Wirth

UIS Soldiers carry the coffin of Erik Kulmala across the border into Finland


(HELSINKI) For Sofia Kulmala, the sight of Russian troops carrying a coffin draped in the Finnish flag hit her like a knife through her heart.

“I know Prime Minister (Matti) Vanhanen had little choice to agree to this disgusting charade,” she told Der Spiegel the day after she received the body of he son, Erik, from the UIS, “but for them to take this so far, to make such a show of it. It was horrible!”

For over nine years Kulmala knew nothing about what happened to her son on that horrible day in 1992 when the newly independent Republic of Estonia spiraled into anarchy and civil war. Reports were spotty, and for Kulmala and the over 100 Finnish families whose loved ones disappeared in the opening days of the conflict, the silence from Moscow was nothing short of torture. But although all held onto hope, that somehow, somewhere, their loved ones were still alive, they also knew the likely truth.

“The last anyone saw of Erik was when the Russian militias came to his office in Paldiski,” Kulmala said bitterly, “they beat him up, along with six other Finns working for the Helsinki University of Technology. Then they dragged them into a truck and disappeared.”

Although UIS President Alexander Lebed had taken steps to reestablish ties to with Finland, the issue of “the Lost 300” remained a major obstacle that the UIS needed to address. In the opening hours of the Estonian Civil War 301 Finnish nationals living and working in Estonia were systematically rounded up and subsequently disappeared. Under former UIS President Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the official policy of Moscow was that the “Lost 300” has simply retuned to Finland. Their disappearance prompted Finland, along with Norway and Sweden, to cut diplomatic ties to Russia, the first three nations to do so after the fall of the Soviet Union. However, as more and more evidence emerged, including satellite images of mass graves located on the Pakri Peninsula near Paldiski, Finnish anger at Russian denials became defining. In November of 2001, during the Crawford thaw (when Western relations with the UIS improved during the American-led war on Afghanistan) Russia finally admitted that the Lost 300 were in fact dead. However, what followed proved to be a diplomatic mess that has yet to resolve itself between the two nations.

“They claimed that Erik was killed fighting alongside the Estonians, fighting the Russian troops,” Kulmala said bitterly, “that he was killed in battle. But that is a lie! Erik was a scientist! An environmentalist! He was there studying the impact of the Soviet nuclear reactor in Paldiski. He was there to help clean up the country, not to fight in a war.”

It is a story that almost all of the families of the Lost 300 share. All bitterly deny that their loved ones were in fact soldiers, and most have ample evidence to back up their claim.

“We have held firm our position since 1992,” said Sami Jarvinen, director of the Red Cross in Helsinki, “that the 57 Red Cross volunteers who were killed in Estonia during the civil war were not mercenaries.”

However, hopes that President Lebed would ease the official Russian position that the Lost 300 had, in fact, been mercenaries were dealt a devastating blow when the bodies of Erik Kulmala and 44 other Finns were brought to the border town of Imatra yesterday. Draped in Finnish flags, the coffins of the 45 men were treated to full military honors by the Russians before they were handed over to the visibly irritated Finnish delegation. After turning the coffins over, a Russian military officer loudly declared to the assembled press that they “humbly return these Finnish patriots, who died fighting for their ethnic brothers and sisters in Estonia, back to the land of their birth.”


Russian Parliament censures President, votes to limit his power

May 10, 1992
By Vincent J. Shanks,
Chicago Tribune.



MOSCOW — in a stunning blow to the Russian President, members of his own Liberal Democratic Party of Russia voted alongside the opposition to censure the Russian President over his role in the Prussiagate scandal. The vote followed another nearly unanimous vote to severely curtail the authority of the Russian President as the federal government of the UDR tries to comfort the international community and convince western nations that Mr. Zhirinovsky has no authority over UDR foreign policy.

“Clearly we need to let the international community know that Mr. Zhirinovsky, the interim president pending the next election, holds no position of authority when it comes to matters of foreign policy,” said Deputy Yegor Gaidar. “He is not the spokesperson for the UDR or the Russian Republic.”

The Parliament also voted to authorize the UDR Federal Government to take control of numerous state government agencies that had fallen into control of the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, including the TASS television network and Pravda. However, the move to centralize power with the federal government has caused concern in many of the other Republics, with both Armenia and Belarus indicating that they may consider disassociating themselves from the UDR. Armenian President Levon Ter-Petrosyan has said that the UDR “is attempting to wield too much power,” and that Armenia will, from this point on, “only honor its obligations under the UIS treaty they signed late last year with Russia.”


CNN interview with Jack Matlock, former ambassador to the USSR

August 18, 2000


CNN: How was it that men like Armenian President Levon Ter-Petrosyan or Belarusian Prime Minister Viachaslau Kebich ended up becoming strong supporters of Vladimir Zhirinovsky after Prussiagate?

Matlock: Both of them had no use for Zhirinovsky, but after Prussiagate it was looking like he was politically dead, and therefore harmless. The Russian Parliament censured him, and severely restricted his power. And the Liberal Democratic Party voted to surrender much of the formerly communist held property over to the federal government. This, coupled with the federal decree of martial law, frightened the other republics. They were more worried about the UDR than Zhirinovsky at that point.

CNN: But didn’t the contents of the Prussiagate memo worry them?

Matlock: It’s hard to know for sure. Zhirinovsky was trying to deny he wrote the note, which prompted the now anti-Zhirinovsky controlled VGTRK to compare a scan of the Prussiagate memo next to a handwritten note Zhirinovsky wrote, showing stark similarities between the two. But they most likely figured that a partnership with a Russian President, who happened to be Vladimir Zhirinovsky right now but almost certainly would be someone else in a few months, was a better alternative to being controlled by the UDR. They were growing very nervous about how the Russian government was handing over power to the federal government, but they also didn’t want to declare independence right off the bat. There was a fear that independence would provoke the federal government to respond like they did in Azerbaijan or to plunge the country into civil war like Estonia and Latvia. Even in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, two countries that shunned both the UDR and UIS and were acting as de facto independent countries, it was clear that the UDR sanctions were crushing them. Both of those countries were descending into absolute anarchy, and with Tajikistan, civil war as well. As a result, for Belarus, Armenia, Ukraine, Georgia, and Kazakhstan the UIS treaty they signed with Zhirinovsky proved to be a very convenient backup plan. They wanted to remain part of this country, but they considered the country to be the UIS, not the UDR.

CNN: So did the UIS-treaty end up being a life preserver for President Zhirinovsky?

Matlock: Absolutely, and he saw it as such. He became a champion of the UIS treaty, knowing that as long as he pushed for it, he wouldn’t be impeached. The Russians didn’t want to provoke the other republics into leaving the Union, so if that meant putting up with Zhirinovsky for the short term, then so be it.


ESTONIAN NATIONAL ARMY ROUTS RUSSIAN MILITIAS IN TALLINN

By Jeff Coleman
Detroit Free Press
May 15, 1992

Russian civilians flee the Kristiine District of Tallinn after Estonian troops captured it yesterday

TALLINN, ESTONIA- The Estonian army mounted a fierce counterattack today after Russian militias briefly captured the Estonian Parliament and executed thirty-one Estonian lawmakers before being driven away. The Estonian National Army, which was based out of Nõmme District in south Tallinn, launched a lightning attack on the poorly trained Russian militias, driving them out of the Mustamäe and Kristiine districts in central Tallinn.

“Most of the Russians are located either in the north east of the country or in Tallinn,” commented Ado Mari, a corporal in the Estonian National Army, “and in Tallinn they are completely surrounded and badly outgunned. So we plan to liquidate the Russian threat here before we move east to Narva.”

The Russian loss of the Kristiine District is particularly significant for the Estonians. Kristiine District had a large Russian population prior to the fall of the Soviet Union and had emerged as a major center for the Russian opposition. With the fall of Kristiine, though, the district looked eerily deserted as most Russians fled shortly after the Estonian National Army entered.

“They told us they would kill us,” commented Yuri Kopov, a veteran of the World War II, “and they were separating the young men from the rest of the group and taking them behind a building, where we would hear gunfire and screams.”

The war has already claimed upwards of two thousand lives since it broke out less than three weeks ago, with atrocities alleged on both sides of the conflict. In the east, Estonians claim a policy of ethnic cleansing and war crimes from the Russian militias, which have used their capital of Narva as a base to target smaller villages nearby. Most of these villages are, unlike Tallinn, made up almost entirely of Estonians.

However, although Russian troops are making headway in the east, in Tallinn their success has been muted, as the Estonian National Army has surrounded the city and has moved to recapture the capital. The Estonian National Army has made no secret of its strategy of splitting the Russian controlled regions of the country in two with the capture of Tallinn. In the west Russian militias have captured the Pakri peninsula, and have begun moving east in an attempt to break the siege of Tallinn.

“If we capture Tallinn, the war is over,” Corporal Mari, “without their stronghold in Tallinn, Paldiski becomes cut off, and we can choke them out on the Pakri peninsula.”

Tallinn has already taken Jerusalem-like significance to both sides, with Russians calling it the center of Russia’s Baltic Republic, while Estonians claim it to be their “eternal and indivisible city on the sea.” The growing extremism on both sides has damped hopes for a negotiated settlement.

“They are all a bunch of Nazis,” commented Yuri Kopov, “they showed us they were Nazis in 1941 and they are showing it to us again. Stalin should have killed them all when we drove the Germans out, but I promise you, when Vladimir Zhirinovsky brings the Russian army into Tallinn, he won’t make that mistake again.”

Front lines in Estonia on May 15, 1992. Russian controlled areas in Red, Estonian controlled areas in tan, and disputed areas in brown

 

[Pellegrino]

PART TWENTY FOUR: THE ZHIRINOVSKY ULTIMATUM

PART TWENTY FOUR THE ZHIRINOVSKY ULTIMATUM

Well, we now see the liberals try to kick start the shock therapy reforms we saw in OTL. Right about the same time Zhirinovsky is nearly impeached and relegated to a bit player. But the west is still fuming over Prussiagate, and a familiar name in OTL emerges here for the first time: Halliburton. And we now (finally) start to get an idea about what is going on in Croatia and Yugoslavia while Germany pushes for NATO expansion in Poland...




Russian Parliament enacts major economic reforms; President survives impeachment


May 29, 1992
By Vincent J. Shanks,
Chicago Tribune.



MOSCOW — in a stunning development, the Russian Parliament voted today to embrace the radical reforms of Deputy Yegor Gaidar, who was named Russia’s new Deputy of Finance last week. The move proved controversial with many of the more conservative members of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, with many of them threatening to walk out of the session. The move also earned scorn from Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky, who called it “a blueprint for the disintegration of the UDR.”

The move is seen as more evidence that Russia and the UDR are moving to ease international fears that have developed over the Prussiagate memo, and to show the international community that it is eager to make serious reforms to its economy. However, the steps have proved controversial in at least two of the other republics of the UDR, with Ukraine and Belarus condemning what they see as a dangerous and reckless modification of the status quo.

“We are not opposed to reform,” commented Ukrainian government spokesperson Anton Muratov, “but we were assured that these reforms would be undertaken in gradual fashion. These proposals embraced by the Russian parliament amount to ‘shock therapy’ and will badly weaken the federal economy. The Ukraine does not want to carry the burden of Russia’s reckless decision when it comes to the economic implications of this decision.”

Many observers cite the growing opposition to Prime Minister Silayev’s reforms as the primary reason Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky survived a vote to kick-start impeachment hearings shortly after the reforms were implemented. Reformists had made no secret of their desire to oust the Russian president, but growing tension with the conservative bloc ensured that the vote would fail to capture the necessary majority in the election. Prior to the impeachment vote dozens of representative’s walked out of the Duma in protest of the previous vote.


Serbian Power struggle in breakaway Croatian Republic of Krajina intensifies

By Jeff Coleman
Detroit Free Press
May 29, 1992

Ousted Republic of Krajina President Goran Hadžić being led away by troops loyal to the former President Milan Babić after Babić seized power in a coup

KNIN, CROATIA- In a stunning turn of events, President Goran Hadžić of the breakaway Serbian Republic of the Krajina, was deposed today by the man he overthrew just three months ago. In a lightning raid, troops loyal to former President Milan Babić stormed the Parliament building of the breakaway Republic inside of Croatia and arrested President Hadžić, claiming his failed economic policies have weakened the republic. The move stunned international observers, many of which felt that Babić was so badly weakened after his ousting in February as to render any potential political comeback impossible. The move also created shockwaves in Belgrade, with Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic condemning the move.

“Mr. Babić has weakened the government of the Republic of the Serbian Krajina and as a result has strengthened the position of the Croat military,” Milosevic said in a press release, “we call on Mr. Babić to restore President Hadžić lest he create a scenario in which the Republic of Krajina becomes isolated from Yugoslavia.”

Mr. Hadžić was seen as a close ally to Milosevic, and many international observers felt that Mr. Babić had been ousted in February under orders of Mr. Milosevic in an attempt to replace him with a leader who was deemed more in line with Belgrade. Many Serbs noted the icy relationship between Mr. Milosevic and Mr. Babić as the primary reason he was driven from office. However, early indications are that Mr. Babić has developed a valuable ally in Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky. Just ten days ago Babić had renamed the Serb Democratic Party, which he headed, to the Serb Liberal Democratic Party. Many saw it as an attempt to strengthen ties with the primary political party in Russia, which was headed by Mr. Zhirinovsky. Early reports also indicate that Mr. Babić may have had the assistance of at least 100 Russian volunteers during the coup.

Milan Babić, shortly after seizing power in the Serbian Breakaway regions of Croatia (AP)


Russian’s protest economy, Estonia as ruble plummets in value

By Tim Welch
June 15, 1992
U.S. News and World Report

Protesters in St. Petersburg clash with Russian police


(ST. PETERSBURG) For the third straight day, Russians citizens poured into Palace Square, in central St. Petersburg, protesting the rapidly collapsing Russian economy and the rapid disintegration of the UDR as both Belarus and Ukraine have threatened to secede from the Union. They also protested what they see as the failure of the federal government to protect ethnic Russians in Estonia and Latvia, where violent protests have spiraled out of control into a full-fledged civil war.

“They are forcing these changes on us, and yet they refuse to stop the anarchy spreading all over the country.” commented one protester who wished to remain nameless, “Thousands of our countrymen have been killed in Tallinn and all of our life’s savings have been wiped out! And we are supposed to do nothing about this?!”

The economic reforms in Russia have come at what is perceived as the worst possible time for the reformist minded Prime Minister, Ivan Silayev. With Estonia and Latvia descending into civil war, coupled with western threats of sanctions and NATO expansion into Poland, both Silayev and his federal counterpart, Yuri Luzhkov, have come under increased attack.

“I don’t understand why they changed the Zhirinovsky plan,” said one protester angrily, “a moderate and gradual application of reforms and a firm hand dealing with these other Republics. But now they’ve tried to oust him and the end result is this…anarchy and economic ruin!”

Many critics of the protesters have expressed doubts over Russian President Zhirinovsky’s claim that he did not instigate the protests. They have noted that many of the protesters have demanded Mr. Zhirinovsky be exonerated and that his ‘veto’ right be reinstated. However, others have ridiculed the accusation.

“I for one could not care less about President Zhirinovsky,” said one protester, “but they claim he wrote that ridiculous Prussiagate letter as an excuse for ousting him, and suddenly they are trying to implement all these changes that he was against? Clearly it was a coup. If it wasn’t, why haven’t the Germans lifted their demands for sanctions?”


CNN interview with Jack Matlock, former ambassador to the USSR

August 18, 2000


CNN: Did the Americans and Germans drop the ball after the Prussiagate scandal?

Matlock: I don’t know. In hindsight perhaps we did. For the Germans the key was to impeach Zhirinovsky, which the Russians didn’t do. Once that vote failed, German Chancellor Kohl’s angry ultimatum made it impossible for the Russians to remove Zhirinovsky without losing face.

CNN: The infamous Zhirinovsky ultimatum-

Matlock: Correct. After Zhirinovsky survived the first impeachment vote, we felt confident that he would subsequently be impeached in the following session of the Russian Duma. He really survived because most of the conservatives walked out of the session over the reforms that had been passed, not because he was particularly popular. But after Kohl issued his ultimatum, that Germany would not lift sanctions until the Russians impeached Vladimir Zhirinovsky, well, there was no chance of impeachment happening after that. It would look like the Russians were bowing down to the Germans, and there was no way the Russians were going to let themselves be pushed around by Helmut Kohl.

CNN: What about the American response.

Matlock: Bush felt personally betrayed by Zhirinovsky, so he backed Kohl’s ultimatum. Unfortunately, that backfired. For one thing, American sanctions were very limited, and with Halliburton just signing a large contract over the construction of the novo gorods, they were able to put enough pressure on Congress to exclude them from the sanctions. So what ended up happening is that the only organizations covered in the sanctions were those directly associated with the now reformist government, while the Zhirinovsky bloc still was getting American money funneled into their Greater Russia plans.

CNN: Why were companies like Halliburton so eager to build the novo gorods in Kazakhstan?

Matlock: One word: oil.


“My Russia- An Autobiography by former Russian Prime Minister Gennady Burbulis”


Published by Interbook, © 1998


CHAPTER THIRTY FIVE

We were all very worried. The war in Estonia and Latvia had made a turn for the worse and our attempted overtures of peace were falling on deaf ears. The Estonians were routing the Russian militias and killing every Russian they could lay their hands on, and they were not interested in stopping. Not after the incident at the Estonian Parliament. But we couldn’t believe the response from the West! We had implemented true reforms, viable moves towards a free market, and yet they belittled us like a bunch of dogs! They would not lift sanctions, which turned the reforms into a disaster. Overnight the ruble had lost 33% of its value, and hyperinflation was ramped. Of course the Russian Central Bank was in the pocket of Viktor Alksnis, and they responded like a bunch of buffoons. We knew that inflation would hit, but their response as soon as the ruble lost its value and sanctions were announced was to print out more money! They made the problem worse and then blamed us! But without the support we were expecting from the West, we knew that the reforms were doomed. When Germany announced the very same day we implemented the reforms that they were pushing for immediate NATO membership for Poland, it robbed us of all of the momentum we had going into the reform. Suddenly people on the streets were wondering why their savings had been wiped out and why the Russian ruble was now worthless and why Germany and the Americans were suddenly kicking us while we were down. And when the Germans issued that Zhirinovsky ultimatum, it was beyond insulting. Zhirinovsky was on the streets immediately afterwards, comparing it to Austrian demands made of Serbia right before the First World War, telling everyone that NATO was planning an invasion of the UDR!

Of course Vladimir Zhirinovsky was feeding off all the discontent. Telling everyone that the Prussiagate memo was a forgery, used to remove him from power because he was the only one willing to stand up to the Germans and Americans. He was telling everyone that, although he wasn’t against the reforms, he was against them being implemented so rapidly. He pointed to how the novo gorods under his reform plan were thriving, while ours had destroyed the Russian economy overnight. Sadly, we realized that, once again, Vladimir Zhirinovsky had dodged another bullet only to emerge stronger than before. Like a disease that is fought with too few antibiotics, he survived to emerge stronger, and deadlier, than before.

 

[Pellegrino]

PART TWENTY FIVE: THE TRIAL OF VLADIMIR ZHIRINOVSKY

PART TWENTY FIVE: THE TRIAL OF VLADIMIR ZHIRINOVKY

Well we now are at the point where Vladimir Zhirinovsky getsa rid of those pesky liberals and takes over, and the last few days of the UDR. Naturally, Germany and NATO have a big part to do with the ill-will in Moscow and Vlad has no problem capitalizing on it. Strategos' Risk had raised a good question about the Pussy Riot Trial, and although I don't have an angle on that right now, it did get me to thinking about a trial in general. So we have The Trial of Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky, charged with throwing horse shit at the US Embassy...

Also bonus points for anyone who gets Matlock's UIS as a three headed eagle reference. That will tell us a lot about where we are going in the next post as well.

Also, as a note, I know that the Pravda issue still has Lenin on the cover and the text (in Russian) is talking about something else. If there are any Photoshop wizards who can clean that up, I will owe you lunch, LOL. Otherwise, please don't let it be a distraction. It is hard to find images of Pravda that can work for what I needed it for...



CNN interview with Jack Matlock, former ambassador to the USSR

August 18, 2000


CNN: What caused the death of the UDR in July of 1992?

Matlock: The easy answer is Vladimir Zhirinovsky. But there really was a lot more to it. With the liberal push in both Russia and the UDR after the Prussiagate scandal, the result was turmoil in the UDR. This coupled with the growing problem of crime and lawlessness created a bizarre dichotomy. On one end you had the Ukrainians and Belarusians who were furious at the sudden 1000% inflation rate, and the lack of say in these economic reforms that they were forced to bear the brunt of when they didn’t sign on for it. But on the other side of the coin you had Russians who felt badly insulted, and quite frankly somewhat wounded, at the sudden loss of prestige of their country. The Zhirinovsky ultimatum was like a slap in the face, not because Zhirinovsky was popular, but because the Germans now could demand that the Russians choose leaders of their liking. Just five years ago if the Soviet Premier was mad at his East German counterpart, Erich Honecker, he could make one phone call and the East German leader would be gone. Suddenly Russians felt like the Germans were now talking down to the Russians, as if they won the Great Patriotic War. Everybody was up in arms, and Zhirinovsky was there to offer his services and save the day.

CNN: So was the outpouring of support for Zhirinovsky after his trial legitimate then?

Matlock: To be honest, yes and no. Yes because he was the only politician who was standing up to the West in the eyes of many Russians, which earned him admiration. But this was more about opposition to the deteriorating conditions in Russia.

CNN: How did he so successfully turn his public affray trial into the catalyst for total control and the establishment of the UIS?

Matlock: Well, Belarus and the Ukraine were threatening to leave; the only thing that kept them in the Union was the vivid recollection of what happened to Azerbaijan when they tried to unilaterally leave the UDR. So for them the UIS treaty they signed with Zhirinovsky seemed like a viable alternative. Although they would still share a common currency, they were assured that these reforms would not be shoved down their throats against their will, and if the problems with the economy persisted, they could leave the economic zone and form their own independent currency…as long as they didn’t leave the UIS. And for Russians, it seemed like a viable alternative since the UDR seemed to be a broken system. Obviously the Germans were not taking the UDR seriously, why should they? And then when Zhirinovsky turned the West on its head after NATO expansion into Poland and Hungary, well that sealed the deal for most Russians. The UDR was seen as a joke to the West, which angered Russians. But this new UIS was different. It was this feared beast, this great three headed eagle that was ready to swoop down and kill the snake of NATO expansion.


EXPANDING ALLIANCE: Former Communist rivals Poland and Hungary join NATO

NEW YORK TIMES
By JIM ZIMMERMAN
July 04, 1992



In a move that UDR spokesperson Vitali Sudakov called a “blatant provocation”, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization today admitted two former rivals - Hungary and Poland – to the rapidly expanding organization as former communist nations in Eastern Europe turn to the West, citing fears of the growing extremism and lawlessness in the UDR. The admission, which came on America’s Independence Day, angered many Russians and protesters in Moscow targeted the United States Embassy before riot police were able to drive them away. In a shocking move, Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky was arrested at the American Embassy by Moscow police when he tried to crawl over the gate and throw animal excrement at the building. He was charged with public affray before being booked and released on his own recognizance. Although the actions of the Russian President earned scorn from the international community, it has proved widely popular in Russia, with many Russian citizens openly calling on the removal of the liberal Prime Minister Ivan Silayev and a restoration of those presidential powers that had been stripped from Zhirinovsky just two months ago.


Poland and Hungary had expressed fears over the bizarre rhetoric of Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky, as well as concerns over the democratic credentials of UDR President Viktor Alksnis. Although both Italy and France had expressed deep reservations over the admission of Poland into NATO, their concerns were alleviated by the steadfast resolve of Germany, Great Britain, and the United States. German Chancellor Helmut Kohl called the admission of Poland into NATO “a moral necessity”, and offered a firm promise to the Polish people that Germany will “never again be on the wrong side of history when it comes to their nation.”

Photo taken by David Rocker, U.S. Embassy staff in Moscow, of Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky attempting to climb over the fence of the U.S. Embassy and throw horse manure at the building.

Op-Ed Contributor

World continues to ignore the fact that Russia is following the same path as Nazi Germany

The Omaha World-Herald
By Jeff Sullivan
Published: July 14, 1992


When Adolf Hitler stood trial in February of 1924, charged with high treason for his role in the failed “Beer Hall Putsch”, much of the world ignored it. After all, Germany was in the midst of an economic free fall, its military had been stripped down to the bare minimum, and it was still reeling from its defeat just six years prior in World War I. There were more pressing matters going on. The 20’s were roaring. President Calvin Coolidge became the first president to address the nation on the radio. Movie star Corinne Griffith got married again, her sixth time. And, after just three weeks in theaters, Batman Returns earned a whopping $125 million dollars.

Except Batman Returns was released just last month and not in February of 1924. The reason I throw that in there is because something very similar to the trial of Adolf Hitler is going on right now in Moscow, and the West seems oblivious to it. Just yesterday in Moscow, Vladimir Zhirinovsky was found guilty of public affray by a local magistrate after he threw horse droppings at the United States Embassy. His one day trial captivated the country, and all but assured that any moderate politician seeking to stand up to the radical (and quite possibly insane) Russian President would think twice. At least twenty thousand Muscovites stood outside the courthouse in support of the Russian President, and millions more watched on television.

At first he smirked and told the magistrate that he saw a hole in the Embassy building, and simply sought to do his civic duty by repairing it with the same material it obviously was made from. Then he countered that in actuality he saw the horse droppings come flying out of American Ambassador Robert Strauss mouth when he told the press that the recent NATO expansion in Poland should not be seen as American expansionism, and he simply was trying to give it back to Mr. Strauss lest he be cited for littering in Moscow. Then he screamed at the Court that the only reason he threw horse droppings was because he didn’t have a grenade.

It should have led to his impeachment, and commitment to an insane asylum. But it didn’t. It made him a hero. Perhaps you missed the result of the trial and the verdict. I can’t blame you if it did. Here in Omaha it didn’t make the news. KETV had a very important story last night on the news about a woman who loves the color purple so much that she only wears purple dresses and named her cat Purr-ple. That bit of pressing news took four minutes. Also, there was the news tidbit about a local actor named David Yost who just was hired to play the role of “Blue Ranger” on an upcoming show called Mighty Morphin Power Rangers. That took five minutes. Clearly there was too much was going on locally to cover this trial that has captivated Russia. But considering Peter Jennings with ABC World News only spent twenty-eight seconds talking about it on last night’s telecast (that’s right, twenty-eight seconds), you could be forgiven if you thought it was no big deal. But you’d be wrong.

Vladimir Zhirinovsky was found guilty and sentenced to life. Yes, life. The judge sentenced him to “a lifetime of community service, defending the Russian people from western imperialism” as the crowd in attendance erupted in cheers. He then stood up, opened his wallet, and asked Zhirinovsky if he would honor him by allowing him to pay his fine. Had it ended there it would have been reason enough to be disgusted. But he then walked over to Zhirinovsky and saluted him before handing him more money and telling him that if he ever did find that grenade that he wanted to pay that fine as well.

Clearly Russia is going down a dark and dangerous path. Vladimir Zhirinovsky is fast emerging as not only the most popular politician in the country, but the most powerful man as well. He still is Russia’s President, and although his powers have been badly limited, he is wasting no time castrating the liberals who tried to oust him. If something doesn’t change soon, if the world doesn’t intervene soon, he will succeed. He will take over the country, and then turn his attention to the West. Let’s just hope that it this situation history doesn’t repeat itself. Let’s hope that it doesn’t take an invasion of Poland for the rest of the world to finally take notice of this madman.

July 13th edition of Pravda with Vladimir Zhirinovsky on the cover

____________________________________________________________________________

Photo from the July 13th edition of Pravda of Zhirinovsky leaving the magistrate Court in Moscow under the headline: GUILTY OF PATRIOTISM!


“My Russia- An Autobiography by former Russian Prime Minister Gennady Burbulis”


Published by Interbook, © 1998


CHAPTER THIRTY SIX

After the verdict of Vladimir Zhirinovsky I called an emergency session of the cabinet in an attempt to figure out what we were going to do. Zhirinovsky was rallying support and undermining us every step of the way. With over one hundred thousand Muscovites in the streets of Moscow all chanting his name, we were admittedly terrified. Would there be a coup tonight? Would we be shot? Where was Lebed and his army? Was there not martial law?! We were sitting ducks, waiting for this rabble to seize us. As I walked over to the Parliament from my Dacha, I heard chants of “Death to Silayev!” from protesters. I knew that the situation had spiraled out of control. We had created a monster in Vladimir Zhirinovsky. General Varennikov was correct. We were nursing a wolf cub in our home. And now he was an adult, living in our home and feeding on our children.

As I walked into the cabinet office I was grabbed by cabinet member Aleksandr Korzhakov, who also was Yeltsin’s former bodyguard. “Where is Silayev?!” he asked in a near panic. I looked over his shoulder and nearly collapsed in my chair. Nobody was there! We were the only two who made it! Had they been seized? Were they killed?

“I…I don’t know,” I said in a near whisper, “where is everyone else?”

They all abandoned us!” he said firmly, “Sergei Filatov and Victor Ivanenko have gone over to General Lebed and General Dubynin and pledged fealty to them. They are on television saying that Silayev’s disastrous reforms have led to the military not receiving paychecks for the last three weeks! Vice President Zavidiya is on the news marching next to Zhirinovsky screaming “Death to Silayev!” and the rest, well, your guess is as good as mine!”

I was speechless. I didn’t know how to proceed. I knew that Ivanenko and Filatov were angry with both Silayev and Alksnis. Silayev’s reforms had badly damaged the military, with soldiers suddenly making only a quarter of what they had been earning just a few months ago. And Alksnis made no friends with Marshal Lebed and General Dubynin when he slashed the federal military budget by 25% due to severe budget shortages. But we assumed that they would be here despite their anger. That they would rally the military and prevent another riot like we saw after Yeltsin was shot. With just two of us what could we possibly accomplish?


Suddenly the phone rang. Korzhakov nearly jumped over the table to answer it.

“Hello?” he said nervously before breathing a sigh of relief, “Prime Minister, we were worried…”

I also let out a sigh of relief. With Prime Minister Silayev alive we could decide how to ride out this storm. But my relief was short lived when Korzhakov began to panic almost immediately.

“What do you mean?!” he screamed into the phone. “Wait! Don’t do this!”

Even I could hear the click on the other end of the line. The Prime Minister had hung up on him. Korzhakov sunk into his chair and said nothing. He looked utterly defeated, although in his defense, I suppose I looked the same way as well. I could hear the protesters outside approaching the Parliament building, and I had no doubt that they were following Zhirinovsky. I knew that within a few minutes they would be here, and we would be faced with a mob that would either kill us or, if we were lucky, arrest us. I sank in a chair as well.

“Well,” I said softly, “Where is he?”

“He is at the German embassy,” Korzhakov said, “he just defected.”

 

[Pellegrino]

PART TWENTY SIX: A TRUE RUSSIAN

PART TWENTY SIX: A TRUE RUSSIAN


Russian protesters storm parliament building, Government collapses!

By James Maxwell
Reuters
July 16, 1992

UDR President Viktor Alksnis as he declared a state of emergency in the UDR

UDR President Viktor Alksnis declared a state of emergency today after opposition protesters, proclaiming a "white revolution," stormed the Russian Parliament forcing the Russian Prime Minister to flee to the German embassy and seek asylum. However, Alksnis’ orders appear to be falling on deaf ears with the UDR military, where soldiers appear to have gone on strike over the federal government’s inability to pay them.

In scenes almost identical to the "people power" protests in Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Eastern Europe just three years ago, over one hundred thousand Russians took to the streets last week to support the Russian President after he was arrested for throwing horse feces at the American embassy in Washington. The brief trial captivated the country and after the verdict was handed down thousands of protesters stormed various government buildings, including two of the offices of the UDR state media: VGTRK and Yunov. However, it appears that for many Russians, the protests are aimed not at bringing democracy to the former Soviet Union, but rather ending it.

“We were told for decades on Voice of America that the United States would help us if we ever chose to embrace capitalism,” yelled protester Vladimir Peretyatko, “well we did, and what did we get? Sanctions and economic ruin! We extended our hand in friendship to them and they spit on us!”

It is a sentiment shared by tens of thousands of Russians, who are not seeking more freedom, but an end to the economic policies that have wiped out almost every Russians’ life savings and made even the most basic items prohibitively expensive.

“I make just over 10,000 rubles a week at a factory,” Peretyatko added, “and right now a bag of flour cost 350,000 rubles! They never adjusted our salaries for these changes they forced down our throats! Of course, if you worked in the Duma, they remembered you then. I noticed Silayev voted to raise his pay twice after he implemented these so called reforms!”

Over ten thousand Russians demanding Prime Minister Ivan Silayev resignation took to the streets of the capital Moscow while troops under the command of UDR Marshal Alexander Lebed stood aside.

As the UDR plunged deeper into crisis, early indications are that UDR president Alksnis’ orders are being ignored as more and more members of the now crumbling federal government have abandoned their post. Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky, who has captured the support of many of the protesters, has promised that “the short, horrible era of Russian groveling has come to an end” and indicated that the Russian government will no longer be honoring their obligations to the UDR federal infrastructure, although he has come short of calling for a complete dissolution of the union that holds Russia and the former republic’s of the USSR together.

“We will still honor all of our obligations in regards to the UIS treaty we signed with Armenia, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Georgia,” he told supporters, “we will still be a unified country and we will still extend membership into the UIS to other former Soviet republics that have not been permitted to vote on the issue such as Uzbekistan and Latvia. But we will no longer work with the UDR if they are unwilling to defend Russians from not only Germany, America, and Estonian fascist thugs, but from something as simple as inflation and corruption.”

Protesters in Moscow on July 16th, 1992 (AP)

“My Russia- An Autobiography by former Russian Prime Minister Gennady Burbulis”


Published by Interbook, © 1998


CHAPTER THIRTY SIX

I stood up when I heard the protesters break into the Duma. I was not going to let them see me defeated and weak. Aleksandr Korzhakov had cursed himself for not bringing his gun; he wanted to end it there. But secretly I was glad he didn’t. I wasn’t going to go out like Boris Pugo. I was going to look Zhirinovsky in the face and let him know I wasn’t afraid of him. I was going to show him that I still remember him as the weak, little man who was afraid to come to the White House last year during the coup. Just because he had hundreds of men with him didn’t change the fact that he was a coward! I almost relished it, because even if they tore me apart right then and their, deep down, Vladimir Zhirinovsky would know that I faced death like a man. All his nationalistic talk couldn’t change one simple fact. That deep down, in his soul, he knew I would always be more of a Russian, and more of a man, than he would ever be.

The door was kicked open and knocked off its hinges. Now there was no question. We were dead. We had left the door unlocked, and the fact that this crazed group of thugs couldn’t be bothered to check the door before kicking it in told us that all reason had abandoned them. I said a silent prayer and prepared to face the man who single-handedly destroyed Russia. I only hoped they would not beat me first, that perhaps he would walk in and they would shoot us quickly and not feel the need to drag us through the streets and hang us from Kymsky Bridge like Mussolini. However, once they saw us, the crowd froze.

“Comrade President,” a young man with a rope in front yelled, “I found them! They are here, hiding like dogs!”

“I am not hiding,” I spat back at the young man, “you can only hope that you face death with as much courage and resolve when you die!”

Zhirinovsky walked into the room and slowly pushed a chair away from the door. He looked around and glared at me.

“Where is Silayev?” he asked angrily, “where is the traitor Silayev?!”

Though I hated Zhirinovsky, I was not going to dignify Silayev’s cowardice with any feeble attempt to defend his acts.

“He fled.” I said, “He ran off and defected to the German embassy.”

“Why didn’t you join him?”

“Because I am not a coward,” I said, “I am willing to stay and die for my country if that is what it takes.”

My words must have given Korzhakov some resolve. He stood up and looked right in Zhirinovsky’s eyes and said: “As will I. I would rather die a Russian patriot, standing here for my country than to run from a man like you.”

I saw a young man in front open his jacket and pull out a small handgun. Where was Lebed? How could he let a few thousand fascists take over the Duma? Where was his martial law when we needed it? Although I knew this was preferable to being dragged and beaten in the streets, I still felt my knees buckle. But I would not give them the satisfaction of knowing I was scared.

“What are you doing?” Zhirinovsky yelled at the young man with the gun, “put that thing away!”

The young man sheepishly put the gun back in his pocket and cowered before Zhirinovsky like a dog that had just been scolded. I was devastated. He was going to make a spectacle of this. He was going to hang us from the Kymsky Bridge.

Zhirinovsky then did something that still shocks me to this day. He grabbed me and hugged me as hard as he could and lifted me into the air and laughed.

“Comrade Burbulis has shown us what a true Russian is!” Zhirinovsky said as he turned and faced the crowd, “he has shown us that a Russian, a true Russian, will look death in the eye without flinching and die for his country! We could all learn something from this great patriot! With a men like this fighting for our country, I know the Turks and Germans don’t stand a chance!”

I looked over at Korzhakov whose jaw was open as the crowd all took turns grabbing his hand and patting him on the back. He looked over at me as if he was not sure if it was some sort of strange dream.

“Comrades!” Zhirinovsky said as he climbed onto the table to face the crowd, “With the help of great, great patriots like Comrade Korzhakov and Comrade Burbulis we have succeeded in taking back out country from the German spy Ivan Silayev! Now is your hour! And I promise you this! By this time tomorrow, those traitors who stole your money will no longer be able to steal from you again! By tomorrow night they will all be spending eternity with the German spies and American imperialist at the bottom of the Moskva River!”

Rioters storm the Russian Duma

UIS Presidential Candidate Vladimir Putin in an interview with the BBC on August 1, 2011.

Discussing his decision to join the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia in July of 1992.



Putin: Like many former KGB agents, I found that my failure to rally behind Viktor Ivanenko during the failed coup had hurt me. I had no job, no income. So when General Dubynin called me and asked me to take over the Russian KGB from Director Ivanenko, who was being promoted, I gladly accepted. General Dubynin recognized that, as radical changes swept through the country, people stopped really paying mind to who supported the communists the previous year. That was yesterday’s news. What was important today was who could be counted on to end the lawlessness that was threatening to destroy the country. He saw how Marshal Lebed was unwilling to send troops to stop Zhirinovsky’s fascist thugs from seizing the Duma. All Marshal Lebed had to do was send one hundred soldiers to the Duma to protect it from Zhirinovsky, but he refused. General Dubynin and I saw what was going on: Lebed wasn’t done with Vladimir Zhirinovsky, not yet. But we were not going to let twenty thousand fascists destroy our country. There were better ways to get rid of Ivan Silayev.

BBC: But then why join joined the Liberal Democratic Party and pledged an oath to support President Zhirinovsky?

Putin: You need to understand, once he had General Dubynin arrested, I had to take steps to protect myself. I couldn’t do anything if I were sitting in a jail cell like General Dubynin. After Vladimir Zhirinovsky seized control of the Russian government from Ivan Silayev, everything changed. The night after the mob seized the Russian Parliament over 100 Muscovites were killed. Mostly members of the opposition Party for a Free and Democratic Russia and independents like Silayev. Many of those who were joining the LDP didn’t really agree with its policies, they did so out of fear or for a desire for power. Five hundred former communists who switched parties formed the Communist Wing of the LDP in August of 1992! How could you have a Communist Wing of the LDP? The party didn’t care if you were a communist or a fascist or even a monkey! As long as you paid fealty to Zhirinovsky, and didn’t question the party’s nationalistic rhetoric and strong armed tactics, that was all that mattered. You could be a communist and rant and rave about Lenin and central planning, but as long as you finished the sentence with “thankfully we have a man like Zhirinovsky who is standing up to the West like Lenin did,” then they didn’t mind. The biggest problem was if you said you wanted freedom and democracy. That could get you arrested.

BBC: Many people openly question your criticism of these policies considering the fact that you, as head of the KGB, ordered many of these actions. Amnesty International called you the “architect of the official State policy of mass disappearances and mass shootings” that you claim now to be appalled by.

Putin: (Long Pause): Until you live in a country ruled by a man like Vladimir Zhirinovsky, you can never truly appreciate how difficult it is to speak up against crimes like these.


CNN interview with Jack Matlock, former ambassador to the USSR

August 18, 2000


CNN: Why did Zhirinovsky recruit men like Aleksandr Korzhakov and Gennady Burbulis, both former liberals, as well as a former KGB agent like Vladimir Putin?

Matlock: It is hard to say; probably the biggest reason was because there was still a chance of civil war between the liberals and hardliners. His success in seizing the Duma had less to do with the number of his supporters than it did with the fact that the military and the police were on strike. And also keep in mind that, thanks to Zhirinovsky’s disastrous plan of flooding Russia with AK-47s, many supporters of Mikhail Arutyunov had guns and lots of them. They all saw this day coming since the failed coup, and had armed to the teeth as a result. So by recruiting liberals into the new government it was enough to fool the liberals and the Arutyunov supporters into believing that this would look a lot like the previous government that it replaced: with an even balance between liberals and hardliners working together to slowly implement change, but not embrace radical change like the unpopular “shock therapy” of the Silayev government. And for the conservatives like Putin, well, Zhirinovsky discovered that former Gorbachev loyalist Anatoly Lukyanov still remained one of his strongest supporters after his infamous “I am not Stalin speech”. Zhirinovsky was very clever that way; he would give those people who had nothing a second chance and they tended to be the most loyal supporters.

CNN: So why was Zhirinovsky so determined to kill off the UDR and get rid of Viktor Alksnis? Didn’t that run contrary to his dream of a greater Russia?

Matlock: Yes, but NATO expansion became so frightening to him that he was willing to gamble with the country to stop it and counter it. He knew that the UDR couldn’t just annex countries into it, but a looser confederation, or at least a looser confederation on paper, could claim that they were simply a Slavic version of NATO and do so. But Alksnis still refused to believe that he was not leader of the country. He was unwilling until the very end to surrender power, and until that mob got to him he remained defiant that the UDR was the true successor state to the USSR, and not the UIS.


German Chancellor Reiterates calls for Zhirinovsky’s resignation; calls UDR President a “nobody”

The Scotsman
July 22, 1992



The German Chancellor Helmut Kohl spoke to reporters in Berlin today, and reiterated his position that Vladimir Zhirinovsky was a “dangerous despot” and also reiterated the official German and British position that sanctions would not be lifted until the Russian president was removed from office.

“Claims by the Russian government that the Zhirinovsky threat has been neutralized clearly have been proven incorrect,” commented Chancellor Kohl at a press conference, “he has shown time and time again that he has no regard not only for international law, but for Russian law as well.”

The Chancellor also indicated that the German government will no longer recognize the UDR confederation, calling it “a political fiction that no longer serves any purpose or exercises any real power inside the borders of the former Soviet Union.”

Kohl told reporters that Germany would also take steps to recognize the independence of all of the former Soviet Republics. He indicated that this would also include Belarus, and Ukraine, two republics that, as of yet, had not taken any steps towards independence. He also referred to UDR President Viktor Alksnis as “a nobody” and indicated that the Germans would no longer recognize that he held any authority in the country.

“After watching Russian troops stand by and watch as Viktor Alksnis was dragged from his home and beaten up by an angry mob, it is clear that he does not control the country,” Kohl told reporters, “the fact that Mr. Alksnis was only able to save his life by pledging fealty to Vladimir Zhirinovsky proves what the German government has been saying all along: that it is Zhirinovsky who really controls the country.”

The Russian embassy in Berlin fired back an angry response to the threats of formal recognition of Belarus and Ukraine, indicating that the UIS now recognized the independence of Bavaria, Saxony, and Adenauerallee Street in downtown Bonn.



CNN interview with James Baker, former Secretary of State under President George H.W. Bush

July 13, 1997


CNN: Why did President Bush follow Chancellor Kohl’s’ lead in formally ending recognition of the UDR in July of 1992? Didn’t that just help Zhirinovsky continue his consolidation of power?

Baker: I don’t think so. By July 20th it was clear that Viktor Alksnis had no power and the UDR was finished. When he was dragged from his home by that mob, it was over for him. His screams that he was a loyal LDP member sounded almost comical, and when he pleaded his undying support for Vladimir Zhirinovsky as the mob kicked him and spat on him, there was no way he would ever emerge as a viable opponent to Vladimir Zhirinovsky.

CNN: But didn’t the threat to preemptively recognize the independence of Belarus and Ukraine also threaten to alienate moderate Russians who might have emerged?

Baker: Yes, but we hoped that it would motivate the Ukrainians and Belarusians to take the initiative and break free from Moscow. We wanted them, and all the republics, to know we would support them.

CNN: But why would they believe you when the Americans had already broken their promise of support in regards to the free-market reforms of the Silayev government?

Baker: In hindsight we didn’t appreciate the fear that Azerbaijan and the Zhirinovsky takeover in Moscow had created all across the former Soviet Union. Nobody would dare stand up to Zhirinovsky after that.

CNN: So that is how Zhirinovsky became a full fledged dictator?

Baker: Yes...but...the interesting thing is in hind sight we missed some very unusual clues. You know, nobody ever harassed General Ivanenko or General Lebed. And it was Lebed troops who were supposed to be protecting Alksnis. They were the ones who let the mob seize him. And even after Zhirinovsky seized power, the generals and the military always seemed…I don’t know…immune.

 

[Pellegrino]

PART TWENTY SEVEN: THE TULA ACCORDS




Going out with a whimper: 20 years after the fall of the UDR

July 29, 2012

By Timothy Welch
Foreign Affairs


For most of us who had just witnessed the Russian version of Kristallnacht over the course of four days in mid-July, the end actually was somewhat uneventful. An emergency session of the Soviet Parliament called by Chairman of the Soviet Parliament, Anatoly Lukyanov, ended in thirty minutes. There was no shouting, no screams, and no violence. It almost resembled a classroom during a final exam, with whispers and the constant sound of paper shuffling. And in that subdued environment the UDR Parliament voted nearly unanimously to recognize the validity of the UIS treaty before voting to dissolve the Union. The only issue of contention would be whether to keep the tri-colored flag of the UDR, with some representatives from Georgia indicating a preference of abandoning the UDR flag for a new UIS flag. Immediately following the vote UDR President Viktor Alksnis pleaded with lawmakers to give the UDR “one more chance,” but his pleas fell on deaf ears. Covered in bandages and still bruised from a beating he received from a mob the week before, few took him seriously anymore. And with Latvia in the midst of a violent civil war that would kill thousands of Russians and Latvians, Mr. Alksnis’ Latvian ethnicity no longer was a benefit to him. UDR Prime Minister Yuri Luzhkov didn’t even show up, remaining in hiding while negotiating a return to his position with other liberals who survived being purged such as Russian Secretary of State and newly appointed Russian Prime Minister Gennady Burbulis. The liberal Chairman of the Supreme Soviet of the Union, Arkadi Volsky, resigned after the military refused to rein in the violence. Dozens of other liberal lawmakers had fled the country and followed the lead of Russian Prime Minister Ivan Silayev and taken refuge in western embassies all over Moscow. Oddly enough, the conservatives didn’t fair much better during the riots. Alksnis was the most obvious example. Conservative UDR Vice President Vladimir Ivashko, a former Gorbachev ally whose loyalties came into question during the 1991 failed coup, was killed in his dacha when a mob broke in and shot him in front of his family. Russian troops stood by and watched. The big winner appeared to be Chairman of the Soviet Parliament Anatoly Lukyanov, who was named acting President of the new UIS. However, any questions as to who really was in control were quickly quashed when he proclaimed loyalty to the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia and that he would make no decisions without approval from the “Party”.

In hindsight perhaps the end of the UDR was inevitable. It was a patchwork union put together to hold together the pieces of the USSR, while giving it a democratic feel. But it never was a truly democratic Union, like some revisionists want to believe. It never held an election and its president was an unapologetic communist who was seeking to emerge as a dictator. It is odd that the west looks at the UDR longingly, like the provisional Russian Republic of 1917. Bemoaning its end and wondering what the world would look like if it could only survive. It says more about the UIS today than the UDR twenty years ago that the world actually thinks it would be better off if it had survived.


Excerpts from the book: “The Short Life and Violent Death of the UDR”


By Sampson Weiss.
Published by University of California Press, © 2005.


CHAPTER XIII

With the disillusion of the UDR, Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky was determined not to let the end of the union lead to international recognition of the independence of any of the other Republics. He preemptively called the presidents of Ukraine, Georgia, Byelorussia, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, as well as the military governor of the occupied Republic of Azerbaijan and three delegates from the government of Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Tajikistan in exile to the city of Tula. There they toured Yasnaya Polyana, the former home and country estate of Leo Tolstoy, while the federal government voted itself out of existence and voted the UIS into power. The environment in Tula was in stark contrast to Moscow, with little rioting and almost no deaths in the previous weeks. As soon as the call came in that the UDR was “no more,” Zhirinovsky immediately summoned his fellow presidents to the courtyard, where the press had been assembled. Awaiting them was a table with documents that would make up the “Tula Accords”. In it, each President agreed in principle that, although each Republic was autonomous, that all matters of foreign policy would be determined only by the federal government and that none of the signatories would seek formal independence or membership in the United Nations.

“It really was an ambush,” commented one Armenian delegate years later, “we had no opportunity to discuss the issue, and we were trapped deep in Zhirinovsky’s Russia. If we didn’t sign we knew we would never make it out of Moscow.”

The leaders, whether intimidated or not, all agreed to the terms of the Tula Accords and signed. However, several leaders believed that the new UIS federal structure would favor their republics.

“Keep in mind that the UIS cut bureaucracy in half.” commented a Ukrainian delegate, “In the USSR and UDR you had a federal government with a Parliament made up of two houses and a Russian Parliament made up of two houses and a Ukrainian Parliament made up of two houses. By the time you got to every republic you were dealing with thousands of politicians and nothing was getting done. But in the UIS you only had the parliament of the republics, and the federal parliament had to be made up of elected officials selected by the presidents from their own parliaments. It cut down on quite a bit of bureaucracy.”

Still, many worried that the system was tailor-made to allow Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky to stack a UIS Federal Duma full of politicians of his choosing. Tragically, those fears proved valid when Vladimir Zhirinovsky selected Liberal Democratic Party loyalists to fill almost all of the seats allotted to the Russian Republic, effectively giving Vladimir Zhirinovsky total control of not only the Russian government but also of the federal government.


CNN interview with James Baker, former Secretary of State under President George H.W. Bush

July 13, 1997


CNN: What did President Bush think about the dissolution of the UDR and the formation of the UIS on July 29, 1992?

Baker: He saw it for what it was: a blatant attempt to usurp power and to turn the former Soviet Union into a dictatorship.

CNN: But on paper wasn’t the UIS more liberal and more democratically oriented than the UDR?

Baker: On paper, yes. But we saw the reality was something else.

CNN: President Bush said in an interview that watching the July riots and the subsequent emergence of the UIS was the most troubling time of his presidency. It has been said that the riots and the subsequent end of any hope for democracy in the UDR actually might have sent him into a deep depression that he never fully shook off during the election. That this depression was to blame for his lethargic debates and the seemingly detached aura he gave off while campaigning.

Baker: I think the President said it best: it was the most troubling time of his presidency.

CNN: Was he depressed?

Baker: I won’t say he was depressed, but it was difficult for him. Especially when we turned on the news and saw Mikhail and Raisa Gorbachev at the American embassy holding two small suitcases and looking like a couple of refugees from World War II. It was shocking. A year ago he was the most important man in the country, now here he was: frightened and disheveled, holding his wife’s hand and trying to comfort her while she slowly sobbed. The thing that really shocked us was when they showed Gorbachev sitting on the floor eating ramen noodles. He didn’t even cook them; he just ate the ramen noodle dry, out of the package. How bad had things gotten in Russia that the former Premier was now sitting on the floor of the American embassy eating an uncooked package of ramen noodles?


MSNBC interview with Robert Strauss, American ambassador to the UDR and UIS

December 10, 2001


MSNBC: Mr. Strauss, thank you so much for joining us here today.

Strauss: Thank you for having me.

MSNBC: You’ve been a vocal critic of President Zhirinovsky over the years, and have recently criticized the policies of a close family friend of yours: President George W. Bush.

Strauss: Yes. I respect President Bush and his father tremendously. But I think his position on the UIS is too lenient.

MSNBC: But some argue that Zhirinovsky has shown that he has turned over a new leaf. He is a valuable ally in the war on terror. And with Pakistan’s refusal to allow the United States the use of its airspace, wasn’t Mr. Zhirinovsky’s offer of the use of military bases in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan a sign that he is eager to now work with the United States? Isn’t it a sign that after a decade of sanctions and international isolation that he wants to change the direction of American-Russian relations?

Strauss: I don’t know what it means, and I don’t know why he allowed American troops to be stationed inside the borders of the UIS. Knowing Vladimir Zhirinovsky it is probably because a little green talking alien that only he can hear told him it was a good idea. And that’s fine and dandy, but sooner or later that little invisible alien is going to tell him to kill a lot of innocent people.

MSNBC: So you are saying that the President should have rejected his offer?

Strauss (long pause): I don’t envy the position President Bush was thrust into. Without Pakistan’s support we had only two options for going into Afghanistan and getting Osama Bin Laden: Iran or the UIS. I am sure that it seems like the lesser of two evils, but I remember those dark days in 1992. I remember when fearful Russians began flooding into our embassy fleeing the Zhirinovsky thugs. I remember hearing the gunshots all night long, and the screams from the street. And I remember the first time I saw those Russian fascists chanting outside our windows. Zhirinovsky may try and spin it today and say that those were Pamyat supporters and not Zhirinovsky supporters. But I was there. I saw what was going on. Make no mistake about it, that man is Hitler. And nothing good can come from doing business with him.

MSNBC: During the ’92 Moscow riots the United States embassy was under virtual siege for twelve days. At anytime did you think that they would overrun the embassy? Were you ever frightened?

Strauss: I was frightened every day. The first few days they would climb the walls and just throw animal feces at us. Then it was human feces. Then they started throwing Molotov cocktails at us. Then they started spraying the side of the embassy with small arms fire. Then they started sniping at us. Two Americans were killed, as well as sixteen Russians who tried to seek asylum at the embassy. Every day I kept wondering if the rioters would overrun us. Every day I would pray that God would spare us. And the whole time I would see Russian military vehicles drive by and ignore us. There was no doubt in my mind: the military and the police were in on it. All over Moscow you had pure lawlessness, and it wasn’t that the military seemed powerless to stop it. They seemed unwilling to stop it.

MSNBC: Did the announcement that the UDR was being dissolved give you any comfort?

Strauss: At first it did. There were over a thousand Russians who had sought asylum crowded in the embassy complex. Many of them were politicians, and the funny thing is they were both liberals and hard line communists. I saw Vasily Starodubtsev, one of the leaders of the failed hard line coup, in the embassy. It was strange, because much of Moscow was just anarchy, but around our embassy and the German embassy, the fascists had actually formed something that resembled an organized presence. You could walk down any street in Moscow and it would just look like looting and lawlessness. But if you stood outside the German embassy or the American embassy, it looked like a Hitler Youth rally.

MSNBC: Why were the communists also fleeing the country?

Strauss: It really didn’t matter what your politics were: everyone in Russia suddenly knew that it wasn’t safe anymore. The Russian people knew what mass insanity was coming their way, they lived through it once before. Stalin killed just as many communists as capitalists. So they started fleeing. My biggest fear was over the fact that we had so many members of the government seeking refuge in the embassy.

 

[Pellegrino]

PART TWENTY EIGHT: THE POLISH EMBASSY CRISIS

I am going to start off by apologizing to Tongera, but as always I like to try and tie in recent news events into this timeline whenever possible, and right now I have a lot in the news that is influencing my direction of this TL. Originally we were going to see what is going on in Yugoslavia in this post, but I felt that this newest development with the embassy protest all over the world would tie in very well with the TL and so I postponed my original plan and added this update. Also, for all of you who were thinking I was a hardcore George Bush-hating Democrat, I threw you a curveball as George Bush gets some love in this TL. He receives a short lived boost with American voters with his response to a Russian mob threatening the American embassy. But like so many things in diplomacy, it is the unintended consequences that always come back to bite you. Tragically, his strong response, though popular in the United States, irritates America’s allies when it is followed by the Polish Embassy Crisis.


UIS Presidential Candidate Vladimir Putin in an interview with the BBC on August 1, 2011.

Discussing his controversial statement that the July Riots were orchestrated by UIS President Alexander Lebed



BBC: You recently made the controversial claim than Vladimir Zhirinovsky did not in fact orchestrate the July riots in Moscow back in 1992, that in fact they were orchestrated by General Alexander Lebed.

Putin: Yes.

BBC: Let me give you this opportunity to address that statement. An opportunity to set the record straight once and for all-

Putin: I stand by my position. All you need to look at is the end result. Why was Gennady Burbulis, a staunch supporter of Ivan Silayev, promoted, and Vladimir Ivashko, a staunch conservative who opposed “shock therapy”, executed? Because it was never about shock therapy! Burbulis supported General Lebed when he declared martial law and Ivashko opposed it! That was why there was no rhyme or reason to those who were targeted. If you challenged Lebed you were arrested or killed, if you didn’t you were left alone. He created a military dictatorship in the UIS and put Vladimir Zhirinovsky at the head of it so that they could have a bad guy to blame all of his war crimes on after he crushed all of the other republics!

BBC: But that statement calls into question everything we know about Vladimir Zhirinovsky. Are you saying that the numerous violent protests at various Western embassies were all organized by the Lebed?

Putin: Yes. Nothing distracts the world from a purge more than a group of nazis screaming “Kill the Jews!” Hundreds of politicians who opposed his promotion to Marshal of the UIS or who called for major cuts to the military were arrested, beaten, or even killed. Thousands more were forced out of the country. And yet the world seemed to ignore this! Why? Because they couldn’t get enough of Lebed’s paid actors acting like fools outside the US embassy. Almost all of the embassy protests were organized by General Lebed.

BBC: Almost all?

Putin: Yes. The incident at the Polish embassy was all Zhirinovsky’s idea.


MSNBC interview with Robert Strauss, American ambassador to the UDR and UIS

December 10, 2001


MSNBC: Mr. Strauss, who ordered the Marines to fire live ammunition into the protesters in Moscow?

Strauss: First of all, the moment they jumped over the embassy gate and bum rushed us with AK-47’s they stopped being protesters and became invaders. Second of all, the American response was hardly excessive considering it was estimated that over five hundred Russian invaders had just violated U.S. territory and we successfully repelled them in only twenty seconds with only six fatalities on their side.

MSNBC: But wasn’t the end result one in which the Russian government became even more volatile and belligerent?

Strauss: I am sure kicking Hitler’s ass all across Normandy really pissed him off too.

MSNBC: But you were widely criticized by the Polish government for your statement right after the incident when you said: “if you invade America and don’t expect to get shot then you’re an idiot.” Do you regret that statement?

Strauss (long pause): Yes I do. I had not slept in over four days. I was on edge. We all were. When I saw the Marines had repelled the threat my emotions were all over the place and I just forgot that there was an AP reporter standing right next to me. I honestly didn’t expect that reporter to send that quote across the wire and send it all over the world.

MSNBC: Do you think it was the main reason the Polish embassy crisis ended the way it did?

Strauss: I really don’t get you guys sometimes.

MSNBC: You guys?

Strauss: The liberal media. Who’s to say that the Polish embassy crisis wouldn’t have happened anyways, only coupled with the American embassy crisis as well? The Russians stormed the Polish and American embassies at exactly the same time, so obviously it was a coordinated attack. And you guys seem to ignore the fact that as soon as the Russians realized that the American embassy was prepared to fight back then suddenly the Moscow Police was miraculously able to secure the location and repel the protesters. Have you ever considered that they needed to clear the scene before they lost control of the mob they sent! I think it was obvious that if we didn’t use live ammunition the only difference would have been that the Russians in the American embassy would have suffered the same fate as those in the Polish embassy.

American Marines at the U.S. embassy in Moscow watch as the Moscow Police clear wounded protesters and clear the embassy complex after a failed attempt by protester at storming the U.S. embassy (AP)

Revolution in Russia!


Anti-Zhirinovsky protests gain traction as over one hundred thousand Russians flock to the former Polish embassy

August 13, 2002 – 13:35 GMT
By John Cecil Johnston
Associated Press


(MOSCOW) For the thirteenth straight day, Russian defied executive order 1095, prohibiting gatherings at the sight of the former Polish embassy in Moscow, as over one hundred thousand flocked to the abandoned building chanting “this is where it started! This is where it ends!”

The protests started on August 1st when a twenty-year old Russian student named Fedor Maslov walked past a pro-Zhirinovsky march celebrating the Polish embassy crisis on live Russian television. He then proceeded to place a wreath of flowers draped in the Polish flag to commemorate the Polish citizens killed. Maslov was immediately seized and beaten to death by the marchers live on Russian TV, prompting hundreds of young Russians to show up at the embassy the following day to lay a wreath of flowers as well. UIS President Vladimir Zhirinovsky’s executive order barring any display of pro-Polish sentiment at the embassy complex has gone unheeded since, and has quickly spiraled into what the opposition is now calling the “Maslov Revolution.”

“Fedor Maslov had no illusions about what would happen when he walked right in front of those fascists and put that wreath at the sight of the Polish embassy,” commented Alina Vitsin, an eighteen year old student at the Moscow State University, “he was willing to give his life for freedom! And we are not willing to let his sacrifice be for nothing! Zhirinovsky might think he can crush this movement, but every Russian is Fedor Maslov today! We are all willing to give our lives for freedom!”

President Zhirinovsky held a press conference yesterday promising that the murderers of Fedor Maslov would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, as well as to form a special committee to address the long list of issues that the protesters have demanded. However, the “Committee for a New Russia”, which consisted of forty-three student leaders, has indicated that they will not end the Maslov Revolution as long as Vladimir Zhirinovsky is still in power. Among the demands they have made were the lifting of martial law, the loosening of the Liberal Democratic Party’s control of the government, and most importantly, the resignation of Vladimir Zhirinovsky.

“The Polish people at this embassy were some of the early victims of Vladimir Zhirinovsky,” Vitsin said, “but we are all victims of Zhirinovsky. We will stand here and protest what he did to our Polish brothers and sisters because we want the world to know that all Russians are not like Vladimir Zhirinovsky. That some of us believe in freedom too.”

UPDATE – 14:15 GMT: Reports from Odessa and Kiev have indicated that students in those cities have just seized control of the local offices of the Liberal Democratic Party of the Ukraine. More details to come.

Russian Protesters breech walls of Polish embassy in Moscow, seize staff!


Hungary, Italy and France announce that embassies will be closed. Americans send Marines to secure U.S. Embassy complex after firefight between American troops and protesters!

Published August 2, 1992
Newsweek
Updated 3:22 p.m. ET



MOSCOW, RUSSIA - Violent protests outside the Polish embassy in Moscow spiraled out of control yesterday and supporters of Russian president Vladimir Zhirinovsky stormed the walls of the embassy complex and seized control of the Polish embassy. The Russians, who had been protesting Polish admission into NATO for over two weeks at the embassy complex, seized the Polish ambassador as the international community condemned the inaction of the Russian government.


“Clearly this could not have happened without the expressed support of the Russian government,” German chancellor Helmut Kohl angrily declared during an emergency session of the German parliament. “We condemn Russian president Vladimir Zhirinovsky for his vile and despicable provocation and call on the safe release of all of the hostages.”


The move prompted dozens of countries to close their embassies and evacuate their staff. However, Russian protesters armed with RPG have threatened to shoot down any helicopters that attempted to fly out from any embassy complex. The Russian government has also indicated that if foreign nationals attempt to flee by vehicle that the Russian government retains the right to pull over those vehicles and seize any Russian citizen that attempted to seek amnesty at that embassy.


“Once they leave the embassy they reenter Russia,” commented newly appointed KGB head Vladimir Putin, “and therefore if they have been charged with treason they will be detained.”


The scene at the French embassy was emotional as over a three hundred Russian citizens who had sought asylum at the embassy pleaded with French embassy officials as they were loaded onto a bus bound for the airport. One young woman attempted to hand her infant child to a French official begging her to take him with them. Shortly after the buses left and the Russian government received the official notice from the French government that the embassy was closed, armed protesters moved into the complex and seized almost all of the remaining Russian nationals. Although the French government had demanded that the asylum seekers be given safe passage to Paris, UIS spokesperson Ivan Piternov told the international press that several were “tragically killed” when the a bus they had been loaded in crashed outside of Moscow.


The situation at the Polish embassy was particularly volatile, with the Polish ambassador to the UIS, Stanisław Ciosek, paraded in front of VHS video camera and forced to read a prepared statement that called on NATO to “defend Polish territorial sovereignty.”


“The embassy of Poland in Moscow is, under international law, Polish territory,” Ciosek said on the tape, “and the Russian people have violated the territorial integrity of the Polish nation. Under the NATO charter it is the duty of NATO to launch a military offensive to drive back these invaders. We call on NATO to uphold the promise that they made to the Polish nation when they admitted our country into NATO.”


Over a dozen witnesses who were permitted to leave the embassy complex have indicated that the taunt of NATO membership was a frequent theme of the hostage takers.


“They kept taunting us and telling us that we would be saved,” commented Italian nationalist Gianfranco Malignaggi, who was in the embassy attempting to secure an exit visa for his Polish-Russian girlfriend, “they kept saying NATO will come to your rescue as they laughed.”


Although reports from inside the embassy remain unreliable, the foreign nationals who had been released have indicated that at least half of the Russian nationals who had been hiding at the embassy have been executed. Malignaggi indicated that 23-yer old Yuri Kekelidze was in fact shot by the Russians in the early hours of the crisis. The photo of Kekelidze, blindfolded and beaten, hugging his Polish girlfriend in front of the embassy complex (see cover) before being dragged away remains one of the most iconic images of the crisis. American President George Bush said in a press conference yesterday that the fate of Kekelidze mirrored the fate of freedom for all Russians and called on the Russian government to guarantee his safety.



French oppose military intervention in Poland; NATO treaty in jeopardy

August 21, 1992
By the CNN Wire Staff


(PARIS, FRANCE) – In a stunning defeat for both American President George Bush and German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, the French ambassador to NATO was quoted on French television yesterday as saying that the French government will not support a military buildup on the Polish-Russian border and that it will oppose “any provocation or escalation of the current situation.”


The move is seen as a stinging defeat for the German Chancellor, who called the Polish embassy crisis last week a “clear violation of the NATO charter, and one in which we must respond forcefully to.”


Kohl called on NATO to deploy over one million troops to the Polish-UIS border as a show of force to counter the increasingly belligerent actions of the Russian President: Vladimir Zhirinovsky. Although his proposal was supported by U.S. President George Bush, as well as tepidly by British Prime Minister John Major, no other NATO nation openly supported the Kohl proposal. However, none took as strong a position opposing intervention as the French, and the refusal by the French government has already opened a floodgate. The Italian, Norwegian, Greek, and Dutch governments have all indicated that unless the agreement to deploy was unanimous that they too would not send troops into Poland.

“Clearly we are dealing with a very, very sensitive situation,” commented Italian Prime Minister Giuliano Amato, “we cannot forget that the UIS is still a nuclear power and that this situation could spiral into a nuclear war if we act recklessly.”

Amato’s Italian Socialist Party is staunchly opposed to any military intervention in the former Soviet bloc, and has indicated that if Italian troops are deployed to Poland that the Amato coalition would almost certainly collapse. Still, international observers were shocked at the disunity in NATO over the Polish embassy crisis, and several American officials have already indicated that the crisis “might have dealt a fatal blow to NATO.”

“Chancellor Kohl really backed us into a corner,” commended one White House official who wished to remain anonymous, “and now we are looking at a situation where NATO looks like a paper tiger. That only gives the Russian government more propaganda.”

The president’s anger at the German Chancellor was undeniable as President Bush saw Kohl’s “one million troop demand” quickly overtake all of the attention from the Republican National Convention in Houston. Bush, who received a boost in the polls after the Polish embassy crisis captured the world’s attention just two weeks before the convention, saw the failure of the Kohl proposal hijack all of the world's attention during the convention. Many Republican strategists have already admitted that the President lost a golden opportunity to boost his sagging poll numbers when the French refusal came at the same time as his acceptance speech in Houston.

Kohl really messed this all up,” added the White House aid, “I can’t honestly believe he really though the French would let themselves be dictated to by the Germans.”


CNN interview with James Baker, former Secretary of State under President George H.W. Bush

July 13, 1997


CNN: How damaging was the Polish embassy crisis to the Bush campaign?

Baker: It was absolutely devastating. Bush was slowly regaining some traction on the issue of Russia. He was taking a hard line and poll numbers were slowly rising. People were starting to realize that he really was tough on Russia and we were slowly digging ourselves out of that hole. But just two weeks before the election we see Russian thugs invade the Polish embassy and openly defy NATO to come and do something about it.

CNN: But didn’t the American response give President Bush a badly needed boost in the polls?

Baker: If you mean when the American Marines repelled the invasion attempt of the US embassy, then yes. The image of old glory flying over the embassy with American Marines pacing back and forth in front of the gate as the Russians fascists meekly collected their dead was a powerful image. The fact that Zhirinovsky tried to storm our embassy and we hit him right in the face and left him with a black eye was a major boost for us domestically, but sadly it was an international diplomatic disaster.

CNN: How so?

Baker: The French blamed us for the increase in violence. When the Russian mobs seized Russian asylum seekers at the French embassy and killed several hundred of them, the French felt that we escalated the situation and caused that to happen. And considering the Polish embassy crisis lasted four days, the Poles were furious with us too. They felt that the Russians would have left within ten minutes of seizing the building if it hadn’t been for us. That after the American response at our embassy that the Russians had to make an example of the Poles to save face. In their opinion that was why they kept using them to challenge NATO.

CNN: How upset was the White House at German chancellor Helmut Kohl after the crisis ended?

Baker: We were absolutely furious. With the release of the remaining Poles at the embassy on August 4th the situation was slowly calming down. But then Helmut Kohl had to unilaterally call for one million NATO troops on the Polish border and that the Polish embassy crisis was in fact a violation of the NATO charter. Well, President Bush couldn’t be seen as being softer than the Germans a week before the convention, so he was forced to back the Kohl plan. But considering the French were still mad at us, and considering the French still didn’t trust the unified German republic, they naturally balked. Once they balked the rest of NATO except Britain and Turkey followed suit. It was a massive PR disaster, and it happened right during the convention.

CNN: Do you think it weakened NATO, or at least the prestige of NATO?

Baker: Obviously. Within a week of the Kohl proposal falling apart Zhirinovsky recognized the independence of the Republic of Serbian Krajina in Croatia and admitted it into the UIS as a direct provocation to NATO.

 

[Pellegrino]

PART TWENTY NINE: THE RIGHTEOUS GENERAL

PART TWENTY NINE: THE RIGHTEOUS GENERAL

OK, I have to apologize but I decided to go off script again (all of you who have been waiting with baited breath to find out what is going on in Yugoslavia are going to have to wait for one more post) but Dan1988 raised some very interesting questions. The big question left unanswered is what happened to the Israeli embassy during this Polish embassy crisis. And I also know that Ivan Silayev’s status in the German embassy still needed to be resolved, and I had two people from OTL that I really wanted to put into the TL. I realized one more embassy update could tie up these loose ends and so I decided to delay the Croatia update once more and to do another embassy update, but change gears a bit. To be perfectly honest, this TL is starting to depress even me. So I decided to do an update that was a bit more uplifting, and to be honest I feel this is one of the better ones yet.

Some new names we will be seeing in this update:

German ambassador Immo Stabreit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immo_Stabreit

Israeli Ambassador Alexander Bovin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Bovin

Lev Rokhlin, the highest ranked Jew in the Russian army
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lev_Rokhlin

General Viktor Dubynin, in OTL the head of the Russian military
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Dubynin


Screenplay of the film “The Righteous General” (2004)


Director:
Sidney Lumet

Starring:
Daniel Craig (General Viktor Dubynin)
Sharon Stone (Anna Dubynin)
Peter O’Toole (Immo Stabreit)
Phillip Seymour Hoffmann (Alexander Bovin)
Kenneth Branagh (General Lev Rokhlin)
Harvey Keitel (Vladimir Zhirinovsky)
Christopher Walken (General Alexander Lebed)
Steve Buscemi (Ivan Silayev)



5. INT. THE DUBYNIN RESIDENCE, NIGHT - We see GENERAL DUBYNIN, tall and handsome but visibly ill, looking out the window of his spacious living room. Outside we hear protesters and the sounds of gunfire, coupled with occasional screams. He is wearing a night robe and looks disturbed at what he is witnessing.


ENTER ANNA DUBYNIN

ANNA
Viktor, come now, you know what the doctor told you. You need your rest.

VIKTOR
I know what that fool said. I don’t see why rest is so important when I’m a dead man anyway.

ANNA
Viktor, we’ve discussed this. You need to keep your spirits up. You can’t start quitting on me.

VIKTOR
I know. I know. I just…I just wish I wasn’t alive to see this.

ANNA (softly)
Did you ever consider that you are alive for a reason? There are not a lot of people left who can do anything about…this.

VIKTOR
I could. I…I should.

ANNA rests her head on her husbands shoulder as they both look sadly out of the window. Suddenly we hear a banging at the door. Both ANNA and VIKTOR jump.

VIKTOR (firmly)
Who is it?

LEV ROKHLIN (OS)
Viktor! It’s me, Lev! For God’s sake, please open the door!

Both ANNA and VIKTOR look at each other nervously.


UIS Presidential Candidate Vladimir Putin in an interview with the BBC on August 1, 2011.

Addressing the fact that General Viktor Dubynin died while in KGB custody


BBC: Mr. Putin, did you arrange to have General Viktor Dubynin executed while in KGB custody?

Putin: No. Tragically, a soldier was able to smuggle a gun to General Dubynin and he committed suicide.

BBC: Mr. Putin, many feel that this claim simply doesn’t hold weight. If General Lebed was in fact in total control, he certainly would have been able to prevent a soldier from smuggling a firearm to the General, who was under arrest for helping Ivan Silayev flee the country. He was perhaps the highest profile prisoner in UIS history, and if Lebed was in fact in control of the KGB, he certainly would have taken steps to prevent Viktor Dubynin from killing himself. And besides, why would General Lebed even arrest Viktor Dubynin, who was a close personal friend of his and the highest ranked officer in the UIS military.

Putin: These critics miss the obvious point.


BBC: Which is?


Putin: He wasn’t arrested for rescuing the Jews and Germans. He was arrested for going off-script. Lebed was angry at him, but he didn’t plan on turning General Dubynin into a martyr. Lebed had him arrested to punish him and to maintain the illusion of Zhirinovsky’s control of the KGB. He didn’t realize General Dubynin was dying of cancer at the time, and he didn’t expect General Dubynin to commit suicide while in custody. He assumed he would be able to have him pardoned in a few months and then give him a private sector job like General Ivanenko. But he couldn’t ignore what General Dubynin did. Viktor Dubynin nearly exposed the charade: that the military could do whatever it wanted and didn’t have to fear Zhirinovsky. If the world saw that the military could disregard Zhirinovsky in regards to the Jews without any ramifications, then they would know who was really in control.


Lumet, O’Toole win Oscars as The Righteous General captures five Academy Awards!


Entertainment Weekly
February 29, 2005

The Righteous General actress Sharon Stone with former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, now living in Malibu, at the 77th Annual Academy Award Ceremony in Hollywood (Getty Images)

(HOLLYWOOD) Last night, at the 77th Annual Academy award ceremony at the Kodak Theater in Los Angeles, two long time Hollywood legends finally captured Oscars for their roles in the Warner brothers film The Righteous General. In an emotional moment, Sidney Lumet, who prior to last night was widely seen as one of the greatest directors never to win an Oscar, finally added the coveted trophy to his impressive resume after winning best director. Lumet, who prior to the The Righteous General was perhaps best known as the director of Serpico and 12 Angry Men, was heavily favored to win the Academy Award, but still admitted that he was “deeply moved” during his acceptance speech.


The Righteous General went on to capture five Oscars at the Kodak Theater in Hollywood, winning best picture, best actress (for Sharon Stone), best supporting actor (for Peter O’Toole), and best adapted screenplay. The Oscar for O’Toole was also his first. The film was based on the infamous 1992 Moscow Airlift, when Russian General Viktor Dubynin disobeyed orders from then Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky and proceeded to rescue all of the civilians from the German and Israeli embassies. Dubynin, who at the time of the Moscow Airlift was terminally ill with cancer, died under suspicious circumstances after being arrested by the KGB, the only high ranking officer of the Russian military to be killed during the 1992 crisis.



Israelis march in Jerusalem for Righteous General


By Steve Foreman
Haaretz
August 23, 2003


JERUSALEM – For the tenth year in a row thousands of Israeli citizens, commemorating the date of General Viktor Dubynin’s death, marched through the streets of Jerusalem in a show of support for the admission of Russian General Viktor Dubynin as one of “the Righteous among the Nations.” General Dubynin became famous when he personally rescued over 300 Israelis and nearly one thousand Russians of Jewish descent who had sought refuge in the Israeli embassy during the infamous Polish embassy crisis in the summer of 1992. Disregarding orders from Russian president Vladimir Zhirinovsky, Dubynin personally commanded a unit of Russian troops who escorted the Israelis to the Moscow Airport where they were able to escape before troops loyal to Vladimir Zhirinovsky were able to recapture the airport and seize Dubynin.


“Every year I come here with my son,” commented Yakov Gringlaz, who came up from Eilat, “and after I die he will come here with his son. Because if it had not been for General Dubynin, I would have died in Moscow and none of us would be here. We owe him everything and my family will never stop fighting for him until he is recognized for his sacrifice.”


“The Righteous among the Nations” is an honorific awarded to gentiles who risked their lives to save Jews during the Holocaust. Yad Vashem, the Holocaust Martyrs' and Heroes' Remembrance Authority in Israel, has rejected numerous requests to award General Dubynin recognition due to the fact that his actions were not connected with the Holocaust.


Yad Vashem released a press release this morning indicating that “although Yad Vashem, and in fact all Israelis, will be forever grateful for the sacrifice of General Dubynin, his actions did not occur during the Holocaust. Therefore he cannot be recognized as one of the Righteous among the Nations. However, this should not be interpreted as a sign that we are belittling the tremendous sacrifice of General Dubynin or the appreciation all Israelis have for the brave acts of General Dubynin.”


General Dubynin was awarded honorary Israeli citizenship by the Knesset in 1998. Recently more politicians have come out in support for recognition of General Dubynin by Yad Vashem.


“We live in a world where Jews still face persecution and live under constant threat,” commented Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, “by disregarding General Dubynin’s tremendous accomplishment, we deny the simple fact that we have a long way to go before Jews are truly safe from another Holocaust from occurring.”

General Viktor Dubynin

Excerpts from the book: “Lev Rokhlin: A Soviet Jew”


By Sampson Weiss.
Published by University of California Press, © 2001.


CHAPTER II

Although Colonel Rokhlin had moved rapidly up the ranks of the Soviet military, the emergence of Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky worried him. He recognized the changing tone of his fellow officers, who suddenly attempted to distance themselves from the highest ranked Jewish officer in the UDR military. Evidence indicates that a casually written note on his file, which Rokhlin by chance had seen, convinced him as early as January of 1992 to defect to Israel.


“He was supposed to be promoted to General in command of the UDR 8th Guard Corps,” commented a close friend who worked closely with Rokhlin, “he had been expecting that ever since Gorbachev took power. But when he was turned down for the position, and promotion, a chance oversight terrified him and convinced him that he was in danger.”


After being told by General’s Dubynin and Lebed that he didn’t get the promotion, Rokhlin happened to look over at his file and catch the phrase “possible Zionist” written in pencil. The phrase terrified him, and with the increasingly anti-Zionist rhetoric coming out of the Duma, he knew that the accusation not only could end his career, but his life. It was at this time that he decided to prepare for a possible defection to Israel. However, the Prussiagate scandal, which initially appeared to end the Zhirinovsky Presidency, caused him to delay his defection.


“He thought Zhirinovsky was finished,” added a Corporal who served with Rokhlin, “we all did.”


However, after protest against economic reform spiraled into a revolution and revealed a much stronger fascist movement within the country, Rokhlin decided to flee the country and seek refuge at the Israeli embassy. Unfortunately his arrival coincided with the seizure of the Polish embassy and the firefight at the U.S. Embassy, rendering entry into the Israeli embassy impossible.


“There were Zhirinovsky supporters everywhere outside the Israeli embassy, “recalled a Russian Jew who had sought refuge in the embassy, “all around us were fascist chanting ‘Heil Zhirinovsky’ as they threw Molotov cocktails at the building. Once they surrounded it they began chanting ‘Jews, Jews, come out and play! We have some trains! We have some ovens!’ It was the most terrible thing I ever experienced in my life.”


It was this scene that greeted the Colonel and his family when they arrived at the Israeli embassy. His shock, however, was short lived when one of the protesters recognized him.
“A private who served under him pointed him out,” one witness recounted, “once they realized that not only was he a Jew, but he was going to defect, they turned on him.”


Desperate, Rokhlin ran to the home of the only friend who he believed might be willing to help him: General Viktor Dubynin.


"A Moment of Courage"


Foreign Affairs (5/12/11)
by Immo Stabreit and William Hason

For the first time, the former German ambassador to the UDR tells the gripping tale of his escape from Moscow, and the moment that changed the German nation forever.

Former German ambassador to the UIS Immo Stabriet (on left)

Immo Stabreit put his coffee down and stood up to shake the young man’s hand. Even at his advance age he refuses to remain sitting when they come and thank him. He doesn’t want them to think that he doesn’t appreciate their gesture.


“Usually at least once a week,” he told Foreign Affairs after the young man left, “sometimes more, sometimes less. But never longer than three weeks. The longest time was seventeen days, but after that movie came out it was almost daily.”


For nearly twenty years Germans have stopped the former ambassador to the UDR to thank him for his role in the Moscow Airlift, some with tears in their eyes.


“The first week I was back, in 1992, an elderly man grabbed me and screamed ‘I fought on the Eastern front!’ I didn’t know if he was angry with me, I didn’t know what to expect. But then he hugged me and broke down in tears. I just held that old man in my arms in the middle of St. Jakobs-Platz in Munich.”


People sometimes tend to stereotype Germans: that they tend to be detached and standoffish. But Immo Stabreit saw another side of the German people while he held that old man in his arms.


“At first people started walking around us, but somebody whispered ‘that’s Immo Stabreit’ and then everything changed. A woman came and hugged us as well and started softly crying too. Within minutes over a dozen of us were sitting there in the middle of the street crying together.”


Perhaps nothing gives the German nation more pride today than the actions of Immo Stabreit and the embassy staff of the UDR embassy during the infamous Polish embassy crisis in August of 1992. It was a brave and heroic act. But it was more than that. Many people were grateful for what the Germans did in Moscow during those dark days of August 1992. But for the Germans it was more: it was something they needed.


“I suppose it was somewhat cathartic for many Germans,” Immo Stabreit said as he sipped his coffee, “but after fifty years we really are a different nation. What happened at the embassy really wasn’t that amazing to me. I think any German would have done what I did.”


It’s a funny analogy. Americans have a very similar phrase they throw around quite frequently. ‘Anyone would have done the same.’ But before 1992 the phrase was almost unheard of in Germany. Because deep down it brought out too many dark memories. Deep down they knew, anyone wouldn’t, and often didn’t.


The crisis at the German embassy exploded when, on August 1st, the newly appointed ambassador learned that a Russian mob seized the Polish embassy and had been repelled in an attempt to seize the U.S. embassy.


“I knew I was being put in a tough situation when I accepted the assignment,” Stabreit said, “but I didn’t expect it to be so much worse than what I left in South Africa. I knew after they seized the Poles that we were next. In the eyes of the Russians not only were we responsible for Prussiagate and NATO expansion, but we had Ivan Silayev.”


Stabreit knew that a raid was almost certainly imminent, but he refused to close the embassy. After a number of refugees at the French embassy were executed en masse, he didn’t want the blood of over one thousand Russians who came to him in desperation on his hands.


“I knew if I closed the embassy that this would just be another building in Moscow,” he said, “then there would be nothing to prevent the Russians from coming in and killing them all.”


Still, Stabreit knew his options were limited. Unless the Germans sent helicopters, there was no way to escape without some assistance from the outside. It was in this, his darkest hour, that he received the call from UIS General Viktor Dubynin.


“At first I was very curt with him,” Stabreit said, “as Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the UIS that he was the second or third most powerful man in the country. I blamed him directly for what was happening.”


Stabreit remained leery of the General as they spoke through a translator over the phone. Within two minutes the German diplomat hung up on the General, convinced he was setting up a trap for the Germans.


“He asked me what he could do to help,” Stabreit said, “Initially I told him to go to hell. I said I knew he had the power to restore order around the embassy. But he swore it was out of his control. I nearly hung up on him right then and there when he said something that stunned me. He said he was sending 25 buses and two tanks as well as three hundred troops to escort us all to the airport. I was speechless.”


Stabreit was unsure of if he could trust the General, unsure if the busses would really take them to the airport or as reported by the Russian government “crash outside of Moscow” like the busses carrying some of the Russians who sought refuge in the French embassy. But he also knew he had no other option.


“How soon can you be here?” he asked skeptically.


“I have the units ready and at my disposal,” the General replied, “I just need to get dressed and I will be right over.”


More than anything, that simple phrase gave Stabreit hope.


“I knew he wouldn’t be coming personally to escort us if we were being led to the slaughter.”


Within the hour, Stabreit saw the column of busses and tanks approach the embassy. Initially they were cheered on by the protesters, who believed that they were there to storm the embassy and seize Ivan Silayev. However, as the troops began beating protesters to disperse them, the mood quickly deteriorated.


General Dubynin stepped out of one of the busses as he approached the front gate of the embassy. Even he was surprised at the display of German efficiency.


“Within fifteen minutes 987 Russian asylum seekers and 239 Germans who were at the embassy were loaded onto the busses,” Stabreit said with a smile, “and if it hadn’t been for Ivan Silayev, we would have pulled it off in ten.”


Initially the General refused to load the former Russian Prime Minister, himself angry at the effects of Silayev’s disastrous economic policies. But after a firm insistence from Ambassador Stabreit, the General reluctantly relented.


“I told him that the German government gave him amnesty,” Stabreit said, “and therefore as far as the German government was concerned he was now a German national.”


After Silayev was loaded onto the final bus with the German ambassador and the General, a young aid ran into the bus with terrible news.”


“The other team retreated,” he said as his voice broke, “the Israelis are still under siege.”


Stabreit would later discover that the young boy was a Jewish soldier whose parents and young sister were in the Israeli embassy. He turned to the General who looked visibly shaken by the revelation.


“What about Colonel Rokhlin?” he asked softly, “Rokhlin wouldn’t have ordered a retreat.”


“Once the soldiers realized what they were being ordered to do they threw Rokhlin and six other Jewish soldiers out of the bus and left them there with the mob.”


I saw the General slump in his chair with the news. I knew he was devastated.

What would happen next would go down in history. The Moscow Airlift, the event that German Chancellor Helmut Kohl would go on to call “Germany’s proudest moment” would start when Ambassador Stabreit would say what every German on that bus felt in their hearts.


“We can’t leave them!” Stabreit said as he jumped up, “we need to go get them.”


“Sir,” a young Captain said to the General, “we simply don’t have room for another one thousand people. We only have 25 buses.”


“We will make it work!” I shot back, “I don’t know how, but we must get them on these busses!"


The General looked at the German ambassador for several seconds before his shoulders rose and he stood up.


“Private Adler,” he said to the young soldier, “tell Captain Poponov we are going to the Israeli embassy.”

“I saw the young boy smile as he saluted General Dubynin,” Stabreit added, “before he ran out of the bus he turned me and looked into my eyes. To this day, I never have seen a person look at me with such gratitude.”


The ride from the German embassy to the Israeli embassy was eerily calm, a sharp contrast to what would follow. Nobody spoke as they got closer and closer to the embassy, but Stabreit knew as soon as they were in the vicinity.


“We started hearing chants in the distance,” Stabreit recalled, “I didn’t understand all of what was being said. Just one word: Jews.”


The scene outside the Israeli embassy resembled a war zone. Stabreit saw over a thousand fascists chanting and taunting those people inside the embassy complex. Over one hundred protesters had broken off from the others and were engaged in a firefight with a small number of soldiers who had taken refuge behind an overturned car.


“When General Dubynin saw that Colonel Rokhlin was still alive his mood lifted immediately,” Statbreit said, “he ordered his troops to open fire at those demonstrators who had the Jewish troops pinned down.”


However, as soon as Colonel Rokhlin was safe, problems quickly emerged. As the busses reached the front gate of the Israeli embassy they were met by Israeli ambassador Alexander Bovin. Although Bovin was aware of the attempted rescue, many of the Israelis were skeptical of getting on the busses.


“As soon as we pulled up and opened our doors an elderly man fell to the ground,” Stabreit said solemnly, “Bovin tried to comfort him, but he saw how crowded the busses were. He kept screaming ‘Oh God, oh God! Please, not again! Please God, not again.'”


Stabreit could see the horrible tattoo on the old man’s arm; he knew what the man was thinking. Bovin began to lose the crowd with Israelis backing away from the busses, many crying and some even screaming.


“I didn’t know what to do, but I knew we didn’t have much time,” Stabreit added, “I suppose what I said next was pretty silly in hind sight.”


Jumping out of the bus the German ambassador ran up to the restive crowd and said the first thing that came to his mind, something that he thought would calm the frayed nerves.


“I screamed ‘it’s OK, we are Germans!’” Stabreit said with a chuckle, “and as soon as it came out of my mouth I regretted it. But the crazy thing is it actually did calm the crowd. Alexander Bovin would go on to tell me that there is something about the Jewish psyche. They just know that they could be rounded up at anytime, but to round up a bunch of Germans and send them to a death camp? That is just crazy talk. Nobody could do that!”


The busses, already badly overcrowded, became inhumane as over a thousand more people were crammed into those twenty five school busses. Small women and children were held up against the roof and people screamed and tried to push even harder against each other to fit one more person inside.


“I honestly didn’t think I would survive the bus ride,” Stabreit would recall, “my whole body was in pain: every inch of my body was being compressed. And the air was so thick none of us could breath. We weren’t getting enough oxygen. I honestly thought it was over for us all.”


Word of the rescue began to spread throughout the city as protesters began to try and intercept the transport as it headed out to the Sheremetyevo International Airport north west of the city center.


“At first they just flashed fascist salutes as we drove by. Then they started throwing bottles at us,” Stabreit said, “then Molotov cocktails. Then the first gunshot happened.”


The bullet ripped through the window just inches from Stabreit’s face. Immediately the German felt the horrible feeling of blood dripping on his back.


“One of the women was holding up her baby, trying to hold him up above the crowd. The bullet tore into her left arm just above her elbow. She almost died from her injuries.”


The Russian soldiers opened fire and dispersed the crowd, but there was little question that the word was out: General Dubynin had gone rogue.


As we approached an intersection I saw several cars on fire blocking our way,” Stabreit said, “for a few seconds we were stuck. Suddenly I noticed that next to the burning cars was a young girl, no more than twelve or thirteen. She was yelling at the top of her lungs, so much so that her face was beat red. I don’t know how long she was there, but she kept yelling the same thing over and over: “Kill the Jews! Kill the Jews!” I almost felt like she had gotten caught in a time warp from 1941, except for the fact that she was wearing a Guns and Roses T-Shirt.”


The survivors of the Moscow airlift have many unique stories about that day, but one thing that every single person agrees on is that the fifty-three minute bus ride to Sheremetyevo International Airport was the longest fifty-three minutes of their lives. By the time the image of the airport could be seen in the horizon screams of joy filled the busses. As soon as the busses pulled up to the Sheremetyevo-2 terminal German efficiency again took over.


“Within twenty minutes everyone was out of the busses and heading towards the gates.” Stabreit recalled.


However, hopes that the worst were behind them proved incorrect when the refugees were greeted with a horrible sight once they reached the gates.


“Aeroflot, as far as the eye could see,” Stabreit said, “all we saw were Russian planes.”


Unbeknownst to Stabreit and General Dubynin, after the Russian extremist threatened to shoot down any helicopter that attempted to leave an embassy, all of the airlines ordered their planes to leave Moscow. The sight devastated the refugees, who knew than Aeroflot was simply not an option for leaving the country.


“General Dubynin’s orders could only be overturned by three people,” Stabreit added, “UIS President Anatoly Lukyanov, Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky, and Marshal of the UIS Alexander Lebed. As a result, he rounded up everyone in the terminal and forbade anyone from touching a phone. He knew that if an Aeroflot flight took off they could easily be recalled with one radio transmission from Moscow.”


After rounding up all airport employees, the General then proceeded to close the tower and force those air traffic controllers to wait in the lobby.


“He couldn’t take any chance of them being contacted by Zhirinovsky over the radio,” added Stabreit, “so we had no way to help any airplanes land if they did want to come back.”


Suddenly a woman screamed “over there!” as she looked out of the window of Gate 22. In the distance were three brown dots, a sharp contrast to the white Aeroflot planes, rolling towards them.


“Germans are a funny people,” Stabreit said with a chuckle, “for fifty years we were told ‘we were just following orders’. As a result we usually are quick to disregard orders when it offends our conscious.”


Three Lufthansa 747 airplanes pulled around the corner as word that the refugees had made it to the airport reached the cockpit. The three Captains of the remaining 747s, Captain Krechmann, Captain Shultz, and Captain Weber, all refused orders from Berlin to return home. The three planes waited on the runway as every international plane departed the rapidly deteriorating Russian capital.


Suddenly Stabreit felt someone pulling my arm. It was Petra Hoffman, his interpreter.


“Immo, there is no way we can fit over two thousand people on three airplanes,” the woman said nervously, “the plane will never get off the ground if there are that many people on board.”


Stabreit knew she was right. He knew that they would have to be a selection process.


“I told her that I was going to give my seat up to Alexander Bovin,” Stabreit recalled, “I said I knew that Alexander was in more danger than I was. All of the Jews were.”


What followed would become one of the most powerful moments of the crisis. Suddenly, all two hundred and thirty nine Germans stood up, and said that they too would give up their seats to their Israeli counterparts. Moments later dozens of Russian refugees started standing up as well, agreeing to surrender their seats as well.


“I really think that all of the Russians would have stood up,” Stabreit said, “had Ivan Silayev kept his mouth shut.”


“There won’t be any more planes!” the former Prime Minister said as he stood up, “I don’t know if you noticed, but they were shooting at us on the way here! Even if they wanted to land they wouldn’t be able to considering there isn’t an operational tower at this airport.”


The crowd turned to the air traffic controllers sitting in the corner and recognized that he was correct.

“I turned to General Dubynin and asked him if it were possible to land without air traffic controllers,” Stabreit said.


“Sure,” he replied gruffly, “if visibility is good enough.”


“Well, how is visibility right now?”


“It’s August in Moscow. The sun is going down. Half the city is on fire and there is smoke everywhere. Visibility is shit.”


“I felt my knees buckle as I looked over to all of my fellow Germans who just moments ago agreed to give up their seats,” Stabreit recalled as his eyes watered, “They all heard what the General said, and then in unison they all walked over the general seating area and sat down. One man opened up his jacket and pulled out a badly crumpled newspaper and began reading it, as if he knew he would have a long wait for his flight. They were not budging.”


By the time Lufthansa flights 223, 16, and 809 took off from the Moscow Airport there were no Jews left on the ground. But the mood quickly darkened when the planes were out of sight. The unmistakable sight of RPG fire from the ground proved that the likely hood of further rescue was all but zero. It would be nothing short of suicide to try and land.


“How long would it take another plane to get here,” Stabreit asked the General nervously.

“Depends on where they are at. The Israeli embassy notified their government that there was going to be a rescue attempt. They would be the ones who would come…if anyone comes.”


The news panicked the already frightened former prime minister.


“They won’t come anymore!” Silayev screamed hysterically, “there are no Jews here anymore! Now we are all dead!”


“I feel bad for saying this, but at that moment I had really wished that the prime minister had picked the Italian embassy,” Stabreit said with a chuckle, “I understand the stress was terrible for him. He was in more danger than any of us; there was no question that he would be killed if he were captured. But at that moment he was really wearing on our nerves.”


The General walked over to the deposed Prime Minister and proceeded to slap him across his face so hard that he knocked him over.


“You may have left your Russian pride in the German embassy, but try and at least pretend you didn’t leave your testicles there too!”


There is a lot of debate over how long the remaining refugees waited at Sheremetyevo-2 terminal before they were rescued. Some survivors claim over three hours, others claim less. But Immo Stabreit swears otherwise.


“It was twenty-two minutes thirty six seconds before we saw that plane,” Stabreit said with a chuckle, “trust me, I was counting.”


Six El Al airplanes, given orders to depart Moscow, elected to circle the city for over five hours before they received the call from Tel Aviv that there would be a rescue attempt.


“I know this sounds odd,” Stabreit said, “but when I saw that tiny blue and white dot in the horizon I honestly thought, for just a few seconds, that it was an angel. It really looked like an angel coming down from heaven.”


“They won’t land!” screamed Silayev, “once they realize nobody is answering them at the tower they will leave!”


“Somebody shoot him,” General Dubynin said as he waived dismissively towards Silayev, “and put me out of my fucking misery.”


Stabreit saw several soldiers immediately grab their rifles as he jumped to his feet.


“No!” Stabreit yelled. You can’t! He sought asylum!”


The General looked irritated as he waved off the soldiers and turned to the incoming planes.


“Will they land?” Stabreit asked the General.


“How the fuck should I know,” he responded gruffly, “if they keep descending then they are going to try and rescue you. If you see them ascend then they are obviously abandoning the rescue attempt.”


The Germans all watched with bated breath as the first El Al airplane approached. As it got closer tracers from small arms fire could be seen crossing in front of the incoming path of the large jumbo jet.


“You know they say Israeli pilots have ice water in their veins,” Stabreit said, “and I know that for a fact. Because I saw those men nearly blind as they flew through the smoke and fog, with no tower, while being shot at, and not a single one of those planes ever even slowed its decent. They just rode through that war zone and landed.”


After the last refugee was loaded onto El Al Flight 333 Stabreit turned to the General who had just saved over two thousand lives.


“You know you can come with us,” Stabreit said as he put his hand on the General’s shoulder.


The General refused the offer bluntly.


“I can understand why Lev is leaving, and I don’t question why he needs to go,” the General replied firmly, “but my place is here…in my country. I’m not a coward like Ivan Silayev. I will live and die in Russia.”


“I watched as he stood firm and saluted me,” Stabreit said sadly, “Never before have I seen such courage. You know, they tell me that what I did was a moment of great courage, but what General Dubynin did, that was the culmination of a lifetime of great courage.”

 

[Pellegrino]

PART THIRTY: THE NEW WARSAW PACT




UIS Presidential Candidate Vladimir Putin in an interview with the BBC on August 1, 2011.

Discussing the role of the Russian president in the Croatian Civil war from 1991-1993


BBC: You have indicated in your campaign that if elected you would not support the extradition of any member of the Russian military to The Hague in regards to war crimes committed in Croatia during the Krajina conflict of 1992 to 1993.

Putin: That is correct.

BBC: Why not? You supported the extradition of Zhirinovsky to The Hague for his role in the war crimes committed in the Chechen war. And you supported extraditing former Armenian President Levon Ter-Petrosyan for his role in war crimes committed against Azerbaijani civilians on the Road to Alat. Why do you oppose demanding accountability from the Russian military?

Putin: Because the Russian military had nothing to do with what happened in Croatia. That was entirely Zhirinovsky and Milan Babic. General Lebed was actually angry that the Russians were dragged into that mess.

BBC: Once again, you seem to be contradicting yourself. If General Lebed was the one who was in control of the UIS how did he allow Zhirinovsky to drag the UIS into the Croatian conflict if he really was opposed to intervention? That seems highly suspect.

Putin: I don’t think even Zhirinovsky was prepared for the pushback. He just kept opening his mouth and saying the first thing that popped into his head and before we knew what was going on the UIS was in Knin. The Germans and Americans kept taking Zhirinovsky seriously and creating this dangerous game of brinkmanship. We really had no choice but to admit the Republic of Serbian Krajina into the UIS. Otherwise it would have damaged our prestige. It would have been the Cuban Missile Crisis all over again, just without any concessions in Turkey when it was over.



Excerpts from the book: “Croatia: The Nation That Almost Was”


By Steven Martinovic
Published by University of California Press, © 2009.


Chapter Four: The Russians Arrive

Croatian President Franjo Tudjman was deeply troubled when he learned of the Russian sponsored coup led by Milan Babic in the breakaway Republic of Serbian Krajina. Tudjman and his Serbian counterpart, Slobodan Milosevic, had reached an uneasy truce, and both supported the Vance plan for peace in Croatia. Allowing a United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) in the disputed regions of the breakaway Republic of Serbian Krajina, Tudjman was hopeful that a permanent division of his country would be avoided. Hoping that the Serbs would accept an autonomous republic inside of Croatia, Tudjman remained cautiously optimistic that the worst of the Croatian war for independence was behind him. Also, Tudjman had a more sinister motive as well. Tudjman and Milosevic had established a secret channel of communication with each other to discuss a possible division of the Republic of Bosnia I Herzegovina, which had also descended into civil war in 1992.


“For Tudjman, keeping the Krajina as part of Croatia and annexing the Croatian Republic of Herzeg-Bosnia was a win-win,” commented former Croatian General Anton Tus, “even if he had to accept an ‘autonomous zone’ for the Serbs, the addition of Mostar and Medjugorje would have more than made up for it.”


The opposition to the Vance peace plan by then Krajinian President Milan Babic was seen as the major reason that he was ousted by Milosevic supporter Goran Hadzic under orders from Belgrade.


“Hadzic used to joke that he was ‘a messenger for Milosevic,” commented Borislav Milic, who served with Milan Babic in Knin, “although to the rest of us we saw him as little more than a sock puppet for Belgrade. When the Vance peace plan was offered, Babic opposed it vehemently. Although Milosevic said that it opened a path for eventual independence, we were not buying it. We were winning the war! Why should we give up even an inch of ground to the Ustashe?”


The entry of Russian president Vladimir Zhirinovsky into the mix badly complicated matters and led to the eventual collapse of the Vance peace plan in September of 1992. After seizing power, Milan Babic announced that the Republic of Serbian Krajina would no longer honor the Vance peace plan and began another siege of the Croatian costal city Biograd na Moru. The escalation of hostilities caught UNPROFOR off guard and resulted in a fierce counter attack from the Croatian army.


“We knew that if the Serbs captured Biograd na Moru that it would be devastating,” commented General Tus, “It would split our country in two and give the Serbs a vital sea port.”


Hoping to restore control over his rapidly deteriorating control over the Serbian militias in Krajina, Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic decided to drastically cut military aid to the breakaway republic in an attempt to force them back into the fold.
“I think the move was appropriate,” commented Phil Macklin, a UN observer who had been stationed inside of the Republic of Krajina at the time of the coup, “but it came at the worst possible time. With the admission of Poland into NATO and the Polish Embassy Crisis, events outside of Croatia were exploding and thrusting the Croatians into the frontline of a badly escalating new cold war.”


As the Polish Embassy Crisis electrified NATO, and earned Russia international scorn, the status of nearly 15,000 Russian troops still stationed in Poland soon became a major source of contention.


“The admission of Poland and Hungary into NATO created a bizarre situation in which we had Russian troops legally inside of the borders of NATO,” added Macklin, “When the war in Azerbaijan exploded in 1991 General Lebed and General Viktor Dubynin both ordered the Western Group of Forces in Germany to return to the UDR to be stationed in Azerbaijan. And the Central Group of Forces in Hungary had also been recalled in 1991. But although much of the Northern Group of Forces had also been recalled and stationed near the Estonian border, at the time of the Polish Embassy Crisis, nearly 15,000 remained. When the Germans started calling for a million troops in Poland, General Alexander Lebed attempted to have these troops quietly returned home.”


However, an unfortunate escalation, a war of words between German chancellor Helmut Kohl and Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky resulted in the remaining Northern Group of Forces stationed in Legnica in western Poland becoming the catalyst for the division of Croatia.


“After the Moscow Airlift, many Germans and Americans were shocked and appalled at what the Russian government had become,” commented Macklin, “there was little question that Russia had turned into a fascist dictatorship. Within a day of the German evacuation from Moscow Chancellor Kohl announced in a special session of the German Parliament that NATO was demanding that all remaining UIS troops in Poland return to Russia.”


The ultimatum was unanimously supported by NATO, with France and Italy both agreeing to the firmly worded demand. The Italians and French were still reeling over their refusal to send troops to Poland, and had been shamed into action by the American president. However, there had been no clear timetable to the withdrawal, and no indication of what would happen if the troops failed to leave. That fact, coupled with the clear steps by the Russian military to withdraw troops anyways, made the ultimatum a moot point. But the Russian President, refusing to be seen as backing down, called out the German Chancellor on his ultimatum.


“Obviously the Russians felt that the ultimatum would end the same way as the last German ultimatum calling for Zhirinovsky’s resignation,” commented Macklin, “with egg all over Kohl’s face. But the emotions of the Moscow Airlift changed everything. Suddenly the French and Italians were on board as well. They realized that there had to be a line in the sand somewhere.”


When Russia President Zhirinovsky told the international community that Russia would ‘oppose German attempts to re-conquer Lower Silesia’ (where Legnica was located), the NATO response was sudden and forceful. Two days after the dismissive Zhirinovsky response, nearly 75,000 German and Polish troops were in Legnica. The Germans and Poles gave the surprised Russians 24-hours to leave the country or they would be arrested en mass. The Russians, stunned at the show of force, quickly ordered a retreat.


“As the Russians were leaving, all across western television networks you saw Poles throwing rocks and rotten vegetables as the Russian troops cowered from the angry mobs,” added Macklin, “they had to cross the entire country like that, with Poles expressing their hatred at the 50-year occupation and their anger at the Russians for the Polish Embassy Crisis. And the whole time they looked like bullies who were just punched in the face.”


The Russian President attempted to diffuse the embarrassment over the retreat by claiming that the move had been pre-ordered by Moscow, that the troops were being recalled for an important redeployment elsewhere. However, the claim rang hollow.


“The Russian Military was furious at how they were embarrassed in Poland,” added Macklin, “and so they really started looking for an ‘important redeployment’ that could allow them to save face. That was where Croatia tragically fell into the mix.”



CNN interview with James Baker, former Secretary of State under President George H.W. Bush

July 13, 1997


CNN: You indicated President Bush was angry at Chancellor Kohl over what you called ‘his tremendous overstep’ in Legnica. However, the move actually proved very popular domestically, with President Bush receiving a boost in the polls over NATO’s forceful removal of the remaining Russian troops stationed in Poland. Why was he angry?

Baker: President Bush was a tremendous coalition builder, and a tremendous diplomat. He knew that in order to get the French and Italians on board there had to be a reasoned and balanced approach to the Russian threat. And that NATO had to move unanimously. When Kohl announced that he was sending troops into Poland to assist the Poles in evicting the Russians, we recognized that it threatened the coalition. He took France and Italy’s approval for the withdrawal demand and he ran with it. He treated it like a blank check. The French were furious over that, justifiably so.

CNN: Do you think that the embarrassing Russian withdrawal from Poland led to the disastrous escalation of the war in Croatia?

Baker: Yes and no. Obviously Zhirinovsky had something planned in Croatia considering he supported the Babic coup months earlier. But it made the situation much more volatile and possibly forced the hand of the Russian military. Considering those retreating troops from Poland were in Romania en route to Bosnia within the week, we did see that the Russians were not going to let themselves be made the fool, and they were clearly made the fool in Poland.

CNN: Why was NATO unable to contain the Russian threat in Croatia?

Baker: Two reasons. First everyone knows that nothing good can come from getting involved in a fight in the Balkans. Especially when you have such strong emotions involved. Whenever emotions overtake reason in the Balkans, then it always leads to disaster. Too many people felt like history was repeating itself, with world powers getting dragged into some meaningless squabble in the Balkans.

CNN: What was the other reason?

Baker: Because the Russians wanted war more than NATO wanted peace.



UIS recognizes independence of breakaway Serbian Republic inside of Croatia, gives UN troops “24-hours” to withdraw from the country.

September 27, 1992
By the CNN Wire Staff


(MOSCOW, UIS) – In what President George Bush called “a dangerous and offensive provocation,” Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky announced in a press conference that the UIS would now recognize the independence of the breakaway Serbian Republic of the Krajina in central and eastern Croatia.


“The will of the Serbian people is clear,” Zhirinovsky said at the press conference, “and the Russian people will not stand by while NATO and the west continue their genocide against the Serbian peoples, nor will we ignore the dreams and aspirations of the Krajinians in their quest to live free from oppression and persecution from the Ustashe.”


The Russian president has announced that the former UIS Northern Group of Forces, which had just fled from Poland last week, was in Romania en route to Eastern Slavonia where the Republic of Serbian Krajina has announced they will be part of a peacekeeping force stationed in Vukovar. The Russian president, in a clear provocation directed towards German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, also issued an ultimatum demanding that the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) withdraw from all areas of Serbian Krajina within 24-hours. He added that failure to comply would result in the UNPROFOR troops being arrested “en mass.”


UNPROFOR commander Satish Nambiar from India indicated that New Delhi had authorized the “immediate withdrawal of all Indian troops within the 24-hour timetable”.


He subsequently turned over command of the UNPROFOR forces to French General Jean Cot. However, nearly 20 other nations have announced that they would also be withdrawing their forces from Croatia, badly weakening the peace keeping force.



NATO condemns Russian recognition of breakaway Serbian republic in Croatia, authorizes $1 billion in military aid to Croatia


September 29, 1992
By Robert Wilson
ABC News


(NEW YORK) At a press conference today at the White House, President George Bush announced that NATO would formally oppose any Russian military presence in Croatia and condemned the Russian recognition of the breakaway republic of Serbian Krajina in Croatia. President Bush, whose poll numbers have slowly been climbing after the horrific Polish embassy crisis in Moscow last month, further announced that NATO would authorize nearly a billion dollars in military aid to Croatia.


“We stand by the Croatian people and stand firm in opposing any Russian attempts to recreate the Warsaw Pact at the expense of the Croat people,” Bush told reporters, “the former Soviet Union cannot expect the world to turn a blind eye to their crimes against freedom and democracy.”


The announcement came as the Croatian national army launched a major offensive after repelling Serbian troops attempting to capture the coastal city of Beograd. Clearly hampered by the lack of aid coming out of Belgrade, the Serbian Army of Krajina (SVK) was also badly routed in a battle just outside of the village of Gospic, in what was referred to by the Croatian military as “the Medak Pocket”. Since the restoration of Milan Babic as leader of the Serbian Republic in Croatia, the Croatians have moved to capture the numerous Serb controlled areas outside of the United Nations Protected Areas (UNPA). Although these “pink zones” are outside of the borders of what even the Russians recognize as the Republic of Serbian Krajina, the Serbs have remained steadfast in their refusal to withdraw from them.


MSNBC interview with Robert Strauss, American ambassador to the UDR and UIS

December 10, 2001


MSNBC: Mr. Strauss, the U.S. embassy was one of the few to remain in Moscow after the horrific events of August 1992. Did you believe that the embassy would be closed?


Strauss: Yes. To be honest, I am surprised we stayed as long as we did. But once the Israeli embassy closed and the Polish Embassy Crisis ended, things did calm down quite a bit in Moscow. Suddenly it resembled the Moscow of Soviet times. There were troops everywhere and everyone was afraid of their own shadows. Still, our embassy was now one of the only avenues of communication with the outside world that the Russians had, so even they admitted that they needed us to stay. Especially considering how dangerous the situation in Croatia was getting.

MSNBC: How were discussions with the Russians considering what you had just witnessed in Moscow the previous month?

Strauss: By that point diplomacy was almost non-existent. The Russians were curt with us, and we were curt with them. We refused to speak to any UIS representative at all, forcing the Russians to send representatives of the Russian Republic whenever they wanted to speak to us. When they arrived we would berate them and call the UIS ‘an illegal union whose only aim was to maintain the Russian occupation of former Soviet Republics.’ We added that it wasn’t even a true union, it was a new Warsaw Pact, and we would continue to support those nations oppressed by this new Warsaw Pact until the day came when Russians were forced to flee the Ukraine in identical fashion to how they fled Poland.

MSNBC: What role did you have in negotiating the rapidly deteriorating situation in Croatia?

Strauss: When the Russians told us that the Northern Group of Forces were crossing into Romania to support the independent Republic of Serbian Krajina I told them in no uncertain terms that such a move would be seen as nothing short of an invasion of Croatia, and we would respond appropriately. The following day I saw that the now abandoned German embassy was flying the flag of the Republic of Serbian Krajina. That the Serbs had moved into the former German embassy.

MSNBC: What was the American response to that?

Strauss: We were furious. I told the Russians that NATO had just authorized over one billion dollars in aid to the Croatians, and that with NATO support the Croatians were routing the Serbs. I added that by the end of the October that embassy would be the only piece of real estate actually controlled by the Republic of Serbian Krajina.


MSNBC: How did they respond to that statement?

Strauss: The following day the Serbs moved out of the German embassy.


MSNBC: So did you think the threat had worked?


Strauss: I guess I was hopeful that it did. I guess I was hoping that cooler heads were prevailing. But deep down I knew it didn’t. The Russians had stopped being reasonable when they stormed the Polish embassy and executed hundreds of Russians at the French embassy. They had become a pariah state, and they responded just like a pariah state would.

MSNBC: How so?

Strauss: The following day I received a call from the Kremlin. I told them I noticed the Serbs had moved out of the German embassy. That’s when they told me why. ‘Of course they moved out,’ the Russian diplomat told me over the phone, ‘they were just admitted into the UIS. Why do they need a separate embassy when they are now part of this Union?’

MSNBC: What did you say when you heard that?

Strauss: I was devastated, but not particularly surprised. I realized the Russians would keep escalating the situation. I just coldly responded, ‘Well, I guess we have nothing more to talk about’ and I was about to hang up the phone when the diplomat said something that made my blood run cold.

MSNBC: What did he say?

Strauss: He said ‘we have one matter to discuss. Yesterday the Croatian Army crossed the border of the Republic of Krajina and invaded the UIS. We expect NATO to call its Croatian dogs back before we have to respond accordingly. We do not wish this to escalate into a worldwide nuclear conflict, but unless NATO calls off the Croats, we will treat this no different than if NATO troops invaded Russia itself. You may think that the UIS is not a real country. We don’t care what you think, believe what you wish. But make no mistake about one fact: we will defend the borders of the UIS to the death. You may consider the UIS a new Warsaw Pact if you wish. But if NATO troops do not end this invasion of this so-called new Warsaw Pact in 24-hours, our nations will be at war.’

 

[Pellegrino]

PART THIRTY ONE: A SIMPLE MATTER OF TRANSIT

PART THIRTY ONE: A SIMPLE MATTER OF TRANSIT

Well, I didn't want to leave everyone hanging in re Romania, so I dedicated this update to what happened in Bucharest on September 27th, 1992 as Russian troops crossed the border. Now hardcore Romanian history buffs will know that something else happened that day: the Romanian Presidental elections. Also, we start to get an idea on how morale is doing with the UIS army, and of course how the UN reacts to the UIS during the speech of the world leaders at the oepning session of the General Assembly...

Some new names in this update:

Romanian President Ion iliescu
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_Iliescu

pro western Romanian politician Emil Constantinescu
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emil_Constantinescu

Romanian nationalist politician Georghe Funar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gheorghe_Funar

The Soviet/Russian 14th guards Army
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_Army_involvement_in_Transnistria

Romanian historian Daniel Barbu
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Barbu

UIS President Anatoly Lukyanov speaks to the General Assembly of the UN


Russians use UN speech to threaten world war as NATO nations walk out of UN General Assembly session

By Craig Franklin
Washington Post Staff Writer
September 27th, 1992



UNITED NATIONS, Sept. 16 – In one of the most contentious sessions ever of the United Nations general assembly, UIS President Anatoly Lukyanov threatened that the conflict in Croatia was “pushing the world dangerously close to a world war” and again reiterated Russia’s position that the breakaway Serbia Republic of Krajina was in fact now part of the Union of Independent States.


However, in a growing sign of the deteriorating political situation, representatives from 43-nations walked out before the UIS President uttered his first word. Led by the American and German delegates, dozens of world leaders took the stance that the that the UIS is not in fact a nation and that President Lukyanov had no authority to speak on behalf of the Russian nation or those former Soviet republics that the Russian Republic now “occupies.”


“We feel that the UIS is not the successor state to the USSR or even the UDR,” commented American ambassador to the UN Edward J. Perkins, “and we strongly condemn the actions of the Russian nation in Croatia and its invasion of Romania yesterday.”


Although the UN general assembly issued a strongly worded rebuke of the UIS for its “disregard for the neutrality and integrity of the Romanian nation” no other nation would go so far as to refer to it as an invasion. UIS troops, led by the former Soviet 14th Army stationed in the Republic of Moldova, crossed the border into Romania in what UIS President Lukyanov called “a simple matter of transit.”


“We received permission from the Romanians to use their territory in order to move our units into the Republic of Serbian Krajina,” Lukyanov said, “and we anticipate being finished with this move no later than tomorrow.”


The Romanian delegation has remained mute on the issue, neither denying nor admitting that permission had been granted. Romanian president Ion Iliescu was unable to speak to the general assembly today due to the presidential elections in Romania today. The session of the general assembly had originally been scheduled for September 21st but had been delayed due to the deteriorating situation in Croatia.

UN Protection Zones in Croatia (blue borders), which the UIS now recognizes as the international borders of the Republic of Serbian Krajina

Republic of Serbian Krajina

The UIS in Eastern Europe. UIS in RED. Nato in BLUE. Neutral nations in GREEN. The independence of the Baltic nations (ORANGE) have not been recognized by UIS, but are not claimed by the UIS.
__________________________________________________________________

UIS in Central Asia. Countries in LIGHT YELLOW have signed the Tula Accords and are members of the UIS. Countries in ORANGE are regarded as UIS members but have not sent representatives to sign the Tula Accords due to lack of government control in those republics. The Baltic countries in GREEN are not UIS members, but have not been recognized by any UIS nation.


“Romania after Ceaușescu” (Routledge Series on Russian and East European Studies)


by Robert Solomon
Routledge Press, (2003)


CHAPTER TWELVE: A SIMPLE MATTER OF TRANSIT

Although relations between the UIS and Romania had deteriorated badly over the course of the year, Romanian President Ion Iliescu was still reluctant to openly criticize his Russian or UIS counterparts. Iliescu had tried to open a secret line communication with NATO after what he considered to be acts of ethnic cleansing against Romanian Moldovans living in the UIS Republic of Moldova. However, he also realized he was walking a tight rope. Surrounded by hostile regimes in Yugoslavia and the UIS (with less than ideal relations with Hungary and Bulgaria as well), Iliescu became deeply concerned when his overtures to NATO had gone unanswered. Iliescu was stunned that NATO seemed oblivious to the plight of the nearly 150,000 Romanian Moldovans who, over the course of ten months, flooded into Romania after their property was seized by the UIS federal government. The seizures of Moldovan property, which was then handed to ethnic Russians and Ukrainians, failed to shock the conscience of the west since it came under the guise of “free market reforms.” However, the effect of the persecuted Moldovans now living in squatters camps all over the Romania electrified the Romanian people, and many were openly calling for the removal of the president over what was seen as his inaction over the Moldovan crisis. President Iliescu knew that even this slightest consideration given to the UIS could turn into political suicide, but also realized that open hostility to the UIS could result in Romania becoming targeted by the UIS, much like Poland had been. By most reports, President Iliescu realized that time was his only ally, and he intended to play his cards close to his chest while the inevitable sanctions crippled the UIS enough for Romania to break free from the sphere of influence of the Russians.

As Romania’s first free and democratic election since the fall of communism neared, President Iliescu hoped to defer the issues with the UIS and NATO until after the election. Although his support had dropped to under 40% in recent polls, he benefited from the divided opposition as well as a general fear of the “shock therapy” reforms proposed by his leading opponent, Emil Constantinescu. Iliescu hoped to capture 50% of the vote, and avoid a runoff, as the situation in the UDR deteriorated in August of 1992 and Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky emerged as a virtual dictator. The emergence of Zhirinovsky and his bizarre brand of quasi-fascism seemed to boost Iliescu slightly at first, but also boosted the prospects of then fringe candidate Gheorghe Funar, who was the candidate for the nationalistic Romanian National Unity Party. Funar, who was polling at 10% in the summer, received a boost from ethnic Moldovans, who embraced his call for a “Romania Mare” (or Greater Romania) to include the UIS Republic of Moldova.

However, with the election just a week away, President Iliescu received a troubling memo from UIS President Anatoly Lukyanov while both leaders were in New York. The polite, handwritten letter, heaped praise on the Romanian leader and his embrace of socialism as opposed to the “shock therapy” capitalism embraced by Russia and other former communist nations. Lukyanov was widely seen as one of the last politicians in the former Soviet Union who still believed in the Gorbachev themed perestroika and glasnost. Although his allegiances were now to the Liberal Democratic Party, most felt that he never abandoned his core belief in communism (liberal communism perhaps, but communism nonetheless). He told Iliescu how much he looked forward to working closely with him in the future. Although most of the letter was polite, a passing sentence at the end of the letter badly stunned the Romanian president.

“The UIS needs to transfer some units that are currently leaving Poland to the Republic of Serbian Krajina,” Lukyanov wrote in closing, “we would appreciate crossing Romanian territory to do so. Don’t worry old friend, this is a simple matter of transit!”

Iliescu knew that giving permission to the Russians would not only be political suicide, but also could result in sanctions from NATO and the west if he were to comply. But he also knew that a firm rejection could erupt into a conflict with the Russians, who may have taken steps to cross Romanian territory regardless, making Iliescu look weak and powerless. Unsure of the best course of action, Iliescu decided to ignore the letter and try and delay having to address it until after the election, where he hoped to capture 50% of the vote. Determined not to bump into Lukyanov in New York, where the opening statements of the session of the General Assembly of the United Nations were to take place, Iliescu returned home as soon as he received the memo, and informed his staff to tell the Russians that they were unable to deliver the message to him.

Iliescu continued his delaying tactics over the next several days, as memos and calls from Moscow went unanswered. Iliescu informed his staff to tell the Russians that he was busy campaigning, and that he would get back with them after the election. However, the patience of President Lukyanov began to wear thin over the course of the week. In his final letter, dated September 25, 1992, Lukyanov wrote “Old friend, I very much need an answer to my request. If I don’t have one by tomorrow, I will assume that the answer is yes.”

Again Iliescu elected to ignore the memo, hoping to address the issue after the September 27th election. However, on the morning of September 27, 1992, as Romanians were waking up to go to the polls and vote in the first free and democratic Romanian election in over fifty years, Russian troops crossed the border from Moldova and began their cross-country journey towards Yugoslavia.

“Witness recounts the Romanian Election of 1992”

Der Spiegel



September 27, 2002

Interviewer’s notes: Der Spiegel interview with Daniel Barbu, Director of Romanian Newspaper Realitatea Românească.


DS: So what happened on the morning of September 27th as Romanians headed to the polls?

Barbu: Well, for President Ion Iliescu, nothing short of a complete disaster.

DS: You of course are talking about the issue of Russian troops crossing the country en route to the breakaway Serbian Republic of Krajina in the former Yugoslavia.

Barbu: Exactly. The first thing Romanians see when they wake up is a bunch of lost Russian troops trying to read the Latin signs and asking, no demanding, people on the streets tell them how to get to Highway E70. Unfortunately for the Russians, I think every Romanian who gave directions all sent them on a wild goose chase.

DS: The Russians were lost?

Barbu: Yes. You have to realize, for as horrible as Nicolae Ceaușescu was, he at least kicked the Russians out of the country in 1958. That was the one good thing he managed to do. As a result, the Russians didn’t have current maps or anything. And apparently they didn’t bother to bring anyone who could read or speak Romanian either. They were so angry over Poland that they didn't even properly prepare for something as simple as a drive through Romania. They just told the units to cross Romania and get to Yugoslavia as soon as possible. Most of the first wave had been troops that had been stationed in Poland, and they were completely lost when it came to figuring out the roads in Romania. They came down from Radauti, in the Ukraine, and somehow ended up near the Black Sea. They were told to avoid cities at all cost, but there is no way to get from Radauti to Belgrade without passing through either Cluj, Brastov, or Timisoara. So they kept taking side roads and harassing people in the towns they passed through.

DS: So they started speaking to the Romanians in Russian?

Barbu: Yes. Most Romanians speak Russian, but we would be perfectly happy if somehow that language just seeped out of our ears and onto the ground. We don’t like to speak Russian. We don’t like to admit we speak Russian. And we don’t like it when Russians come up to us and start speaking it and just assume we know it.

DS: How upsetting was it to see Russian troops in the country?

Barbu: Very upsetting. These troops had to pass through dozens of these Moldovan refugee camps, and somehow a handful of these clowns ended up in downtown Bucharest before dinner. It was like giving a cymbal to a monkey and telling him not to wake the sleeping baby in the room. I honestly don’t know how those idiots even figured out how to start the tanks before they left.

DS: How did citizens in Bucharest handle the presence of Russian troops?

Barbu: How do you think? They were furious. They were furious at the Russians, and they were furious at President Iliescu for letting them come into the country. Sadly for the president, they took it out on him at the ballot box.

DS: Isn’t it true that the second wave of Russian troops proved even more upsetting for the Romanians?

Barbu: Yes. After these clowns who had spent the last ten years playing chess and drinking wine at the Oder River passed through, then the real troops came in: the UIS 14th Army.

DS: Why were these so hated by the Romanians?

Barbu: Because they were the troops stationed in Tiraspol, in Moldova. They operated with brutal, and ruthless, efficiency. Its commander, General G. I. Yakovlev, made no secret that he was trying to cleans as many Moldovans out of the UIS as possible. The 14th Army was the division that was ethnically cleansing Moldova, and they were the ones who Moldovans and Romanians most despised.

DS: What happened when the 14th Army entered the country?

Barbu: We knew it was them as soon as they crossed the border at Iasi. For one thing, none of them were drunk, and most spoke Moldovan. As they reached the first refugee camp they just passed by, but the refugees recognized the insignia of the 59th Guards Motor Rifle Division on their tanks and uniforms. That created a huge uproar, and that was how Gheorghe Funar, the man many Romanians would go on to call “Romania’s Zhirinovsky” ended up president of the country.


Romanian President stunned in presidential election as anti-Russian candidates advance to second round

By Richard Roundtree
Economist
September 30, 1992

It seemed like a safe bet that Romanian President Ion Iliescu would at least make it to the second round of the presidential elections in Romania as Romanians took to the polls this last Sunday. But if there is one thing that can turn an election in Eastern Europe, apparently it is the Russians. Controversy over President Iliescu’s apparent “nod of the head” to the former Soviet Union (which transferred 40,000 troops through Romania to aid Serbian separatists in Croatia) apparently ended the political career of the popular President as he finished third in a surprisingly close contest. Iliescu captured 30.8 percent of the votes as firebrand nationalist Gheorghe Funar edged him out with 31.1 percent of the total votes. Emil Constantinescu, of the Romanian Democratic Convention, finished in first place with 38.1 percent of the total votes. Emil Constantinescu is seen as more pro-western than Funar, however, both candidates have indicated that they will support Romania’s admission into NATO and both vehemently oppose allowing UIS troop’s use of Romanian territory.

“The presence of these troops on Romanian territory is a violation of our national sovereignty,” commented Constantinescu, “and we call on the UIS to immediately cease using Romanian territory and withdraw from our nation.”

Both Funar and Constantinescu have indicated that they may also honor NATO’s sanctions on the UIS, which would badly weaken the Russians ability to conduct military operations in the former Yugoslav republic of Croatia.

A Russian Officer looks at a Romanian road atlas near Radauti (AP)

Russian troops attempt to ask for directions in Valeni De Munti, Romania

A UIS tank gets seperated from its unit and accidently drives into downtown Bucharest (AP)

 

[Pellegrino]

PART THIRTY TWO: THE QUASI-JUNTA




UIS Presidential Candidate Vladimir Putin in an interview with the BBC on August 1, 2011.

Discussing the shakeup of the UIS military in 1992 after the Romanian intervention.



BBC: You indicated that Zhirinovsky had no role in the emergence of what most historians now call the “Quasi-Junta” in October of 1992. Where much of the military leadership was purged while others were recruited into a “16-man Committee for State Security and Defense” that almost acted independently of Moscow in regards to the war effort in the former Yugoslavia.

Putin: Correct. General Lebed organized it.

BBC: So why did Lebed attack the institution that was crucial to his power base? Didn’t the purges threaten to alienate his most valuable ally?

Putin: First of all, I hardly consider them purges. Those generals didn’t end up in gulags. They weren’t tried for treason and shot. They were just reassigned to desk jobs or given private sector jobs. Even General Dubynin was going to be given a lucrative private sector job before he committed suicide.

BBC: But those generals who were removed must have opposed the reassignments.

Putin: Some of them did, sure. But by and large the military recognized that the cronyism and corruption that had infected the UIS military had to be removed. And after the removal of General Dubynin the previous month after his role in the Moscow Airlift, there was a problem with leadership. He was the head of the armed forces, but without him you had an emerging power struggle. Dozens of generals now acted independently of each other, and some were openly vying to emerge, like General Lebed and General Ivanenko, as major power brokers. But once the “Quasi-Junta” emerged, there no longer was a question of whose orders to follow. If the UIS told you one thing and the Russian republic gave you a conflicting order, you deferred to the "Junta” and followed their orders.

BBC: How did General Lebed recognize that there was a problem?

Putin: Romania. That was beyond a disaster.


Excerpts from the book “The Soviets and the Serbs: Vladimir Zhirinovsky and the conquest of Yugoslavia


By Edward Ellis.
Published by Random House © 2004



Moscow, UIS, September 29, 1992:

As soon as UIS Marshal Alexander Lebed discovered how disastrous the Romanian situation had become he became outraged. Although he was angry at UIS President Anatoly Lukyanov for ordering troops to cross into Romania so quickly, most of his anger was directed towards Northern Group of Forces commander Leonid Kovalyov. General Kovalyov had struggled to maintain morale with his troops stationed in Poland, even after Polish admission into NATO. But his failure to withdraw troops in a timely fashion led to an embarrassing withdrawal that had been broadcast on international television, and his failure to mobilize his troops properly for the entry into Romania infuriated Lebed.

Still, many felt that General Kovalyov was burdened with what most felt was an almost impossible task. After the arrest the previous month of the former Northern Group of Forces commander Viktor Dubynin, many of the troops stationed in Poland were in a near rebellion. General Dubynin was a firm leader, but widely popular with the troops, and his arrest resulted in a noticeable decline in morale.

“As soon as he was arrested, at least 1,000 troops just abandoned their post,” commented a corporal stationed in Poland at the time of the withdrawal, “and others just started to drink and create discord.”

The lack of a clear chain of command also complicated matters. With the vacancy of the position of Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the UIS (after General Dubynin’s arrest) it became unclear where central command originated. Conflicting orders often came from the federal government and the Russian President. Further complicating the issue was the clear power struggle inside of the military for an appointment to General Dubynin’s vacant position.

“We had a situation where commanders were trying to align themselves with either Lukyanov or Zhirinovsky,” commented an officer who worked in Moscow at the time, “but both tended to defer to General Lebed on matters of military.”

It was this attempt to align with a power broker that led to the poor performance of the Russian military in Romania. Apparently unwilling to admit that his grip on the Northern Group of Forces was perilously weak, and also unwilling to admit that his troops simply were unable to fully mobilize with such short notice, General Kovalyov elected to hide the truth from President Lukyanov.

“The plan was for the UIS troops to enter Romania no later than 2AM on September 27th;” commented a unit commander who was part of the mobilization,” the hope was that they would be out of Romania no later than 7 AM, before most people woke up.”

However, poor communication and preparation led to troops entering Romania in sporadic fashion. As late as 11 AM UIS troops were still crossing the border from all over the country, most with little more than a general command to “get to Belgrade as soon as possible.” Troops became scattered all over Romania over the course of the day, with the effect of electrifying Romanians as they headed to the polls.

“One tank even ended up in downtown Bucharest,” added the soldier involved in the mobilization, “it really was a complete mess.”

But more than the embarrassment of the situation, it also deeply frightened Marshal Lebed. Recognizing that with units stumbling into Romania in small groups, the Marshal saw that had the Romanians elected to resist the UIS troops, it could have lead to a humiliating defeat. He decided to send the controversial UIS 14th Army into Romania in an attempt to pacify the region and rally the UIS units scattered across the country.

“He took a gamble.” commented one officer, “The 14th Army could have brought the Romanians out in full force. But if it turned into a fight, they were the unit best equipped to handle the situation.”

UIS President Lukyanov also found his plans thwarted by the disastrous intervention. His original plan was to publically apologize as soon as the last unit entered Yugoslavia, and humbly beg President Iliescu for forgiveness over “the misunderstanding”, hoping that would pacify the situation before it erupted. However, realizing that his troops were still entering Romania as late as noon, he was forced to switch gears and claim he had “permission”. Although President Iliescu initially remained silent on the matter, by early afternoon, as opposition candidate Gheorghe Funar was calling on Romanians to put up barricades to block Russian troops from passing through the country, Iliescu relented and confirmed that the UIS troops were in fact there without authorization. The statement electrified the international community, and badly embarrassed the UIS President, who prior to the fiasco was still admired by some in the west for his role in perestroika and glasnost.

As the final unit entered Yugoslavia, General Lebed fired General Kovalyov and turned over general command of all units located in Yugoslavia to General G. I. Yakovlev of the 14th Army. It was this decision that would become the foundation of what Russian would soon refer to as “the quasi-junta”.


Excerpts from the book: “Croatia: The Nation That Almost Was”


By Steven Martinovic
Published by University of California Press, © 2009.


Chapter Four: The Battle of Knin

Moscow soon became worried over the Croatian advances into the UN Protected Areas (or what the UIS regarded as the Republic of Serbian Krajina), and issued a strongly worded condemnation of the assault. The threatening message from Moscow badly worried the UN, which now was faced with the unenviable task of trying to rein in the surging Croatian military.

“We learned a hard lesson in September of 1992,” commented UN observer Phil Macklin, “a lesson that history has repeated time and time again. You can’t control people in the Balkans when there get their blood boiling. The Croatians were disregarding us and trying desperately to crush the Serbs.”

Just weeks ago the Croatian army was desperately trying to rid the Serbs from what they referred to as “pink zones”, Serbian-occupied areas outside of the UN Protected Areas.

But the lack of supplies from Belgrade, coupled with NATO support, turned the tide of the battle for the Croatians almost overnight. Badly routed Serb units began to flee to the capital city of Knin as the Croatians entered the UN Protected Areas and launched a major offensive on the Serb defensive positions in Knin.

“The Croatians knew that if Knin fell, the war would likely be all but over,” added Macklin, “the problem was we were not sure if it would lead to World War III. Although the Croats were willing to take that chance, we obviously were not.”

However, the battle of Knin, which began as Croatian troops surrounded the capital city on September 29th, began to turn as UIS troops began to cross the border of Romania into Yugoslavia. The UIS troops initially arrived in the eastern enclave of Vukovar. Removed from the rest of the Serbian Republic of the Krajina, the initial Croatian belief was that the UIS troops would not be able to reinforce the troops in Knin without a full fledged invasion of Croatia itself. Although the presence of UIS troops worried Croatian President Franjo Tudjman, he believed that the 33,000 UIS troops would be unable to cross Croatia and capture Zagreb even if they wanted to lift the siege of Knin.

“I think he badly underestimated the disregard the Russians had shown for international borders up to that point,” added Macklin, “I mean, all he had to do was look at what happened in Romania.”

Oddly enough, many historians believe it was the intervention in Romania that gave President Tudjman a sense of false hope.

“He knew that if the Russians came stumbling into Croatia like they did in Romania that it would be a bloodbath for the Russians,” commented Croatian General Anton Tus, “we were not going to let them clumsily waltz into our country like the Romanians did. We were ready to fight them off.”

General Tus recounted the controversial order than many felt cost the Croatians the war in October of 1992. Realizing that the Russians were in Vukovar, President Tudjman decided not to fortify the front lines in the east near Vukovar. He believed that if the Russians invaded, they would have ample warning, and decided to try and destroy the resistance in Knin before the Russians would be fully mobilized. The decision proved disastrous for the Croatians.

“For one thing, the UN had now cut off the Croatian army’s supply line,” commented Macklin, “the Croatians were surprised at this move. They saw it as a betrayal. But we were ordered to keep peace, and prevent World War III.”

But it was more than just the fractured supply lines that created havoc for the Croatians. Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic was desperate to regain the nationalist high ground in Belgrade and suddenly switched gears, restoring aid to the breakaway Serb Republic.

“Milosevic might not have liked how the Russians usurped him with Babic,” commented Borislav Milic, “but there was no way he was going to let Knin fall. Especially considering it would have been blamed on his ego if it did fall.”

As the Croatians entered the outskirts of Knin, their badly fractured supply line finally broke as the Serbs regained the upper hand. By October 1st the Serbs began an offensive that began to drive the Croats out of the city and, by the following week, out of the breakaway republic. Still, most observers believe that total capitulation might have been avoided had it not been for what President Tudjman once famously called “the Bear looking in the kitchen window”. On October 2nd, as Serbian troops began their march to the Adriatic Sea, Serbian troops in Bosnia launched a coordinated assault on the Croatian border city of Slavonski Brod. Although Croatian troops bravely attempted to repel the Bosnian Serb invasion and repel the Serbian offensive on Biograd na Moru, the badly overextended Croatian military was finally broken on October 7th. On that day, UIS troops under the command of General Gennady Yakovlev crossed into Croatia and destroyed all remnants of the Croatian Armed forces.

UIS troops cross into Croatia on October 7, 1992




Croatia “overrun” by Russian troops as full-scaled invasion begins

By Vincent J. Shanks
Chicago Tribune
October 10, 1992

UIS troops with captured Croatian troops in Osijek, Croatia


(ZAGREB, CROATIA) Croatian officials tonight claimed the country had been “overrun” by Russian troops after a full-scale ground invasion. Croatian president Franjo Tudjman indicated that the eastern city of Osijek was captured by UIS forces while Serbian militias from Bosnia have seized the border town of Slavonski Brod. Reports from eastern Croatia remain unreliable, but most eyewitness reports indicate that the Croatian military has been “thoroughly routed” and are in full retreat.


“At this point it doesn’t look like there is anything standing between the Russians and Zagreb,” commented American ambassador Mara M. Letica, “but we are not sure of what the situation is in the east right now.”


In the central portion of the country Serb troops from the breakaway republic were closing in on the strategically vital costal city of Biograd na Moru. The capture of Biograd na Moru would give the Serbian republic a valuable port to the Adriatic Sea while also splitting the Croatian republic in two. Croatians in the southern city of Dubrovnik are preparing for another siege of the city as Serbian troops in Bosnia crossed into Croatian territory and have taken positions in the mountains surrounding the city.


American President George Bush interrupted his preparations for tomorrow’s Presidential debate to condemn the Russian and Serbian offensive.


“The Russian military continues to escalate the situation in Croatia,” said President Bush in a press conference, “but we want to be abundantly clear to Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky: the world will not continue to tolerate these acts of aggression.”


However, for many Croatians the time for words from NATO and the United States has passed.


“They castrated our military in Knin, and now they sit by and do nothing while the Russians lay siege on our country,” commented refugee Anton Martinovic, “NATO is worthless, and so is George Bush. If they didn’t plan to help us, at least they should have told us from the beginning so we wouldn’t rely on their worthless promises.”


TRANSCRIPT FROM THE FIRST UNITED STATES PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE (OCTOBER 11, 1992)

JIM LEHRER: Mr. Perot, you have come out in criticism of President Bush’s handling of the crisis in Croatia. Would you care to elaborate?

PEROT: Yes. Look at what’s going on over there. The Russians threaten us and we go running out of the country. Then they go and invade Croatia and all this President is doing is telling him to stop ‘or else’. Well, as far as I’m concern, ‘or else’ crossed the cattle guard about a month ago when all those refugees were killed in the French embassy. That’s the point when I would have said, ‘OK partner, that was a line in the sand, and you just stepped over it’.

JIM LEHRER: Any comment Governor Kerrey?

KERREY: If President Bush had no intention of helping the Croatians, he should have told them so from the start. But to lie to them, just like he lied to the Shiites and Kurds in Iraq, is beyond reprehensible. If the world community cannot believe the word of the American President when he promises not to abandon our friends, then this country loses a great deal of prestige. And the actions of President Bush have caused more harm to the prestige of this country than any President since Richard Nixon.

JIM LEHRER: President Bush, you have one minute for a rebuttal.

BUSH: I resent that accusation that I have abandoned our friends in Croatia. Right now this administration has gotten the UN to authorize one of the most crippling rounds of sanctions in world history, and nearly every country has signed on with these sanctions. The Indians, once close allies to the Russians, have severed economic ties to Russia. The Chinese have agreed to cut all trade to Russia. Even the Iranians have agreed to sanctions. The Russian nation will not be able to continue this aggressive policy of intervention for long as long as we remain diligent and maintain the economic pressure that will force them to abandon their occupation of Croatia. In fact, Russia has already shown that it already is stretched too thin. They cannot turn their nose to the international community and think they can get away with it-

PEROT: Mr. President, I don’t know if you have been keeping up with the news, but those Russians are turning their nose to the international community right now. And thanks to you they are getting away with it.


“Romania after Ceaușescu” (Routledge Series on Russian and East European Studies)


by Robert Solomon
Routledge Press, (2003)


CHAPTER THIRTEEN: THE ZHIRINOVSKY FACTOR

As Romanians took to the polls on October 11th to vote in the Presidential runoff election, UIS president Anatoly Lukyanov knew that regardless of who won the election, relations with Romania would sour quickly. Romanian Democratic Convention candidate Emil Constantinescu was eager to implement major free market reforms and see to it that Romania would join NATO, perhaps as early as December. The prospect of such a thing deeply troubled Lukyanov, who recognized that a NATO presence in Romania could devastate the UIS war effort in Croatia. However, his opponent, radical nationalist Gheorghe Funar of the Romanian National Unity Party, had made no secret of his desire to see Moldova “ripped away from the clutches of the Russian occupiers” and had made no secret of his plan to support secessionist groups that had already begun to form in Moldova. Neither scenario particularly appealed to the UIS president, but it was Russian president Vladimir Zhirinovsky who helped the UIS president make the decision that would decide the fate of the election and give Funar the unlikely victory.


Zhirinovsky recognized that Funar was deeply disliked with the Hungarian minority, and believed that as long as Funar was president the Hungarians would oppose NATO membership for Romania. It was enough to convince Lukyanov to support Zhirinovsky’s bizarre plan to help elect Funar president of Romania. Hours after the still unpopular Ion Iliescu announced his support for Emil Constantinescu; Russian media outlets released a controversial press release from Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky:


“I hereby announce my support for the candidacy of Emil Constantinescu and call on the Romanian people to vote for Constantinescu. Mr. Constantinescu has entered into a preliminary agreement with the UIS government to permanently allow UIS troops free access through their country, and we look forward to seeing this agreement implemented after October 11th.”

Constantinescu was defeated by less that 5,000 votes after the final votes were tallied.

 

[Pellegrino]

PART THIRTY THREE: A LIE AND TWO LOAVES OF BREAD

Well, we now go back to Russia for a brief update on the state of the economy under these massive UN sanctions. But we get our first idea on how the UIS survives the sanctions thanks to an unexpected loophole. We also revisit the old “Free Market Fascism” update and see what is going on in Kazakhstan with the UN sanctions in place…


CNN interview with James Baker, former Secretary of State under President George H.W. Bush

July 13, 1997


CNN: You indicated that President Bob Kerrey “failed our country” by not closing the Article 8 loophole of United Nations Security Resolution 777. But wasn’t President Bush the one who authorized the Article 8 loophole?

Baker: Yes, but we didn't know how it would turn into a loophole. Everyone supported Article 8. The United States didn’t recognize the Russian occupation of those other Republics, why punish them for being occupied? Besides, if the other Republics realized that being tethered to Russia was turning into a huge financial drain on their economies, well, we figured they would break free that much sooner. But once President Bush realized how Article 8 was being exploited by the Chinese, he moved to close it. Unfortunately that was after the election and it was too late to do anything about it. But when he met with President elect Kerrey in November he implored him not to let that loophole remain open. He told him that the Chinese were exploiting it, and if he didn’t act quickly, western companies would soon follow suit. And once western companies had settled in, it would be next to impossible to dislodge them.

CNN: Why do you think President Kerrey chose not to do anything about Article 8?

Baker: Well, we could see clearly that the sanctions were working in Russia. Perhaps they were working too well. Although Russia suffered under sanctions for the entire decade, in 1992 the sanctions were particularly devastating. But sadly, President Kerrey didn’t have the strength of character to stand up to the radical left wing of his party. They were furious at the toll of Iraqi sanctions. Right after taking office a report came out indicating nearly 200,000 Iraqi children might had died because of UN Sanctions on Iraq. Right after that a CNN news piece comes out showing images on TV of emancipated Russians wandering around the streets, begging for food. And many Democrats were worried that if the sanctions were to be put on all of the UIS countries, the big difference would be what little food there was would go to Russia while it would be the Kazakhs and Moldovans starving to death. So he decided not to suffer the wrath of his party, and he let Article 8 stay in place. And it was nothing short of an IV right into the vein of the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia.


UIS Presidential Candidate Vladimir Putin in an interview with the BBC on August 1, 2011.

Discussing the impact of United Nations Security Resolution 777 on the UIS in October of 1992.


BBC: You indicated that United Nations Security Council Resolution 777, which imposed massive international sanctions on Russia, were quite devastating in the final months of 1992 and that they nearly ended the presidency of Vladimir Zhirinovsky.

Putin: Yes. To be honest, the Constitutional Crisis of 1993 could have occurred as early as November of 1992. The sanctions took an immediate toll.

BBC: How so?

Putin: As bad as sanctions were in the late 90s, by then the UIS had figured out how to at least keep people fed. You could find bread and meat in the stores. But in 1992 none of the shops had anything to sell. Food was scarce. The only things that people on the street could get easily were either guns, petrol, or ironically, bananas.

BBC: But wasn’t this similar to what many Russians experienced under communism?

Putin: Don’t underestimate the impact of ten months of capitalism. We almost had a riot in Moscow when the McDonald’s closed down.

BBC: So how did Zhirinovsky weather the storm?

Putin: General Lebed and the Committee knew that there was no way they could be seen as rolling over to the sanctions in 1992. If they did, the UN would demand they give up Kazakhstan and the Ukraine. So the plan was to drag them out as long as possible, and then turn on Zhirinovsky once the UN decided that it had turned into a Cuba situation. But once the impact of the sanctions was felt the committee realized that surviving the sanctions would be difficult…very difficult. Suddenly the impact of “shock therapy” was truly felt. Many of the state industries that produced food and vodka and even clothing now were bankrupt. We were totally dependent on outside help for food. Zhirinovsky tried to reinstate central planning and state control over industries, but shock therapy left him with nothing to work with. All he could do was implement price controls, which didn’t help since there was nothing to sell anyways. And this created problems with many of the liberals in the LDP.

BBC: But weren’t they nearly wiped out during the purges?

Putin: No, only the ones who dared to stand up to the military were. Some, like Gennady Burbulis, remained. And they were not happy about the return of central planning in Russia. But they accepted it since there was no other option. Besides, the liberals had their laboratory to test free enterprise and to test the free market.

BBC: Where was that?

Putin: Kazakhstan.

Russian citizens gather outside the Moscow McDonald's as it closes its doors in September of 1992 (AP)

Cheney Resigns from Bush Campaign to Lobby

June 29, 2000
Associated Press



WASHINGTON- Former United States Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney has resigned from both Halliburton and the presidential campaign of George W. Bush to lobby for Wall Street. However, he has not ruled out a cabinet position in a potential Bush presidency despite accepting the position of CEO of the Financial Services Roundtable. He is set to begin working for the Financial Services Roundtable on November 3.

“At this time, I feel that I leave the campaign in competent hands and I feel confident that Governor Bush will no longer need my assistance as he selected the next vice president of the United States,” Cheney said at a press conference, “I am honored to have been part of this campaign, and I wish Governor Bush the best of luck as he heads into the Republican Convention next month.”

Cheney was the CEO of Halliburton earlier this year when he was asked by Governor Bush to head a committee to vet the next Republican vice presidential candidate. However, his role in what the media dubbed “Kazakhgate” and his subsequent denials of wrong doing became a tremendous distraction for the Bush campaign. Although Governor Bush has denied that Kazakhgate had any role in the resignation, many pundits point to his resignation as CEO of Halliburton on the same day as proof that the scandal had badly damaged the former Secretary of Defense and was the major reason for his sudden departure from the Bush campaign.

“Clearly one must call into question Mr. Cheney’s judgment,” commented Vice President Al Gore, “Although we applaud his decision to resign, I think the fact that he even made it into the Bush inner circle should cause voters to seriously question what kind of president George W. Bush would be.”

Kazakhgate exploded on the national spotlight when Mother Jones reported in February that Halliburton had sold over one billion dollars worth of dual-use oil drills to the Kazakh government. Mother Jones also reported that Halliburton, through its subsidiary Kellogg, Brown, and Root, helped financed the construction of dozens of new cities around the Tenzig Oil Field and the Kashagan Oil Field in northern Kazakhstan. Cheney responded that United Nations Security Council Resolution 777 only prohibited trade with the Republic of Russia and not any of the other Republics that were part of the UIS. However, Resolution 777 prohibited trade “if it appeared that such trade would benefit either the UIS government or the Russian Republic.” Critics point to the obvious benefits that Moscow received from the development of Kazakh oil fields and the construction of the new cities along the Caspian Sea (which due to the heavy population of Russians in these cities has strengthened the UIS’ hold on the Kazakh Republic according to many observers).

“The sanctions against the UIS never had a chance to work,” commented Pierre S. du Pont, former Republican Governor of Delaware, “because too many people like Dick Cheney took advantages of the loopholes in the sanctions for their own gain. Clearly what Halliburton did was not in line with the true intent of Article 8. It was meant to help Republics like Kazakhstan free themselves from UIS occupation, not help the Russians solidify their hold over the Kazakh nation.”

Russians in Kazakhstan recount early days of UN sanctions in UIS


Foreign Affairs (2/22/2008)
by William Hason

Gennady Podrezov recounts the struggles of everyday Russians in late 1992 after UN sanctions were implemented

(TENZIGRAD, KAZAKHSTAN) Gennady Podrezov still remembers the fear that gripped him and his family on that cold February day in Tambov, a large city nearly 300 miles from Moscow. He remembers it like it was yesterday.

“I had been terrified ever since the revolution,” he said as he opened his closet and showed me the Kalashnikov that led to all of his troubles, “I had never made it a secret that I opposed Zhirinovsky, and I was registered as a member of the Party for a Free and Democratic Russia. But when they started handing out Kalashnikovs I decided to sign up and get one. My friend, Maxim Popov got one too and he sold his for $75 American dollars. He told me I should too. But I decided not to. Not out of principle, but because I thought the gun was worth more than $75.”

It was a decision that he often reflects back on, even more than his decision to get the gun in the first place. Gennady Podrezov is sure that it was that decision that saved his life.

“I heard that they came for Popov right after they took me,” Podrezov recounted, “but when they discovered he no longer had the gun they threw him in jail for six months before they sent him to that…other place. They sent him to the place everyone called Zhirinovsky’s Siberian Island Paradise.”


Although things in the UIS began to normalize somewhat by late 1993, with opposition parties again beginning to operate freely, in early 1993 much of Russia resembled the Soviet Union of old. Long lines could be seen outside shops while hunger and desperation gripped the nation and the police instilled fear in the hearts of everyone.


“After the revolution everything changed,” Podrezov recalled. “We were all afraid to walk the streets. It was clear that the KGB needed to get rid of people. There was not enough food to go around so they just wandered the streets looking to arrest people. The military was out and they could stop you at any time and demand your papers. Not just your identity papers, but your voter identification card. They could demand to find out what political faction you supported. And for those of us with the Party for a Free and Democratic Russia, we were often considered enemy number one.”

But for as bad as the police presence was, he knew he was one of the lucky ones. Many of his fellow democrats had been killed in the riots that followed the trial of Vladimir Zhirinovsky.

“Everyone knew somebody in the French embassy,” Podrezov recounted, “even supporters of Zhirinovsky had friends in the French embassy. That was what terrified us more than anything. Even Stalin was never so brazen. To march into another country’s embassy and seize hundreds of Russian-born people and take them off to kill them?! It was beyond insanity. We suddenly knew we were living in a terrifying new world. We may have lived in fear in the Soviet Union, but this new Union was something even more frightening.”

Podrezov was not at all surprised when Pravda reported the following day that the West had put sanctions on the country, and that the UN had followed suit. He even secretly hoped that they would work, that Zhirinovsky would be starved out of power. But he also knew that was unlikely.

“Look how long Cuba was under sanctions,” Podrezov said, “and the only people who suffered were people like me. Castro never suffered! Only the Cuban people suffered.”

Podrezov elected not to try and flee the country and take refuge in a foreign embassy, a decision that he said almost certainly saved his life. Rather, he went to his local clerk’s office and quietly registered with the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, hoping to slip under the radar and not raise attention to himself.

“We lived in the shadows for nearly eighty years in Russia,” Podrezov said, “we were used to it.”

But after the sanctions took hold he knew that Russia had yet to hit rock bottom. Suddenly survival became a challenge.

“Two days after the sanctions I noticed the lines forming around the local grocery store,” Podrezov said, “within four days the shelves were bare. That’s when we realized that we were in danger of starving.”

With food scarce, Podrezov, like all of the residents of Tambov, began slipping into a subsistence economy. He began looking for anything he could trade for food.

“Sure, the government had technically abandoned communism,” Podrezov recounted, “so technically you could grow your own food, or raise your own livestock, without government interference. But we lived in a city, not in the country! None of us had any crops!”

Podrezov soon began trading with the only man in his neighborhood with food.

“Under communism many people still had chickens in their homes, but most of us had sold them after the fall of communism,” Podrezov said, “One of my neighbors had bought a hundred chickens shortly after that. I remember when he did. He paid fifty rubles for a hundred chickens. We teased him and told him that his apartment was too small to live with that many chickens and that he wasted his money. Well, the joke was on us.”

Podrezov, like many of his neighbors, paid five US dollars per egg to the man, often trading anything they could to get a single egg.

“One man traded his car for a chicken,” Podrezov recounted, “but he was stupid about it. He cooked the chicken and ate it. He should have talked to me first. I would have traded my car for another one of the chickens and then we would have had all the eggs we wanted!”

But even as bad as it was in Tambov, Podrezov and his family would soon discover that the worst was yet to come.

“The man with the chickens was a janitor at the elementary school under communism,” Podrezov recounted, “but thanks to those chickens he ended up with a car and who knows how much money before he took off with his loot. After he sold his chickens I figured he bribed a soldier and drove his new car to Brest with at least ten thousand dollars. Not a bad way to start a life out west.”

Without their meager source of food, and with the economy crumbling around them, tensions between neighbors soon boiled over.

“We all started fighting with each other,” Podrezov recounted, “the pressure was breaking us all down. But rather than blame the government or even the west, we started blaming each other.”

It was in this heightened environment that Podrezov would discover how desperate his neighbors had become.

“Everyday we all went to the grocery store on Ulitsa Mira on our way home from work,” Podrezov recounted, “and we always had to wait in line for what ended up being nothing. But one day I decided to go back to the store after all of my neighbors had left. I stood in the line a second time. By chance a small shipment of bread had come in and I was able to buy two loaves of bread. I was so happy; I guess I was smiling all the way home.”

However, word of Podrezov’s fortune soon spread.

“Later that night two of my neighbors started pounding on my door loudly,” Podrezov said, “they were screaming at the top of their lungs ‘We know you have bread Gennady! Open this door!’”

Podrezov opened the door and tried to reason with his neighbors, but emotions were raw.


“Other neighbors began to emerge due to the commotion,” Podrezov said, “and one of them kept screaming ‘you don’t deserve bread! You’re a traitor! You’re a member of the Party for a Free and Democratic Russia!’ I tried to deny it, but they became angrier. That’s when we noticed that the police arrived.”

The soldiers dispersed the crowd, but not before taking statements from the woman who accused them of treason.

“Suddenly her story changed,” Podrezov said sadly, “I robbed her of her bread with a gun. She was going to let them take me and my family to a gulag for two loaves of bread!”

The police entered his small flat and began searching for the bread. They discovered the two loaves on the table as the woman screamed that those were her loaves. But it was what happened next that would change the life of Gennady Podrezov forever.

“One of the policemen opened my closet and found the Kalashnikov,” Podrezov recounted, “that’s when I knew it was all over.”

As the woman yelled that the AK-47 that Podrezov hid in his closet was the weapon she was robbed with, one of the officers threw him to the ground as his wife and three children screamed.

“I really thought they would shoot me right there in front of my family,” Podrezov said as tears welled up in his eyes, “I thought that my children would have to witness my execution over a lie and two loaves of bread.”

The officers seized the gun and the “documents of assignment” that were given to him when he received it. But they didn’t stop there.

“At first I was glad to see that they were not giving the bread to the woman from Apartment 5B,” Podrezov said, “they told her it was evidence and that it would be seized for trial. That bitch started crying right there in the hallway.”

But what happened next terrified Podrezov.

“I saw them handcuff my children and my wife,” Podrezov recounted, “My three year old son was bound with a rope and pushed to the ground so hard it chipped his tooth.”

The drive to the Tambov police station was terrifying for Gennady Podrezov, who could not get the image of his children in bondage out of his mind. Certain that they were being taken to a “secret interrogation room” in the Police station, Podrezov began openly weeping.

“My children were all crying and screaming in the back of the police van,” Podrezov said softly, “and at first I was trying to be strong for them, telling them it would be all right. But then suddenly I realized that we were all about to be killed, and I couldn’t help it. I just started crying too. I am not proud of that moment, and if it were just me, I think I would have been able to hold my composure. But the thought of my children being executed was simply too much to bear.”

As they arrived at the Police Station an eerily familiar sight greeted them.

“It was the KGB,” Podrezov recalled, “we recognized them at once. Then I knew it was over.”

The two KGB agents separated Podrezov from his family and took him to a small cell in the basement where the beatings would begin.

“All I could think about was protecting my family,” Podrezov said, “I didn’t care if they killed me, so I blurted out ‘I will confess to anything if you don’t hurt my family.’ But that didn’t work.”

The beatings began as soon as he blurted out the plea for his family, all with a peculiar and unexpected line of questioning.

“I expected them to ask me if I was a member of the Party for a Free and Democratic Russia, or if I opposed the UIS or Vladimir Zhirinovsky,” Podrezov recounted, “but all they kept asking me was ‘do you believe in private property! Do you want to own property?!’”

At first Podrezov denied it, still begging his tormentors to stop the beatings. Initially he refused to answer in the affirmative, believing that to do so would be a death sentence for him and his family. But he was only able to resist for so long before the torture broke him down.

“I honestly don’t know how long I held out,” Podrezov recounted, “but the bruises didn’t heal completely until 1994, so I know it much have been awhile.”

To this day, Gennady Podrezov was shocked at what happened next. Stopping the beatings immediately, one of the two KGB agents suddenly picked up the phone and called a young woman into the room.

“She must have been no more than 20 or 21,” Podrezov said, “and she didn’t look at all surprised at what she saw when she walked in. I realized at that moment that I was one of thousands who had been in that room.”

The KGB agent picked up a folder and thrust it in Podrezov’s lap before uttering the words that would forever change his life.

“Comrade, you agreed to move to the UIS Republic of Kazakhstan when you asked for the Kalashnikov,” Podrezov recalled the agent saying; “here is the title for your new plot of land in Tenzigrad.”

Podrezov was stunned into silence at the statement, afraid to even acknowledge the folder on his lap.

“There is no house there yet,” the agent added “but don’t worry about that. The Americans will build one for you.”

Even after the KGB took Podrezov and his family to his apartment to collect his belongings, he was still sure that they were being led to their deaths.

“I remember they only allowed us to take a few bags per person and our gun, but they told us to put tags on them so we wouldn’t get them mixed up with someone else’s gun when we got to the bus,” Podrezov recalled, “I knew the Nazis told the Jews the same thing.”

It was on the bus filled with other unfortunate Russians that Podrezov first started wondering if perhaps the worst was behind him.

“It was such a strange experience,” Podrezov said, “there were liberals and communists sitting next to each other. Even die-hard LDP supporters were on the bus. It really didn’t matter who you were before the bus ride, the only thing that mattered was did you take a gun and agree to move to Kazakhstan back in January of last year. If you did, well, the UIS was now here to collect on that debt.”

What Podrezov saw after the thirty hour bus ride also gave him hope.

“We saw westerners standing around,” Podrezov said, “they had crisp uniforms and shiny hard hats on. We could tell in an instance that they were Americans.”

The Americans seemed oblivious to the refugees as the bus came to a halt near them, but as soon as Gennady Podrezov stepped off the bus, a chance encounter made him realize that, despite everything he had just been through, things might just start looking up.


“One of the Americans asked if anyone spoke English,” Podrezov recalled, “that’s when I raised my hand.”

Podrezov and his family were quickly recruited by the Americans, who hired him on the spot as a translator.

“They told me I was going to be paid $21,000 US Dollars a year,” Podrezov said with a chuckle, “I honestly thought to myself, ‘my English must not be as good as I thought. I could have sworn they said $21,000.’”

But for him family, the realization that the worst was behind them was even more emotional.

“My oldest daughter went to the American cafeteria that afternoon,” Podrezov recounted, “and when she got there she saw a table covered in bottles of Coca-Cola and 7-UP, just sitting there for everyone to grab. Her eyes nearly popped out of her head. She never saw so much soda pop in her life. She just stood there, deciding which one she would have. Some Americans behind her got irritated because she was holding up the line, and they told her just to take both of them! She nearly cried. She couldn’t believe what she was hearing. Two days ago two loaves of bread were a tremendous feast, and now she was drinking Coca-Cola and 7-UP at once!”

Now, after fifteen years, Gennady Podrezov finds himself the most unlikely beneficiary of the infamous Article 8 loophole. Where United Nations sanctions against his country ended at the borders of Russia, he, and thousands of other Russians like him find themselves living comfortable lives in the UIS Republic of Kazakhstan, helping American companies exploit the vast oil reserves in the northern Caspian Sea.

“As much as I appreciate the life that my family now has, I don’t think the Americans and Chinese should have ignored the sanctions,” Podrezov said, “They knew that all they were doing was helping Zhirinovsky hold onto power.”

For the thousands who were dragged from their homes in the middle of the night after UN sanctions began to collapse in February of 1993, the memories are still bitter. But they find themselves outnumbered not only at the ballot box, but even inside their homes.

“To this day I will never forgive Vladimir Zhirinovsky for what he did to my family on February 13, 1993,” Podrezov added, “and I will never vote for the Liberal Democratic Party! Never! I don’t buy for a minute that they changed under Lebed! But sadly, my youngest son is a strong supporter of Alexander Lebed and even Vladimir Zhirinovsky. It’s odd. The image of him getting his tooth broken by Zhirinovsky’s thugs is why I hate the LDP so much. Yet he thinks I’m the one who is out of touch with reality.”


Let’s Go Eastern Europe 1998
Eastern Europe on a Budget

Let’s Go Inc.
Publication Date: January 9, 1998
800 Pages

Croatia

Dubrovnik


Dubrovnik is an old city on the Adriatic Sea coast in the extreme south of Croatia. Despite heavy damage during the Croatian civil war of 1992-1993, it is slowly regaining its place as one of the most prominent tourist resorts of the Mediterranean as western tourists are slowly discovering what Lord Byron called “the pearl of the Adriatic”.


Dubrovnik is a seaport and the centre of the Dubrovnik-Neretva County. Its population was about 43,000 in 1991, but most believe that it has since doubled as refuges from the war in Bosnia have flooded into the city. Dubrovnik was listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1979, and despite the damage from the war, much of the beauty still can be found in the old city. A magnificent curtain of walls surrounds marble streets and baroque buildings in the old town, a sharp contrast to the refugee camps that encircle the city itself.

Getting In:

By Plane

Dubrovnik airport is located about 15 miles to the south of the city. The following airlines offer service to Dubrovnik:

Lufthansa (Munich), Luxair (Luxembourg), British Airways (London-Gatwick), Iberia airlines (Madrid), Tarom (Bucharest), and Croatian Air (Zagreb and various European locations).

By Boat

Almost everyone who comes to Dubrovnik comes by way of ferry. The biggest ferry service that stops in Dubrovnik is Jadrolinija, which leaves either from Rijeka, Croatia, or Bari, Italy.

By Land

Contrary to what you might have been told, overland service to Dubrovnik from Zagreb is virtually non-existent and not for the faint of heart! Ever since the 1992 ceasefire, and the 1993 Split Peace Treaty which allegedly ended the conflict between the UIS and Croatia, any drive through central Croatia will drag you into a ocean of red tape that even the most seasoned war correspondents have trouble with! Bus service between Zagreb and Dubrovnik will require you to either take the coastal road to Zadar and then catch a ferry to Split, or enter what the Croatians refer to as “UIS occupied territory”.

If you are crazy enough to take Bus 113B from Zagreb to the Krnjak border crossing, be advised that you will need a Croatian travel permit to enter the UIS Republic of Serbian Krajina. These travel permits are not easy to obtain if you are not a journalist. Also be advised that to enter the UIS, you need an entry visa. Unlike with the UIS Republic of Kazakhstan, there is no independent embassy or consulate office for Krajina, so you will need to deal directly with the UIS embassy! A non-Kazakh UIS visa is even tougher to obtain than a Croatian travel permit and you can pretty much assume you won't get one unless you are from North Korea, Libya, Iraq, or oddly enough Switzerland. From there note that there is NO EMBASSY SERVICE anywhere in the UIS Republic of Serbian Krajina for any western country (yes, this means you Switzerland). So if you lose your passport or it is stolen (and it will be, see Staying Safe below) then you will need to find a way to get to a consulate office in Belgrade, UIS and hope that you are Swiss, Danish, Irish, or Chinese. Now if this hasn’t discouraged you, keep in mind that if you go to Switzerland and obtain a UIS entry visa at the embassy in Bern, YOU WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO ENTER GERMANY, FRANCE, ITALY, GREAT BRITIAN, FINLAND, SPAIN, PORTUGAL, ROMANIA, SLOVENIA, POLAND, AUSTRIA, OR ABOUT TWENTY FOUR OTHER COUNTRIES! Also keep in mind that if you are German, American, British, French, or from Scandinavia YOU MAY BE PROSECUTED IN YOUR HOME COUNTRY FOR ENTERING THE UIS REPUBLIC OF SERBIAN KRAJINA!

So, basically, to take the bus from Zagreb to Dubrovnik via Knin, first go to Switzerland, get a passport, then fly to Zagreb (remember, you just gave up your right to go overland through Austria or Italy). From there catch Bus 113B to Krnjak. From there cross the border by foot, and go over to the Mihailović Bus Station three blocks to the south. At the Mihailović Bus Station you will need to catch Bus 17 to Knin. Right about now you may want to write a will and ask yourself how you plan to deal with being mugged and/or shot, and if you have a phone card it would be a good idea to start calling your relatives for a good lawyer back home.

Stay Safe:

Although Dubrovnik is relatively safe, the numerous “tent cities” and UN run refugee camps outside of town are VERY DANGEROUS and should be avoided at all cost. Travel to the UIS Republic of Serbian Krajina is not advised, as crime against westerners is not only common, but apparently encouraged by the local authorities. Travel to the Croatian Republic of Herzeg-Bosnia in the former Yugoslavian Republic of Bosnia is also not recommended. Although Mostar and Medjugorje are relatively safe, there have been reports of armed bandits stopping busses en route and robbing people at gun point. Also keep in mind that many western nations do not recognize the Croatian annexation of Herzeg-Bosnia under the terms of the Split Peace Treaty and you may be in hot water with your local government if there is any evidence of travel to either Mostar or Medjugorje in your passport or travel documents.

 

[Pellegrino]

PART THIRTY FOUR: THE NIGHT OF THE TIGERS

PART THIRTY FOUR: THE NIGHT OF THE TIGERS

Well,some of you were curious what the police state in the UIS looked like. I had planned to go into that, but I also had quite a few updates in regards to Yugoslavia. So I decided to sort of merge the two topics. In TTL, we start seeing the emergence of a paramilitary organization in the Krajina that lays the foundation of what will soon become a virtual SS not only in Yugoslavia, but in Russia as well. We also get a few hints that the UIS is a pretty loose organization thus far. Armenia is left alone for the most part, and the Serbs assume they will be treated in much the same way. But a familiar face from OTL soon emerges and changes the way the UIS operates in the Krajina…

Some names we will be visiting in this update:


Serb paramilitary leader Arkan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkan

Former Mayor of Vukovar Slavko Dokmanovic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavko_Dokmanovi%C4%87

The UAZ-469
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UAZ-469

The T-72
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product890.html

The Tigers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serb_Volunteer_Guard



UIS Presidential Candidate Vladimir Putin in an interview with the BBC on August 1, 2011.

Discussing the partnership between the UIS and noted war criminal Željko “Arkan” Ražnatović.



BBC: Why did the UIS become partners with the noted war criminal Željko Ražnatović during the wars in the former Yugoslavia?

Putin: That was a decision made by President Zhirinovsky. He admired Arkan and wanted to work with him.

BBC: Once again Mr. Putin, you seem to be trying to pass blame to former President Zhirinovsky for any controversial decision that you might have been responsible for. Numerous defectors have said it was the KGB, which you were in charge of in October of 1992, which allowed Arkan’s Tigers to emerge as the UIS version of the SS in the former Yugoslavia.

Putin: That is simply not true. I had no role in the selection of Arkan as head of security in the Krajina.

BBC: Then why did the military let Zhirinovsky make such an important decision in regards to such a sensitive issue? Why would the military agree to such a thing, especially since it was obvious that such a decision would drag the UIS into the Bosnian conflict as well?

Putin (long pause): I had no role in the decision to partner with Arkan. Perhaps General Lebed may have had a role, but the KGB didn't agree to Arkan at any time.

BBC: Didn’t you at least vet him? Didn’t the KGB have a role in looking through his background?

Putin: No. We were never asked to do so.


“A Country Not Worthy of an Occupation”- Russian soldier recounts his time in Vukovar during the 1992-1993 war with Croatia

Foreign Affairs (10/22/2002)
by William Hason

Denis Valilov recounts his time in Croatia in 1992

(ROME, ITALY)- Denis Valilov still considers himself a patriot, even if many in his country now regard him as a traitor.

“I still love my country,” he said as he sipped his espresso at an outdoor café in Piazza Navona, “and I still believe in the original concept of the UIS. But not what it is now, not what it became.”

Valilov was one of thousands of Russians who served in the Northern Group of Forces stationed in Poland, and he remembers vividly the day he received the order to retreat.

“We were all angry,” Valilov recalled, “we knew that our departure was at least three months overdue. When Poland joined NATO it was obvious what was going to come next. So why did it take them so long to get us out of there? Why did it take us getting made to look like fools by the Germans for them to realize that the Poles didn’t want us there anymore?”

It was events during the embarrassing retreat from Poland and the subsequent “invasion” of Romania that nearly led to the young officer’s defection in September of 1992.

“So many of us were angry,” Valilov added, “we were angry that General Dubynin was arrested and then killed by the KGB, and we were angry that nobody knew what to do with us. On top of that our rations were drastically cut! We were an army without food!”

As his unit was given orders to enter into Romania on September 26th, 1992, Valilov watched as dozens of men elected to abandon their posts, leaving him in charge of an inexperienced crew to man the T-72 tank he was just put in charge of.

“Once the original crew made it to Grodno, just across the Polish border in Belarus, they just parked it in front of a post office and went home,” Valilov said, “I was a young officer with no command experience, but they told me to get up there and pick it up before someone sold it on the black market to the Lithuanians.”

Valilov commandeered a mechanic to go with him to pick it up. The very fact that he succeeded in the mission and chose not to try and sell the tank himself led to his unexpected promotion.

“They were shocked that I actually came back with it,” Valilov said with a laugh, “at that point being dependable was more important than being trained. So they told me I was now in command of the T-72 tank I just recovered.”

Unfortunately for Junior Lieutenant Valilov, he had little time to enjoy his newfound status as tank commander. Less than two days later he and his ragtag crew were given general orders to cross the border into Romania and make it to Yugoslavia ASAP.

“I had an inexperienced driver-mechanic,” Valilov said with a chuckle, “he had never driven a tank before the retreat from Poland, and the only reason he drove one then was because he didn’t want to leave it for the Germans. But for a kid with no training, he handled that T-72 with surprising ease.”

His gunner, however, was a different story.

“I was assigned this Armenian gunner who was very skilled at his job,” Valilov said, “the only problem was he was a sociopath. He refused to speak to us in Russia, and half the time we would just see him staring at us with this wild look in his eyes. But once we got to Croatia his demeanor changed. He would go up the water tower in Vukovar with a snipers rifle and try and shoot people every other morning before breakfast. That would put him in better spirits for the rest of the day.”

Again the young officer found himself the unlikely beneficiary of a successful move. Crossing into Romania early on the morning of September 27th, he arrived in Yugoslavia just before 7 AM, the only T-72 that arrived ahead of schedule.

“To be honest, the mechanic and I were just so terrified of that crazy Armenian that we just drove as fast as we could without stopping,” Valilov recounted with a chuckle, “I think it was almost luck that we didn’t end up lost like everyone else. When we got the order at 1AM, I honestly was conflicted. Clearly the UIS ground forces were not properly mobilized.”

Valilov had reason to be concerned. Over 5,000 troops were supposed to leave Khust in the Ukraine that night, but the young officer could see that something was wrong with the planned intervention from the start.

“There were only 500 troops at most,” Valilov said, “and most of the other units were so badly understaffed thanks to defections that their ability to mobilize was basically zero.”

Of the other units that had made it to Khust, only a dozen other main battle tanks were present, and none of them were eager to cross into Romania.

“One T-72 commander was arguing with his crew,” Valilov recounted, “they wanted to go to Estonia instead of Yugoslavia. The gunner was from Narva and he wanted to help there instead. He said that the UIS should take precedence over Yugoslavia.”

Valilov also noticed that the defections had decimated the other T-72s and T-80s. Each needed a three man crew, and once the word had come that they would soon be ordered to go to Yugoslavia, many of the gunners and drivers elected to return home. Others stayed in Khust, but elected to ignore the order nonetheless.


“Remember, this was before the fall of Grozny and the Kosovo missile crisis,” Valilov added, “In late 1992 it really did appear like the military was losing its grip and we really could just go home. But I was more worried about the Armenian at that point. The first time I heard him speaking Russian was when I said I thought we should hold off on entering Romania. He said that I was ignoring a direct order, and that was treason. I said to him ‘Why do you care? You’re not Serbian! You’re not even Russian! Why do you care if we go to Yugoslavia?’ He just looked at me with those crazy eyes and said ‘I don’t care where we go. But if this is treason, then I think I would be allowed to shoot you without getting in trouble.’”

Within the hour Junior Lieutenant Valilov and his T-72 were in northern Romania en route to Vojvodina.

“As soon as we reached Vukovar we knew there would be a shakeup,” Valilov added, “when we saw General Yakovlev arrive with the 14th Army we knew that things would be run differently.”

Although Valilov recognized that a firm hand was needed in restoring morale, even he was impressed with General Yakovlev’s heavy handed approach when it came to dealing with corruption.

“Once we got to the Krajina we were shocked at the level of corruption with the Serbs,” Valilov said, “they had a massive criminal enterprise going in Vukovar, and were selling everything they could steal on the black market. At first General Yakovlev tried to get the local authorities to rein in the corruption, but they were the ones profiting from it!”

However, Junior Lieutenant Valilov would find himself thrust in the center of a scandal that erupted between the UIS military command and the local Serbian authorities, one which would redefine the UIS role in the Republic of Serbian Krajina.

“It was right after the invasion of Croatia,” Valilov recalled, “I was on patrol in Čepin when the T-72 just died on me.”

Alone in a hostile Croatian town, Valilov would be shocked to discover what caused the breakdown.

“Now only had all of our fuel been siphoned out of the gas tank, but they drained all the brake fluid as well!”

Valilov contacted his superiors in Vukovar, but when reinforcements arrived Valilov was surprised to discover that their supplies had also been pillaged.

“A UAZ-469 came to our rescue with some petrol, but when we opened the canister we found that the petrol had been stolen and replaced with water,” Valilov recounted, “at that point we noticed that some Croatian guerillas had arrived. We had no choice but to destroy the tank.”

Valilov was furious at the Serbs, but he was unsure if his superiors would share his displeasure with their allies. But Valilov, and the Serbs, were about to discover that membership in the UIS was not quite what they expected.

“I think the Serbs thought the Russians would treat them the same way they treated the Armenians,” Valilov said, “to leave them alone and let them run the country as they saw fit. But the Armenians didn’t need to be supervised like the Serbs did. The fact that we had to destroy a T-72 because of their rampant corruption was simply too much. So General Yakovlev declared martial law and launched an investigation.”

General Yakovlev’s investigation would find that nearly 30% of the military’s petrol had been stolen in the days before the invasion. But much to the surprise of General Yakovlev, the guilty party was easy to locate.

“General Yakovlev simply rounded up everyone who had access to the vehicles, both Serb and Russian” Valilov recounted, “and then he told them that the KGB would be coming in the morning to discuss the matter with each of them. He advised them that their families would also need to be questioned as well.”

The detained men quickly pointed the finger at the guilty party: Vukovar’s Mayor, Slavko Dokmanović.

“I guess it was Mayor Dokmanović’s nephew or something,” Valilov recalled, “He was stealing the petrol and selling it to the Yugoslavians across the border.”

What followed would shock Valilov as General Yakovlev ordered him to seize the war profiteer.

“That guy didn’t even try and hide it,” Valilov said, “he had barrels of petrol in his warehouse!”

The Russians then dragged the man to the city center, where Lieutenant Valilov was ordered to arrest him in a very public spectacle. The man’s hands were tied behind his back, and around his neck he wore a sign that read ‘traitor’.

“General Yakovlev brought every Serb man, woman, and child out to see the thief get arrested,” Valilov recounted.

As the man screamed profanities at the Russians, Lieutenant Valilov noticed Mayor Dokmanović storming down Zelena Street with about a dozen armed thugs. Valilov worried that the situation was getting out of hand.

“I didn’t want to get involved in a firefight,” Valilov recalled, “to be honest, I didn’t understand why we had to make such a production out of the whole thing.”

“Mayor Dokmanović ordered the soldiers to release his nephew,” Valilov recalled, “and he kept screaming at General Yakovlev that he was a guest in the Republic of Serbian Krajina. He then turned in my direction and started screaming at me, although he didn’t get very far before the General responded.”

General Yakovlev pulled out a pistol and shot Mayor Dokmanović in the head, killing him instantly. The armed thugs immediately dropped their weapons as the Russians seized them.

“As soon as the General fired his pistol everyone just dropped everything” Valilov recalled, “it all happened so suddenly that, for a few seconds, I wasn’t sure what was going on. I was sort of in a daze. But when I looked over and saw the Armenian with this ridiculous smile on his face, like he just had sex, I suddenly realized that I was covered in blood.”

Valilov would recall how quickly the partnership would change after that incident.

“The following day President Milan Babić arrived from Knin,” Valilov recalled, “he was furious with General Yakovlev. But General Yakovlev was unimpressed, and his response clearly shook up the President.”

History has long since debated what exactly transpired between the two that day, but Valilov says that he knows first hand.

“I was there in the room,” Valilov said with a chuckle, “I heard it with my own ears. As President Babić was ranting and raving, General Valilov said to him ‘when you turned on (Slobodan) Milosevic, he had you ousted. If you turn on the UIS military, you will end up dead on the side of the road.’”

From that point on, the UIS military began to operate completely independent of the government of the Republic of Serbian Krajina. But the lack of a Serbian face to what was beginning to look more and more like an occupation began to worry General Yakovlev.

“Before we arrived there was no economy in the Krajina,” Valilov recounted, “once we came thousands of Serbs had jobs thanks to the UIS military and all the while we were cleaning up corruption. Plus we drove the Croats out. But that didn’t change the fact that we were turning into an occupying army. We needed to find a Serb to work with us in Vukovar.”

Valilov, however, was shocked at who General Yakovlev partnered up with.

“I remember coming into the General’s office and seeing him sitting next to the most wanted criminal in Western Europe,” Valilov recounted, “I couldn’t believe he was honestly considering becoming partners with that madman.”

The bizarre partnership between the UIS and the man history would call “Arkan” continues to perplex historians, even today. Why a noted bank robber would be seen as a viable partner for the Russians has never been answered satisfactorily, but Valilov believes he knows the answer.

“The UIS didn’t want to occupy the Krajina,” Valilov said, “it was a criminal state run by gangsters. It was a country not worthy of an occupation. But General Yakovlev knew that the military needed to keep the corruption under control. The biggest threat to the UIS in Krajina no longer was NATO or Croatia, it was men like Arkan. Men with ties to Belgrade who could give the UIS numerous headaches if they so wished. Better to have men like that on your side. Besides, for as much of a gangster as Arkan was, he really did want to win the war. He was the kind of man who would kill his own brother if he caught him siphoning gas out of one of his tanks.”

The partnership with Arkan would bring stability to the Republic of Serbian Krajina, but it came at a hefty price for General Yakovlev and the UIS.

“With Krajina under Serb control, Arkan now focused his attention on Bosnia,” Valilov recalled, “and unfortunately for us, he managed to drag the entire UIS military into that war as well.”

But for Valilov, that was a conflict that he would end up watching from the television, and not the frontlines.

“It all happened in December, right after Arkan’s paramilitary group was merged with the Krajina police force and was named a separate wing of the UIS military,” Valilov recalled, “I was sent to the town of Knezvo, a few miles from the Hungarian border. I was supposed to keep an eye out for NATO troops.”

But a spontaneous decision would forever change his life that Christmas when he, and the soldier he was patrolling with, smelled a Christmas dinner being cooked in a farm house across the border in Sarok.

“Neither of us had a real meal in weeks,” Valilov recounted, “but as we were patrolling the border, all we could smell was fish soup and stuffed cabbage from that farmhouse. So I turned to the young boy and said ‘let’s ask them if we can join them for dinner.’ It was crazy, but we were so hungry we didn’t even care anymore.”

Lieutenant Valilov and the private were quickly apprehended by Hungarian troops as soon as they crossed the border.

“The kid was smart,” Valilov recalled, “he just said ‘I’m defecting’ and they took care of him. But I didn’t want to abandon my country so I kept telling them I was just lost and I didn’t mean to cross the border.”

After spending three nights in jail, Valilov finally relented.

“At that point I realized it would be worse for me if I was sent back, the UIS would think I was a spy. So I told them I was defecting as well.”

Now, after nearly twelve years since his defection, Denis Valilov still regards himself as a Russian in Rome.

“Obviously I’m not an Italian,” he said with a chuckle, “but I do believe that my home is now here in Rome. I would love the opportunity to return to Russia and visit my family, but not until things change there. I don’t want my children to grow up there. I don’t even want them to visit. Not as long as Vladimir Zhirinovsky is still in power. And as long as the Tigers are still allowed to run free in Serbia, I will never go back.”

Arkan and the Tigers

Excerpts from the book “The Soviets and the Serbs: Vladimir Zhirinovsky and the conquest of Yugoslavia


By Edward Ellis.
Published by Random House © 2004



Vukovar, UIS, October 30th, 1992:

As soon as General Yakovlev named Željko Ražnatović as head of Serbian security forces in The Krajina, confusion began to emerge. The exact role of the Serbian paramilitary leader was left unanswered initially, with many noted Serb politicians and military commanders unsure if they were now subservient to Arkan’s Tigers or not.

“He was running around saying that the Tigers were now in charge of security,” commented a Serbian officer who was stationed in Knin in November of 1992, “at first we just shrugged our shoulders and went on with our duties. But then the killings started.”

Shortly after the assassination of Vukovar mayor Slavko Dokmanović, word began to emerge that supporters of former President Goran Hadžić in the Serbian Liberal Democratic Party had sent an olive branch to Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic. General Gennady Yakovlev decided to crush the potential rebellion before it had the opportunity to gain traction, and he sent the Tigers to subdue the restive politicians.

“Some of the Serbs started feeling that Babic bit off more than he could chew with the Russians,” a Serbian politician who served in Knin would later recall, “they were desperate to mend fences with Milosevic in the hopes that the Krajina could be incorporated into Yugoslavia.”

The growing discontent over the heavy-handed tactics of the Russians would lead to a growing movement to revisit the partnership with Moscow. However, the movement, which had the tactic support of several Serbian military leaders, was brutally crushed before it ever had the chance to get off the ground.

“The problem was Milosevic was recognizing that it was suicide to try and go against the Russians,” a former Tiger would recall, “so as soon as he received word that some of the Serbs were trying to break free of the Russians he sold them out and told General Yakovlev.”

Yakovlev sent the Tigers to Knin on the night of October 30th where one of the most brutal purges to take place in the UIS would occur. Dozens of Serbian politicians were dragged out of their homes in the middle of the night by masked gunmen. At first believing that a criminal gang was attempting to kidnap the Serbian politicians, President Babic ordered the Knin Police to intercept the gunmen and rescue the politicians. He picked up the phone in his home to call the chief of police, only to be shocked at the voice at the other end of the phone.

“It was Arkan,” the former Tiger would recall, “he told him not to worry, they were just getting rid of some traitors and to go back to bed.”

Moments later masked gunmen kicked down the door of former President Goran Hadžić and seized him. Dragging him out to the street, Hadžić was stunned to see dozens of his fellow Liberal Democrats on their knees at the side of the road as Arkan walked by.

“I don’t think he really believed that fellow Serbs would turn on him in such a way,” the former Tiger said with a laugh, “until he saw Arkan start shooting the others I think he honestly believed he was immune.”

The shootings took place all over the Republic of Serbian Krajina that night, but although they only lasted for several hours, the impact of that night on the Serbian psyche was far reaching.

“I had an uncle who fled to America,” one soldier said solemnly, “On the first anniversary of the Night of the Tigers he received a knock on the door. He nearly fainted when he saw a child wearing a mask. He didn’t know it was an American holiday! He honestly thought the Tigers sent a child to kill him!”

Babic and Hadžić would both survive the Night of the Tigers, but neither would ever challenge General Yakovlev after that, publically or privately. When the murders were blamed on supporters of former President Goran Hadžić, Babic never questioned the official report from Moscow.

“He knew it was the Tigers and not some angry Hadžić supporters,” the former Tiger said with a laugh, “considering he spoke to Arkan personally on the phone while it was happening!”

As the Republic of Serbian Krajina awoke on October 31st, the image of dead Serbs on the road shocked many of them into silence. All over Knin men lay dead in front of their homes, many with messages carved into their chest and bellies.

“The most common one was ‘Only Unity Saves the Serbs’,” commented the former Tiger, “but sometimes we personalized it. Sometimes we would sign it ‘Love, Arkan.’”

 

[Pellegrino]

PART THIRTY FIVE: THE TRANSYLVANIAN CORRIDOR


United States presidential election, 1992
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Nominee:

Bob Kerrey (NE)-Al Gore (TN) (Democrat)

George H. W. Bush (TX) -Dan Quayle (IN) (Republican)

Ross Perot (TX) -James Stockdale(IL) (Independent)

Electoral vote:

Kerrey- 400

Bush- 138

Perot- 0

States carried:

Kerrey- 34 + DC

Bush- 16

Perot- 0

Popular vote:

46,909,806 (45.2%)

33,104,550 (31.9%)

23,743,821 (22.9%)

The United States presidential election of 1992 had three major candidates: Incumbent Republican President George H. W. Bush; Democratic Nebraska Senator Bob Kerrey, and independent Texas businessman Ross Perot.

Bush had alienated much of his conservative base by breaking his 1988 campaign pledge against raising taxes. Also, the economy was in a recession, and Bush's perceived greatest strength, foreign policy, became his greatest liability as the former Soviet Union, headed by a right wing junta made up of radical nationalists and the military, began to challenge the west in the former Yugoslavia and Romania. A UIS invasion of the former Yugoslav republic of Croatia coupled with a UIS backed Hungarian revolution in western Romania the day of the election all but sealed the fate for Bush and destroyed any hope for a comeback in the polls.

Presidential election results map. Red denotes states won by Bush/Quayle, Blue denotes those won by Kerrey/Gore.



Romanian President outlaws pro-Hungarian political party, prompting protests across Romania

By Richard Roundtree
Economist
November 1, 1992


Gheorghe Funar wasted no time in rattling the system in Romania, issuing an executive order that drew harsh criticism from opposition parties. In his first official presidential act, Funar stunned NATO leaders and fellow Romanians by outlawing the Democratic Union of Hungarians in Romania, a political party popular with the Hungarian ethnic minority population.

“It is time that we stop the divisive policies of the past and accept that there are no Hungarians in Romania,” Funar said in a press conference, “there are only Romanian citizens. This country stands unified with all of her citizens, regardless of race.”

The move sparked protest across central Romania with ethnic Hungarians taking to the streets to condemn the move.

“Besides the fact that he has no legal authority to outlaw a political party by executive order, the suggestion that there are no Hungarians in Romania is asinine,” commented Hungarian politician Béla Markó, “considering Romania needs to strengthen ties to the west, this sort of act only serves to isolates us.”

Both former president Ion Iliescu and Romanian Democratic Convention leader Emil Constantinescu also condemned the move.

“The greatest threat this country faces today is not the Hungarian minority population, which has never revolted against the central government, nor ever supported separation from Romania,” Constantinescu said in a press release, “the greatest threat Romania faces today is from the former Soviet Union. And President Funar has just weakened Romania’s position and lessened the likelihood of NATO admission through his reckless and illegal proclamation.”

Hungary has expressed deep reservations about President Funar’s proclamation, and has called on NATO to withhold admission until the rights of minorities in Romania are guaranteed.


Protesters in Romanian city of Târgu Mureș fired upon by sniper as fears of civil war intensifies


By Richard Roundtree
Economist
November 2, 1992

President Funar calls for calm

Just a day after Romanian president Gheorghe Funar issued a controversial executive order outlawing the Democratic Union of Hungarians in Romania, a political party aimed at protecting the rights of the Hungarian minority population in Romania, fears of a civil war have emerged in the former Warsaw pact nation. A peaceful protest of Hungarians and Romanians in the ethnically diverse city of Târgu Mureș ended in riots when a sniper fired upon the protesters, killing seven before being captured by Romanian officials. The riots, which have engulfed Târgu Mureș and which threaten to spiral into other ethnically mixed cities in the central regions of Romania, have badly rattled the new President, who visibly was shaken in a press conference as he called for calm and promised to withdraw the executive order banning the Democratic Union of Hungarians in Romania. However, it may prove to be too late, as a previously unknown political entity called the “Szekely Liberation Front” has issued a proclamation, calling for the independence of Szeklerland and for Hungarians to “reject slavery and fascism and stand for a free and united Szekely Republic.”

Still, many in the west have questioned the legitimacy of the SLF, which German Chancellor Helmut Kohl called “a puppet of Moscow.”

“It is clear to us that the SLF is not a legitimate organization representing the interests of the Hungarian ethnic minority of Romania,” Kohl said in a press conference earlier today, “rather, it is clearly a tool of Moscow attempting to create discord and disunity within Romania in an attempt to further Moscow’s aims in the region.”

Many in the West and even in Romania have questioned the legitimacy of the SLF as well, noting that the UIS almost immediately issued a “statement of support” for the SLF. Critics also note that the alleged sniper, Mihai Baboescu, was a former Communist Party supporter with strong ties to the KGB. A neighbor noted that Baboescu spent much of the previous Christmas “in tears over the execution of Ceaușescu.”

“He clearly was devastated that communism was over,” the neighbor said, “up until recently he still flew the communist era flag. I don’t understand why he would suddenly turn so radically.”

Still, it appears that as riots spiral out of control in central Romania, that the country may become the latest casualty of the rapidly deteriorating political situation in Eastern Europe.


“Romania after Ceaușescu” (Routledge Series on Russian and East European Studies)


by Robert Solomon
Routledge Press, (2003)


CHAPTER FIFTEEN: A MISTAKE OF EPIC PROPORTIONS

Once the unheard of Szekely Liberation Front issued its proclamation calling for the independence of Szeklerland, many Romanian opposition groups suddenly realized that former President Ion Iliescu’s dire warnings were in fact coming to fruition. Ion Iliescu prophetically warned Romanians during Funar’s swearing in ceremony that Russia was determined to create any sort of pretext to keep the road between the Ukraine and Yugoslavia open (dubbing it the “Transylvanian corridor”) and that Russian President Vladimir Zhirinovsky would have no qualms about creating civil war in Romania if it meant keeping supplies flowing to the newly annexed UIS Republic of Krajina. Although Funar was dismissive of the former President at the time, what was clear just three weeks into his Presidency was that Iliescu’s warnings were in fact legitimate, prompting many in his cabinet to quietly suggest that Funar had “been played.” It became clear that the UIS was manipulating the misguided statements of President Gheorghe Funar to create a “Transylvanian corridor” and that the SLF, an organization clouded in mystery, was the tool to create just such an opening.

“There are many reasons why Romanians call Funar’s Presidency ‘the great catastrophe’ despite the fact that it was so brief,” commented Daniel Barbu, a Romanian journalist, “but the ease upon which he let Zhirinovsky manipulate him was clearly reason number one. Before he took office there were issues between Hungarians and Romanians, sure. But in three weeks he created so much discord between the Hungarians and central government that he allowed the fictitious SLF to jump into the picture and start a civil war that nobody except Zhirinovsky wanted.”

Although Funar tried desperately to downplay his rhetoric once the SLF issued its declaration of independence, tensions spiraled out of control as riots spread all over central and western Romania over the course of three days. On November 3rd, 1992, as American voters took to the polls, armed units of the SLF, assisted by UIS “advisors” seized the town of Borsec in central Romania. The SLF proceeded to arrest the entire Romanian population, which numbered just under three hundred and fifty. Historians widely consider the capture of Borsec as the start of the Romanian Civil War.

 

[Pellegrino]

PART THIRTY SIX: A BILLION KALASHNIKOVS AND ONE NUKE

PART THIRTY SIX: A BILLION KALASHNIKOVS AND ONE NUKE



Well, this is a much broader post which paints a much clearer, and darker, picture of the world. We now see how Russia and the UIS operate, in particular in places like Pakistan and central Africa, where anarchy was already taking a foothold. While Pakistan holds a special place in the heart of Zhirinovsky (thanks to the Afghan war), Zaire represents a more broad and general world policy. And just in case you guys think Russian and Serb mercenaries is total ASB, keep in mind, this did happen in OTL! One of the most fascinating people in the Congolese Civil War was Jugoslav Petrusic, also known as Colonel Yugo. He was a war criminal who committed some terrible atrocities while in Zaire, who also was married to an African woman and had a child with her. He was a veteran of the Bosnian war, but worked with a large number of Bosnian and Croat mercenaries in Zaire. When all was said and done, this real life Bond villain was secretly working for the French government to prop up the regime of Mobutu Sese Seko. How Chirac avoided prosecution for this is beyond me, but in this timeline his role in supporting the mercenaries is simply to egregious to overlook and he is convicted of it. There is not a whole lot on Colonel Yugo online unless you speak or read Serbo-Croatian, but if you do a Google search on him you will find some fascinating stuff. 1997 was, in my opinion, a pivotal time in Africa with these numerous private military organizations like Executive Outcomes operating in countries like Sierra Leone and Congo. In OTL the failed Wonga Coup sort of brought these groups down (EO and Sandline both folded in 1998 and 2004 respectively) but here, with strong Russian support, these organizations not only flourish, but succeed (we see the Wonga Coup doesn’t fail, because rather than have to fly out of Zimbabwe, they are allowed to fly directly out of Zaire). But tragically, the cost is high with a Congolese Civil war that is even deadlier than the one in OTL and which drags on from 1997 to at least 2008. Some new names we will be introducing in this update:

The Kiev, a badly decrepit and soon to be decommissioned aircraft carrier in 1993 that has one last mission:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_aircraft_carrier_Kiev

Yuly Vorontsov
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuly_Vorontsov


Balochistan:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balochistan

Gwadar, a costal city in Pakistan that was sold to them by Oman in 1958:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwadar

The Boloch Liberation Front:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baloch_Liberation_Front


Baloch Liberation Front leader Jumma Marri:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumma_Khan_Marri

The Balochistan Liberation Army:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balochistan_Liberation_Army

Balach Marri, leader of the Balochistan Liberation Army:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balach_Marri


Mobuto opponent Étienne Tshisekedi of Zaire: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89tienne_Tshisekedi


Nzanga Mobutu, son of former Zaire dictator Mobuto Sese Seko:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nzanga_Mobutu


Equatorial Guinea opposition leader Severo Moto:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severo_Moto

British MP Charles Kennedy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Kennedy

Some info on Colonel Yugo:

http://iwpr.net/report-news/alleged-assassins-were-no-strangers-france

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/03/19/world/serb-who-went-to-defend-zaire-spread-death-and-horror-instead.html


CNN interview with James Baker, former Secretary of State under President George H.W. Bush

July 13, 1997


CNN: You have been a critic of President Kerrey’s initial response to the former Soviet Union's expansionist policies in Eastern Europe, calling his first 100 days in office “the greatest failure of presidential foreign policy in modern American history.”

Baker: President Kerrey made some critical mistakes early on, and I think the end result was it let The UIS off the hook right when they were on the verge of collapsing.

CNN: Such as?

Baker: For one thing by letting China off the hook. Once China started to balk on sanctions he should have rallied the troops and got China back on board. Another thing was by not standing by Pakistan when the UIS decided to target Pakistan.

CNN: But he authorized over five billon dollars in aid to Pakistan in his first week as president, and also declared the Balochistan Liberation Front a terrorist organization.

Baker: And where did that money end up? In Afghanistan and Kashmir. The Pakistanis didn’t need money; they needed the US Navy to send a battleship and drive the Kiev out of the Indian Ocean. We should have sought to end that second rate rebellion in the Gwadar enclave and get the UN in there before it turned into a disaster.

CNN: But the Pakistanis eventually crushed the Gwadar independence movement and regained control of the city despite the air support from the Russians and the Kiev.

Baker: Yes, and then they proceeded to commit so many human rights violations that they single handedly revitalized the Balochistan Liberation Front. The Russians knew that the Pakistanis would overplay their hand, and as far as Vladimir Zhirinovsky was concerned, Pakistan was responsible for the defeat of the Soviets in Afghanistan. It was a special mission of his to destroy that country.

CNN: Is that why Pakistani troops were targeted in Somalia?

Baker: Yes. I read that General Lebed famously called Pakistan the “soft underbelly” of the UN. I don’t know if that is true, but Pakistan became the example that the UIS gave to the rest of the world. See how much western aid really matters when the Russians decide to destroy your country from the inside out.

CNN: You also called President Kerrey’s selection for your replacement as “a complete disaster”.

Baker (long pause): That was taken somewhat out of context. But I do feel that Walter Mondale was, quite simply, the wrong man for the job.


UIS Presidential Candidate Vladimir Putin in an interview with the BBC on August 1, 2011.

Discussing the UIS’s support of the Balochistan Liberation Front and the targeting of Pakistani peacekeepers in Somalia by UIS sponsored rebels.


BBC: You claimed that General Lebed personally gave the order to send the UIS warship Kiev to Gwadar in January of 1993 and that he, not Vladimir Zhirinovsky, instructed pro-UIS elements of the Somali opposition to target Pakistani troops.

Putin: Correct. General Lebed realized that the sanctions were castrating the nation and unless we got them lifted, the country would implode before the summer.

BBC: But to send a Russian aircraft carrier to the Indian Ocean? Couldn’t that have provoked the Pakistanis into shooting at it or even sinking it? Wouldn’t that have resulted in a tremendous loss of prestige?

Putin: It was a chance we had to take. But Lebed, and even President Zhirinovsky, felt that Pakistan was ripe for the taking. It barely had control of its western provinces and basically had no control of the north-west territories bordering Afghanistan. If we could cause Pakistan to implode before we did, we would show the rest of the world that American aid was ultimately worthless. If we accomplished that, well, in such an instance we could cause the sanctions to collapse.

BBC: So in a sense it was a success?

Putin: For the UIS it was. Obviously for countries like Pakistan and Zaire it was not. But at the end of the day Lebed and Zhirinovsky were on the same page about one thing: the arms race of the USSR and the USA destroyed the Soviet Union and we couldn’t hope to keep that up. But Zhirinovsky realized something that many of the old guard didn’t. The west had become so rich and so successful that they had grown soft. We didn’t need to have the ground forces to match the American forces, or even the nuclear weapons to match theirs. All we needed was a billion Kalashnikov’s and one nuke aimed at New York and that would be enough to wage a new kind of cold war against the West. When all was said and done, the sanctions collapsed because for all the promises of aid money from the West, one thing frightened these countries more than anything else. And it was something we understood very well: they feared a rebellion.



Islamists seize northern Pakistani city, at least 133 dead as Pakistani troops flee breakaway province of Balochistan

By Sergio Marquez (Toronto Globe and Mail) –January 27, 2002

Quetta after Pakistan troops fled the city

QUETTA — After fighting the Pakistani military for nearly ten years in an attempt to establish an independent Bloch republic in western Pakistan, soldiers of the Balochistan Liberation Front appear poised to finally realize their dream as the city of Quetta fell yesterday just two days after a coup drove Pakistani prime minister Malik Meraj Khalid out of office. After a fierce firefight in the center of Quetta left over one hundred Pakistani soldiers dead, government troops withdrew from the capital city and retreated to Islamabad. The military-backed coup was widely seen as a direct result of American sanctions that had been levied against Pakistan for its refusal to assist in the invasion of Afghanistan after the September 11th terrorist attacks in New York, Washington, and Moscow.


“Pakistani troops have withdrawn from Quetta temporarily,” newly announced chief executive Pervez Musharraf said on Pakistani television, “but we will regroup and regain control of the Baloch province shortly.”


However, independent observers question the likelihood of Pakistan ever regaining control of Balochistan, noting that over the course of the previous nine years the province continued to descend into a state of anarchy as the central government withdrew from Gwadar and Turbat. Although most international observers feel that Musharraf will attempt to repair relations with the United States, the sanctions are believed to have devastated the military capabilities of the Pakistani government.


“The Baloch Liberation Front exposed the great myth of Pakistani nationhood,” former UIS ambassador Yuli Mikhailovich Vorontsov told the BBC in an interview, “Pakistan is not a nation but an occupier that has spread discontent and misery to all of her neighbors and to those minorities living within her borders.”


Although the UIS has already recognized the independence of Balochistan in 1994, many Pakistanis fear that the loss of Quetta will prompt other nations to formally recognize the independence of the breakaway province.

Eerie calm as fear descends upon Quetta

With the central government formally driven from the city, members of the Balochistan Liberation Front began rounding up “enemies” of the state in what the Red Crescent and Amnesty International have already called “a dangerous indication of planned human rights violations.” The BLF arrested the Pakistani mayor of Quetta, and also detained over 100 soldiers as well as dozens of government employees. However, perhaps most troubling were early indications that the shaky cease fire between the BLF and the rival Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) was about to collapse now that the Pakistanis were driven out. The BLF was a staunch ally of Moscow and condemned the actions of the Taliban in Afghanistan, while the BLA was seen as more closely allied with the Taliban and Al Qaeda.


“There are early indications that, despite this victory by the BLF, stability in Balochistan will not emerge,” a representative for Amnesty International told reporters, “we are very worried about the persecution of the Pashto population in Quetta.”


BLF leader Jumma Khan Marri has indicated that, although he will not target the Pashtu minority in Balochistan, he “will not let terrorists use our nation as a safe haven as had been the case under the Pakistanis.”


Zairian recounts torture by Serb and Russian mercenaries during Zaire’s devastating civil war

October 13, 1997
By Terry Higgins - CNN

Yugo posing with a government troop

(KISANGANI, ZAIRE) - Standing in a refugee camp in Congo, Daniel Nwanatabwe recalled the horrors of being held captive by Serb and Russian mercenaries paid for by his country’s leaders.

“We heard about the Tutsis coming in from Rwanda,” Nwanatabwe said softly, “but we didn’t think it would involve us. We had nothing to do with the Hutus and Tutsis.”

However, as rebel leader Laurent-Désiré Kabila’s forces routed Zairian forces in the early days of the conflict, Nwanatabwe realized that his city of over half a million would soon be thrust into the front lines.

“We kept expecting reinforcements to come from Kinshasa,” Nwanatabwe recalled, “but when they did they simply sacked the city before fleeing into the jungle. Over thirty years of corruption and mismanagement from Mobutu had taken a toll.”

However, with a defeat clearly looming, the widely despised Zairian president made perhaps his most controversial decision: to hire the Russians. The Russian mercenaries were part of the innocuous sounding International Strategic Resource Group, an army of mercenaries that amounted to a Russian foreign legion in Africa. However, prior to the Zairian Civil War, they were perhaps best known as a subcontractor for the South African based mercenary outfit Executive Outcomes.

“They had made their presence known in Africa over the last six years with limited engagements in Somalia and Sierra Leone,” former American ambassador Robert Oakley said of the group recently, “but now they have really upped the ante. Their presence in Zaire has completely changed everything in Africa, with Zaire now parroting whatever Moscow tells them to say at the UN while Moscow plunders Zaire much like the Belgians did one hundred years ago.”

The comparison to the Belgians is not without merit, especially with men like Nwanatabwe.

“We saw them arrive in helicopters,” Nwanatabwe said, “one thousand Russian and Serbian mercenaries. And as soon as they landed they began the terror.”

The troops, led by noted Serbian war criminal Jugoslav Petrusic, who operated under the nom de guerre of Colonel Yugo Dominik, immediately rounded up suspected rebel sympathizers, which appeared to Nwanatabwe to be anyone young enough to fight.

“He knew that we all hated Mobutu,” Nwanatabwe said, “everyone in Zaire did. So he treated us all as if we were rebel sympathizers and began rounding us up.”

Nwanatabwe recalled the day he was arrested, even though he was never told what he was charged with.

“I was walking down the street when suddenly a Russian saw me and ran up to me with his AK-47,” Nwanatabwe recalled, “I knew he’d shoot me if I ran so I just stood there hoping he’d see I wasn’t resisting. But he hit me in the face with his rifle butt and knocked me unconscious.”

Colonel Yuko’s reign of terror continued for ten days, until the rebels laid siege to the city. Although it at first looked like the city would fall despite the presence of the mercenaries, the assault was repelled when rebel leader Kabila was killed by a sniper.

“After that the rebellion just sort of fell apart,” Nwanatabwe said, “The rebels pulled back to eastern Zaire and began fighting between themselves.”

A power struggle between Jean-Pierre Bemba, who was backed by Rwanda, and Ernest Wamba dia Wamba, who was backed by Uganda, destroyed the opposition and even the alliance between Rwanda and Uganda. As Rwanda and Uganda inched closer to war, the Serbs and Russians succeeded in solidifying control over western Zaire, aided by an unexpected stroke of luck.

“When Mobutu died in September it took a lot of energy out of the opposition,” Nwanatabwe said, “he was the face of the devil to us, and now that he was dead, most Zairians lost the will to fight. For us the struggle was now over.”

The death of the dictator in September in his Kinshasa presidential mansion and the subsequent appointment of popular opposition leader Étienne Tshisekedi as new president (allegedly by the International Strategic Resource Group) calmed tensions in Zaire and gave some legitimacy to the new administration.

“It was funny, because at that point the government began calling for all foreign troops to leave the country,” Nwanatabwe recalled, “they said that eastern Zaire was occupied by Ugandan and Rwandan troops. But those of us in Kisangani knew better. Maybe eastern Zaire was occupied by Africans, but central Zaire was occupied by Russians.”

Initially the Russians and Serbs eased the grip they held on the city, releasing all of the prisoners in hopes that the population would rally behind the popular Tshisekedi. But for Nwanatabwe, he had seen enough from the Slavs.

“They tortured me every night I was in jail,” Nwanatabwe said, “and when they emptied the jail, only 108 of us were left. There were over 500 prisoners there, but only 100 walked out. It was obvious what happened.”

Nwanatabwe fled to the capital city of Kinshasa with his family before fleeing across the Congo River to neighboring Congo.

“What I saw in Kinshasa terrified me,” Nwanatabwe recalled, “the presidential palace was under guard of the Russians, and they were not letting anyone in or out. The new president was under house arrest!”

Since taking office in September, President Tshisekedi has not yet been seen in public, nor has he given any interviews with the foreign media. Perhaps most noteworthy is the steady stream of government officials who, despite technically being in control of the country, are defecting en masse. Perhaps most noteworthy was when newly appointed UN ambassador Nzanga Mobutu, son of the late dictator, sought asylum in the United States as soon as he arrived in New York, claiming that the International Strategic Resource Group had turned his country into a virtual fiefdom.

“What is happening right now in Zaire is the most troubling development in the African continent since colonialism,” Ambassador Oakley said, “and what is most troubling is that all the early indications are that the International Strategic Resource Group now is looking to expand their presence into other African nations as well.”


Chirac, former French president, convicted in corruption trial


BBC
January 22, 2008

Chirac, seen leaving the courthouse after being convicted


(PARIS) Yesterday afternoon, in front of a packed courtroom, Jacques Chirac became the first former president of France to be convicted on criminal charges after he was found guilty of corruption, embezzlement, tampering with evidence, and perjury. The convictions stem from his role in ordering his administration to illegally funnel millions of dollars to help former Zairian president Mobutu Sese Seko maintain power in the early months of that country’s civil war. It was alleged that the money, which violated French sanctions on both Zaire and the UIS, ultimately had been used to hire a group of Russian and Serbian mercenaries which repelled the Rwandan and Ugandan backed rebels in late 1997. However, the “victory” came at a steep cost to the country. Since 1997 the country has become a virtual puppet state of the Union of Independent States. The UIS has used Zaire as a base to overthrow regimes in Ivory Coast, Liberia, Sierra Leone as well as Equatorial Guinea. In Equatorial Guinea, British and Russian mercenaries ousted longtime dictator Teodoro Obiang in April of 2000.


Chirac is facing a maximum jail sentence of 18 years, although it is suspected that he would not have to serve any actual jail time. However, French prosecutors have indicated that more charges of corruption, connected to his time as mayor of Paris, will be filed against the former president.

 

[Pellegrino]

PART THIRTY SEVEN: SOME DAMNED SILLY THING IN THE BALKANS

PART THIRTY SEVEN: SOME DAMNED SILLY THING IN THE BALKANS

OK, I decided to split up this update into two, and start with this shorter one. Bosnia is going to be a key in coming post and rather than try and rush it I wanted to set it up with a bit more detail. Now in OTL we know that the Serbs and Croats in Bosnia secretly agreed to split up Bosnia in Graz Austria. The question is what impact does the influx of NATO and UIS weapons coupled with the sudden interest from both the UIS and the USA in Russia have on the eventual Serb-Croat tag team on the Bosnians in OTL. Well, the answer is, not much. But as Bosnia explode the rest of the world suddenly realizes that they just got invloved in some damned silly thing in the Balkans...

Some new names and places to focus on for this update...

Fikret Abdic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fikret_Abdić

Bihac during the war
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Bihać

Mate Boban
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mate_Boban

Graz Agreement:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graz_agreement

PART THIRTY SEVEN: SOME DAMNED SILLY THING IN THE BALKANS




CNN interview with James Baker, former Secretary of State under President George H.W. Bush

July 13, 1997


CNN: You famously called President Kerrey’s response to the UIS invasion of Bosnia in February of 1993 the “biggest disaster of his presidency” and his role in the Croat-Bosnian war in 1993 “a misguided mess.”

Baker: President Kerrey promised the American people, and the world, that he would stop the UIS in Yugoslavia. It really was the center of his campaign. He also authorized over five billion dollars in aid to the Croatians, with the understanding that they would use those funds to help counter the Russian threat in the Krajina. Needless to say, when the Croatians and the Serbs entered into secret negotiations to split up Bosnia between them, it was a tremendous disaster for us. To this day the Muslim world is furious at us over the fact that it was American artillery that destroyed the Mostar Bridge.

CNN: But many democrats countered that the Croats felt abandoned by the United States, and was backed into a corner in February of 1993 when they entered into secret negotiations with the Serbs.

Baker: That’s a bunch of malarkey. There is no excuse for what they did in Herzegovina, just as there is no excuse for what the Serbs did in Krajina. We could have kept them in check, but Walter Mondale simply did not know how to handle Yugoslavia. To him it was entirely black and white. To be honest, President Kerrey should have named Warren Christopher as Secretary of State from day one. Warren Christopher would have kept the Croats from stabbing us in the back and going to bed with the Serbs.


UIS Presidential Candidate Vladimir Putin in an interview with the BBC on August 1, 2011.

Discussing the UIS role in the Bosnia Civil War of 1992-1993.


BBC: You recently indicated that the joint Croat-Serb operation in Bosnia, dubbed Operation Graz after the Graz Agreement, caught the UIS off guard and came as a complete shock to General Lebed and General Yakovlev.

Putin: Yes. In early 1993 the sanctions and general weakened state of the UIS military was making the Krajina a very expensive endeavor. And the fact that now we were tied into a civil war in Romania had many of us in the 16-man Committee for State Security and Defense deeply troubled at how things were spiraling out of control. We were perfectly happy with the status quo in Bosnia, as long as the Serbs controlled northern Bosnia, our troops in the Krajina wouldn’t be cut off from the motherland. But we never expected that the Croats and Serbs would switch gears so quickly and become partners in Bosnia.

BBC: But UIS troops began moving into Bosnia just days after the operation kicked off. Is it your contention that the UIS entered Bosnia, just two months into the presidency of Bob Kerrey, as “peacekeepers” as General Lebed and others have contended?

Putin: Yes, we initially entered as peacekeepers, but things on the ground changed rapidly.

BBC: Many find that contention absurd.

Putin: It may seem that way to some. But we were working hard to lift the sanctions, and when the Tigers overran the Bihac Pocket we realized that Arkan was poised to kill thousands of civilians. If that happened on our watch the world would never lift the sanctions. Ever. So we sent UIS troops into Bihac to try and restore order and keep Arkan from committing a major war crime. We even put a Bosniak as head of the autonomous province of Western Bosnia, a man named Fikret Abdic. But it didn’t matter. By then Bosnia had spiraled out of control, and before all was said and done after the Split Peace Accord, we found ourselves in the middle of an ethnic war we had no business being part of.

BBC: So you are trying to say that UIS had no actual desire to annex the Bosnian Serb Republic into the UIS?! That seems highly suspect.

Putin: No, we didn’t. Even though the Croats and Serbs were all for it, we knew that it made the lifting of sanctions much more difficult. But unfortunately, we were tethered to the Serbs at that point, and anything they did would inherently be blamed on us. Particularly since Zhirinovsky and Yakovlev gave Arkan dictatorial powers in the Krajina. Once we realized that the Split Peace Plan was not being honored by either the Croats or the Serbs, we moved in so that those two nations didn’t drag us into another conflict we could ill afford to be part of.

The destruction of the Mostar Bridge by Croat forces

_______________________________________________________________________________

Croat troops capture Mostar

Excerpts from the book “The Soviets and the Serbs: Vladimir Zhirinovsky and the conquest of Yugoslavia


By Edward Ellis.
Published by Random House © 2004



Bihac, Bosnia I Herzegovina, February 11, 1993:

The joint Croat-Serbian led operation, dubbed Operation Graz, kicked off on the morning of February 9, 1993 and proceeded to surprise leaders in both Moscow and Washington. It also proved confusing to diplomats on both sides of the Iron Curtain, as many were suddenly unsure of who was aligned with who in the former Yugoslavia.

“The Americans feared that the Croats had suddenly switched sides and joined up with the Russians,” former UN observer Phil Maklin recalled, “and the Russians were afraid that the Serbs had made a deal with the Americans over Bosnia and were about to cut ties to the UIS. There was mass confusion at first before it started to become clear that both the Croatians and the Serbs simply didn’t give a damn about what the Americans or the Russians thought. They just wanted to beat up on the Bosnians since they were suddenly seen as weak and ripe for the taking.”

In perhaps one of the great ironies of the emergence of the former Yugoslavia as the a modern frontline of the Cold War, the Croats and Serbs suddenly found themselves awash with weapons as both the Russians and Americans anticipated a proxy war between the two enemies and armed them accordingly. But it was Bosnian Croat leader Mate Boban who realized that there was another age old dispute that needed settling, one with the Bosnian Muslim population.

“It really shouldn’t have come as a surprise to anyone who was familiar with Balkan history,” Maklin added, “but the Croats and Serbs weren’t content with arming to the teeth and waiting for the other side to blink. Especially since, thanks to Russian and American military aid, the Bosniaks were now so badly outgunned. So they put aside their differences and secretly agreed to implement the Graz agreement by force.”

Once it became clear what was happening both Moscow and Washington became enraged and tried to move quickly to quell the operation.

“At no time did they discuss this with their American or Russian allies,” Maklin recalled, “They just decided to split up Bosnia amongst themselves, and if it triggered World War III, well, so be it.”

Perhaps most troubling to the Russians and Americans was the brutality of both armies as they stormed through southern and western Bosnia. In Mostar, Croatian troops shelled the world famous bridge that connected the Catholic and Muslim sections of the town before overrunning the Muslim-held enclaves. Almost immediately, the Croats began a campaign of terror that shocked the western world, which had, prior to the operation, seen Croatia as an ally and a victim of Serbian and UIS aggression. The image of frightened women and children being driven from there homes disgusted many western leaders who felt betrayed by the Croats.

“For six months the leaders of the United States, France, Britain, and Germany had been telling their subjects that the Croats were a freedom loving people who wished only to live in peace,” Maklin added, “well, the image of that bridge collapsing shattered that picture.”

For leaders of the UIS, the concern was not over Serbian war crimes committed against civilians but over the fact that those crimes committed would almost certainly be blamed on them. If acts of ethnic cleansing, or even worse, genocide, were to occur, the result would almost certainly be the strengthening of international sanctions.

“The UIS felt that they had created a wedge in the sanctions,” Maklin added, “and they believed, realistically or not, that the sanctions were about to fall apart. But they had one man who suddenly stood in the way of that: Arkan.”

In what some historians called “Zhirinovsky’s Hindenburg moment,” the appointment of Arkan as head of Serbian security forces proved disastrous for the UIS military despite his success at subduing restive elements within Krajina itself. Within months, Arkan emerged as the most powerful man in the region. Unwilling to remain in Krajina, Arkan frequently raided Bosnia and conducted military operations against Bosnian Muslim forces. The raids, however, were often coupled with war crimes and in some instances, executions. And with each report of prisoner executions, the Russians often found themselves blamed for the actions of the Tigers.

“Yakovlev ordered Arkan to stay in Krajina, even threatened him like he did Babic” one Russian officer recounted years later, “but Arkan told him point blank ‘no’. He said he would rather die in Bosnia fighting for his people than to sit in his home in Knin knowing that his country was being raped. He told him if he were not allowed to fight in Bosnia then they would need to find someone else to serve as head of security in the Krajina.”

It was Arkan’s successful operation into the city of Bihac in western Bosnia that terrified Moscow. With over 200,000 civilians living in the pocket, almost all being Bosnian Muslims, the thought of Arkan and his Tigers in control of the Bihac pocket terrified Moscow and caused General Yakovlev to move 10,000 Russian troops into the city of Bihac before Arkan began a campaign of terror that could lead to a triggering of increased sanctions of even UN military action. But, in a move that most historians believed was clearly planned out by the Serbian paramilitary leader, the Russian troops arrival prompted the Serbs to quickly abandon the town. Arkan, seeing the Russians moving into Bihac, moved east and turned his attention toward the eastern portion of the country, and towards the enclave of Srebrenica.



Bosnian Serb forces seize Srebrenica


CNN
February 13, 1993
5:30 PM EDT



(SREBRENICA) A large force of 2,000 Bosnian Serb troops overran the enclave of Srebrenica Friday, despite strong diplomatic pressure from the United Nations to refrain from “entering Srebrenica or the Bosnian-held areas surrounding the city.”


The move into Srebrenica is widely seen by many in the west as a direct result of UIS aid into the breakaway republic of Srpska, and many in the United States have called for renewed sanctions on the UIS.


“Since 1992 over 2000 civilians have been killed in or around Srebrenica,” UN spokesperson Duk-U Yi said in a press conference, “and much of that can be directly traced to UIS military aid to the paramilitary group known as the Tigers. We call on the UIS government to prevent the targeting of innocent civilians, and stress that the UIS will be held responsible for any war crimes committed in Srebrenica by their proxies.”


UIS President Anatoly Lukyanov countered that the US backed Croatian separatists have already “committed war crimes comparable to those committed by the Nazis fifty years ago.”


However, although several members have expressed deep concern over the Croatian response in southern Bosnia, it is in Srebrenica where many observers are fearful that a massacre is poised to occur. Many point to the clear policies of ethnic cleansing committed by the Serbs since the outbreak of the war, as well as the large number of civilian casualties killed in various raids on villages around Srebrenica.


“All eyes are on Srebrenica,” one American diplomat said after the city fell, “If the Russians can’t control the Serbs in Srebrenica then it is going to be the point of no return for many UN members. If we see a massacre like we saw in Baku, then the Russians may be faced with even deeper sanctions and a UN protection force entering Bosnia and directly engaging Russian troops.”


Bosnians recall the “fall of Srebrenica” on fifteen year anniversary of Split Peace Accord

Foreign Affairs (3/14/2002)
by William Hason




(SARAJEVO, BOSNIA)- Senad Mehmedovic cringes as he hears the fireworks explode overhead, despite the fact that his neighbors south of the Miljacka River had been setting them off for much of the day.

“They purposely shoot them over the Miljacka River,” Mehmedovic said with disgust as he looked across the river, “they have to rub our faces in it!”

It is a sentiment that is shared by many Bosnian Muslims who live is the city of North Sarajevo. As Mehmedovic sits at a café in the Baščaršija district of North Sarajevo, music from the celebrations just across the river can be heard, much to the chagrin of Mehmedovic and his fellow patrons.

“Those fools have nothing to celebrate,” Mehmedovic said sarcastically, “they lost their dreams of a country on March 13th! At least we still have our independence! But they can’t admit they were wrong about the Russians. So they make that entire ruckus just to torment us.”

Whether of not the Serbs who live in South Sarajevo, capital of the UIS Republic of Srpska, actually feel any regret over the course of the 1992-1993 conflict is hard to know. Entry into South Sarajevo is difficult for Americans, and even tougher for men like Senad Mehmedovic, who dreams of some day returning to his home in Srebrenica. But from what can be seen in South Sarajevo, the indication is that reunification has a long way to go. The emotions connected to the 1993 Split Peace Treaty, which was signed on March 13, 1993, are as strong with the Serbs as they are with the Bosniaks. Places named after famous Bosniaks in South Sarajevo were renamed March 13th Avenue or March 13th Square. And in the Republic Srpska (or UIS-RS as it is commonly called) March 13th is a national holiday: Victory Day. But in the North the sentiments are much different. Here March 13th and the Split Peace Treaty are often referred to by a much different name: Nakba, or the catastrophe (named after the Palestinian exodus following the end of the 1948 Israeli war for independence).

“It was a catastrophe for the Bosnian people,” Mehmedovic said angrily, “but it was more than that. It was a betrayal by the United Nations and NATO. They betrayed us just like the West betrayed Czechoslovakia in 1938. They let fascist Croatia and fascist Serbia split our country up just like they let Hitler split up Czechoslovakia.”

Widely hailed as a major coup for then US secretary of state Walter Mondale back in 1993, the Split Peace Accord has gone on to become a major thorn in the side for the United States and the West. The unresolved status of the division of Bosnia has caused friction with both the UIS and the Muslim world. But even more troubling is the refusal of both Serbs and Croats to honor the Article 3 provision of the Split Peace Accord: the right of return for refugees.

“As soon as we read the terms of the peace treaty we knew what would happen,” Mehmedovic said sadly, “and we knew what the Russians would do. I had first hand knowledge of how they would treat us. I knew that the last thing they wanted was a return to a multi ethnic Bosnia.”

For Mehmedovic, his first encounters with the Russians came shortly after the fall of the Bihac pocket in February of 1993. Srebrenica had briefly been overrun by Serbian forces the previous year, but under the leadership of a Naser Oric, a 25-year old officer of the Bosnian Territorial Defense (TO), the poorly armed Bosniaks were able to repel the Serbs and retake their city. However, the actions of the Serbs during the brief occupation frightened many Bosnian Muslims and showed them that surrender was not an option.

“They burned homes and raped women,” Mehmedovic recalled, “and they made it abundantly clear that they were going to drive us out of Srebrenica or kill us. It was clear they wanted no Muslims in Srebrenica.”

Armed with little more than hunting rifles and stolen Zastava M-70s, the Bosnians were able to repel the Serbs, but the heavily armed Serb army soon surrounded the city and besieged it. Although the Bosniaks held out, a disturbing trend began to emerge.

“The Serbs were getting stronger,” Mehmedovic said, “and better armed. We were noticing that the Russians were flooding weapons into Bosnia, and into the hands of General Mladic.”

It was at this point that the 16-year old Mehmedovic decided to join his older brother and fight alongside Naser Oric in defense of his city. Although his parents objected, the growing hopelessness and desperation began to take its toll on all of the residents of Srebrenica. After a few days training alongside a handful of other teenagers, Mehmedovic took his father’s hunting rifle and joined his first patrol in February of 1993.

“My parents kept trying to keep me from fighting until I was older,” Mehmedovic recalled, “but after a while the hunger and the constant shelling began to take its toll. We were surrounded on all fronts, and there was no hope of rescue from the west or even from our fellow Bosnians in Sarajevo or Tuzla. We were alone.”

The sudden and unexpected Operation Graz, where Croatian and Serbian forces inside of Bosnia decided to join forces to wipe out the Bosnian army and split the nation between themselves, came as a surprise to much of the world. However, in Srebrenica it shocked nobody.

“Once the Americans started sending military aid to the Croats and the Russians started sending military aid to the Serbs we knew what would happen,” Mehmedovic said, “the Croats and the Serbs are bullies and terrorists. We knew that they wouldn’t pick a fight with each other under those circumstances. Not when we were so badly outgunned.”

Bosnian forces found themselves the unlikely victim of the United Nations provision that was, ironically, designed to protect them. An arms embargo, implemented in 1992, proved disastrous for the Bosniak population as Croatia, the UIS and Serbia all ignored the embargo and sent weapons to their allies inside the country.

“The only people that stupid embargo hurt was us,” Mehmedovic said angrily, “it robbed us of the means to defend ourselves.”

It was on Mehmedovic’s first patrol just outside of the town of Potočari that word of Operation Graz spread. Within days reports began coming in of the fall of Mostar and the fall of Bihac. For Senad Mehmedovic and his brother, Rasim, there was no question that the Serbian forces stationed around the city would soon be on the offensive.

“We knew that the Serbs were desperate to capture Srebrenica and Gorazde,” Mehmedovic said, “we knew that an assault was imminent. Still, we were prepared to fight them off and die to the last man. At least until we discovered that Oric had abandoned us.”

Controversy still remains over the departure of Naser Oric on February 12, 1993. To this day, Oric claims that he was ordered to withdraw from his superiors in Sarajevo, a claim that is denied by many. Regardless of who ordered his retreat, Oric’s withdrawal (by helicopter) just hours before the Serb assault on Srebrenica effectively destroyed the morale of the Potočari TO and destroyed any resistance that the Bosnian army could have mounted. Soldiers suddenly abandoned their post to check on loved ones, many abandoning their weapons in the field.

“Some people in Sarajevo called us cowards,” Mehmedovic spat out, “but we had no weapons and no ammunition. I had eight bullets and a hunting rifle! The only thing we had was each other, and our family! Once we realized that Oric fled, our next concern became our family.”

Senad Mehmedovic and his brother Rasim ran home once they realized that the line had been broken and the Potočari TO was now effectively no more. The two brothers ran 10 kilometers back to their hometown of Srebrenica, only to see a horrible sight when they reached the outskirts of town.

“Serb troops were in the center of the city,” Mehmedovic said, “we saw them rounding up men and women and saw dozens of homes on fire…including ours.”

Rasim argued that they needed to go into town and find their parents and sister, but Senad knew that it would be a suicide mission.

“We were wearing uniforms,” Mehmedovic said sadly, “and we were young men. The Serbs would have shot us dead as soon as we were seen.”


Instead Senad convinced his brother to flee into the woods outside of town and wait for a counter offensive from Bosnian forces.

“Deep down we both knew there would not be a counter attack,” Mehmedovic said, “but hiding in the woods was the only way we would survive.”

However, the plan soon encountered problems. The two brothers found that they were not alone, and that they were also not ignored.

“As soon as we got into the woods we started finding other Bosnian soldiers and civilians from town who fled,” Mehmedovic recalled, “you couldn’t go ten feet into the woods without bumping into a refugee. That first night a dozen of us made a small fire and hoped that the Serbs would not come looking for us. But within an hour we started hearing gunshots in the night…and screams. We then realized that they were hunting us like pigs! I was so frightened, because I knew that sooner or later they would find us, and that if we tried to flee that there was no way we could make it all the way to Sarajevo or Tuzla. I realized that we were all dead.”

Throughout the night Senad and Rasim Mehmedovic hugged each other and softly prayed as the sounds of Serb laughter and gunshots filled the air. Oftentimes Mehmedovic would recognize a voice, a plea from an unseen friend begging for his life, followed by the sound of a single gunshot and then laughter.

“That was the worse night of my life,” Mehmedovic recalled, “we could hear them, just a few feet away. Friends. Comrades. And in every instance they were shot by the Serbs. To them it was just a game.”

The hunt continued until sunrise, when the Serbs elected to return to Srebrenica. The two brothers realized that they had little time before they would be back.

“I wasn’t sure if it was a change of guard or if they were just stopping to eat breakfast,” Mehmedovic said, “but we knew they would be back shortly. And that it would be even easier for them to find us now that the sun was up.”

What Senad and Rasim Mehmedovic saw in the woods shocked and terrified the two brothers.

“One of the men who had been with us in the forest was dead in the woods,” Mehmedovic recalled, “but he wasn’t a soldier. He was a baker. When we saw him he had nothing but a sweater, a warm jacked, and some bread. But as he lay dead we saw that someone had put a rifle in his hand. The Serbs now had so many supplies they could use them to dress up dead Bosnians as soldiers to hide their war crimes!”

Moments later the two brothers came across another dead man, again with a rifle. Overcome with curiosity, Senad decided to see if the weapon was of better quality than they hunting rifle he was holding.

“I stopped and leaned over to look at the rifle,” Mehmedovic said, “it was a Zastava, an M-70. I figured I’d use it instead of the rifle I had. But as soon as I picked it up I realized that it was a piece of junk. The firing pin had been removed and most of the gun looked to be broken. It was clearly inoperable and it had no ammunition. I realized that the Serbs were simply dumping off their old weapons now that the Russians were giving them better ones. It was only a minute at most that I stopped to look at the rifle, but in that minute I allowed myself to be distracted and allowed the Russians to sneak up on us.”

As soon as the two brothers looked up they saw a dozen soldiers had surrounded them and had aimed their weapons on them. Mehmedovic was certain that this was the end; that the Serbs would kill them just as they had killed the others. But as one of the soldiers ordered him to drop his weapon, he quickly realized that they were Russians and not Serbs.

“The accent jumped out at me,” Mehmedovic recalled, “and then I saw the UIS flag on their uniforms. But still, we knew the Russians were in bed with the Serbs. We assumed they would kill us.”

Mehmedovic started to try and plea for his life, saying that he wasn’t a soldier and that he just found the gun in the woods. But he was shouted down by his older brother.

“I have never been as proud of Rasim as I was at that moment,” Mehmedovic recalled, “he just yelled at me to shut up. Then he said that I was just some boy who came out to the woods to watch the battle. But he then added that he was a soldier in the Bosnian army and he was prepared to die for his country right then and there.”

Mehmedovic watched as he brother dropped his rifle and stood firm, expecting the Russians to shoot him on the spot. But what followed stunned him.

“Take off your clothes,” the Russian soldier ordered.

Both brothers looked at each other nervously before looking back at the solider.

“This can be easy or it can be difficult,” the soldier continued, “but you will take off your uniforms.”

“I saw my brother looked confused and frightened,” Mehmedovic said, “we honestly didn’t know if we were about to be raped or if they wanted to steal our uniforms before shooting us. I didn’t even realize that I was complying. It was like I was in a daze. But before I knew it I had taken my jacket off and my pants.”


The two brothers were forced to strip to their underwear and sneakers before being marched through the snow towards a UIS tank. It was there that they were handed civilian clothing and told that they would be returned to Sarajevo.

“I was given a thick jacket and some slacks,” Mehmedovic recalled, “but Rasim was handed a woman’s coat. I cringed as he put it on and was told to sit on the tank as it drove off.”

A chance encounter with the Serbian military commander in Srebrenica moments later gave Mehmedovic something he never expected to feel as a UIS prisoner…hope.

“As we pulled into town, we saw that the Russians had now established themselves in the center of town and were loading men onto a bus,” Mehmedovic said, “the Serb military commander, General Mladic, arrived just as we were being pulled off the tank.”

The visibly angry Mladic demanded to know what the young Russian major was doing, and demanded that the UIS prisoners be turned over to the Serbs.

“He even pointed to my brother and demanded to know why he was riding on the side of a tank,” Mehmedovic recalled, “that’s when the Russian major said that he wasn’t a soldier. That he was caught having sex with another man in the woods. Mladic nearly exploded; screaming that there was no way my brother was not an enemy combatant. The whole time my brother’s face was beat red with anger.”

The UIS major continued to listen to General Mladic rant and rave before saying something that stopped the Serbian military commander in his tracks. Although there has been much controversy over the exact nature of the discussion, Mehmedovic claims that he was present during the exchange.

“He informed General Mladic that the UIS was now taking part in a peace keeping operation,” Mehmedovic said, “and the next time the Bosnian Serbs decided to invade a country without UIS permission, that President Zhirinovsky and General Yakovlev would hold him personally responsible.”

Mehmedovic and his brother were soon loaded onto a bus filled with dozens of other Bosnian men, some Mehmedovic recognized as soldiers and others he knew as civilians. All looked shocked at how the events had unfolded and few spoke until they crossed the cease fire line and ended up in Bosnian controlled Sarajevo several hours later.

“We didn’t know what to expect,” Mehmedovic recalled, “but we didn’t expect to be loaded onto a bus by the Russians and sent off to Sarajevo and just dumped off. And we didn’t expect that to be the last time any of us would see Srebrenica.”

Although Mehmedovic grudgingly acknowledges that the UIS prevented a potential massacre in Srebrenica, he also holds little good will towards the UIS. Although he was soon reunited with his sister and mother, the whereabouts of his father, and nearly 500 other men from Srebrenica, were unknown. He immediately tried to return to Srebrenica to find out what had happened to his father, but was turned back by the same UIS “peacekeepers” that brought him to Sarajevo.

“Look at what they did in Bosnia,” Mehmedovic said, “look at what they did all over the country. They clearly are partners with the Serbs. Even though they prevented a massacre in Srebrenica, they have killed thousands more across Bosnia. Including Rasim.”

When the Bosnian civil war flared back up in 1997, Rasim Mehmedovic quickly reenlisted in the Army of the Bosnian Republic. He was determined to liberate his hometown and to drive the Serbs and Russians out of Sarajevo.

“He begged me not to go with him,” Mehmedovic recalled, “he said that since our father had disappeared and our mother had died that I couldn’t sacrifice myself; that I had to take care of our sister. He made me promise. And to this day, I hate myself for keeping that promise.”

Rasim Mehmedovic was killed when UIS forces overran the Stari Grad district of Sarajevo and executed over 1500 prisoners in what has often been referred to as the “Rape of Sarajevo.”


Excerpts from the book: “Croatia: The Nation That Almost Was”


By Steven Martinovic
Published by University of California Press, © 2009.


Chapter Four: The Battle of Zenica

Once the city of Mostar fell, the Croatians found little resistance as they moved north. Capturing the predominantly Muslim towns of Potoci and Konjic, there soon emerged a strong desire on the part of Bosnian Croat leader Mate Boban to not only seize the predominantly Croatian regions in central Bosnia, but to also capture the cities of Visoko and Zenica, much to the chagrin of NATO.

“Zenica had a small Croat population, around 15%,” commented Phil Macklin, “and in Visoko it was even less, around 3%. But the Croats suddenly saw the opportunity to capture more land than they lost the previous year in the conflict with the UIS over Krajina and they were determined to do so.”

The Croatians rapid advance into Bosnia and Herzegovina also worried many NATO observers who feared that the capture of heavily Muslim towns like Visoko would prompt the Serbs to try and duplicate the Croatians success in Gorazde and even Tuzla.


“Prior to Operation Graz there was really was no serious claim made by either the Serbs or the Croats on places like Tuzla,” added Macklin, “in fact, the most common threat was that there would be a Lesotho like republic around Tuzla and Visoko for Bosnians, while the rest of the country would be either Serb or Croat. But Operation Graz showed that the demands were changing. We were now faced with the very real possibility that there would soon no longer be a Bosnian nation.”

Although Croatian troops met little resistance at first, eventually their supply lines were so badly stretched that they were forced to slow down their assault and give the badly demoralized Bosnian army the opportunity to regroup outside of Visoko and Zenica. The Croatian assault on Zenica fared poorly, and the assault on Visoko went even worse. Still, with Croatian troops on the outskirts of both cities, and more importantly with Sarajevo, and much of the Bosnian First Corps now surrounded by Serbian forces (thus rendering the largest military force in Bosnia a non-factor in the Croat advance in central Bosnia) many Bosnian Croats were confident of a total victory.

“The Serbs surrounded Sarajevo, along with nearly the entire First Corps which was within the city,” commented Anton Manolic, an aid to Boban “so the Bosnians would kill themselves trying to break the siege and the Serbs would kill themselves trying to ensure the Bosnians didn’t escape, all the while we had a clear path all the way to Brcko. It was perfect!”

However, as the world watched in horror, eventually the pressure from NATO and Zagreb forced the Croatians to go to the negotiating table in Split, Croatia.

“We had total victory in our hands,” Martinovic would recall years later, “but everyone was so frightened that the Russians and the Americans would start another Korean War in Bosnia that President Tudjman was forced to bring us to Split and discuss a ceasefire.”