Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

RUSSIAN-GEORGIAN WAR OF 2008: REACTION OF UKRAINIAN POLITICUM

View through CrossRef
The paper analyzes assessments of Ukraine's political environment regarding the Russian-Georgian war of 2008 – the military conflict between Georgia on the one hand and Russia and the separatist groups of South Ossetia and Abkhazia on the other, the «hot» phase of which fell on August 8–12. It is stated that although Ukrainian and foreign historiographies already have some work on this military confrontation in the Caucasus, in all these cases it is mostly an analysis of the events of August 2008 in Georgia only through the prism of political history with a predominant chronology of the conflict. The main stages of the Russian-Georgian military confrontation in August 2008 and further attempts to resolve it through diplomacy are briefly outlined. It was stated that the «hot phase» of the confrontation on the territory of Georgia immediately became the center of attention of Ukrainian politicians. From the first day of the military conflict among Ukrainian political circles, there were two camps – pro-Georgian and pro-Russian – attitudes to which were correlated personal and collective political, ideological, mental, and even pragmatic sympathies, often turning from assessments of the foreign policy situation for disputes and discussions within the country. It is noted that the circles close to the then President Viktor Yushchenko took an openly pro-Georgian side, and the Ukrainian head of state himself visited Tbilisi against the background of the threat of Russian occupation in support of his counterpart Mikheil Saakashvili. It is stressed that the neutral attitude to military actions in the Caucasus prevailed among Ukrainian politicians, especially among Prime Ministers Yulia Tymoshenko and Volodymyr Lytvyn, who headed the bloc of the same name in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. It is shown, that representatives of the Party of Regions and the Communist Party of Ukraine took a pro-Russian stance in assessing the military conflict, blaming official Tbilisi for the start of hostilities and supporting the idea of recognizing Russia’s independence after Abkhazia and South Ossetia. It is concluded that despite the presence of such a diverse palette of views, it was not possible to adopt a clear consolidated official position within the walls of the parliament, despite the relevant appeals of Speaker Arsenii Yatseniuk. Keywords Russian Federation, Georgia, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, war, politicum, Ukraine.
Ivan Krypyakevych Institute of Ukrainian Studies - National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
Title: RUSSIAN-GEORGIAN WAR OF 2008: REACTION OF UKRAINIAN POLITICUM
Description:
The paper analyzes assessments of Ukraine's political environment regarding the Russian-Georgian war of 2008 – the military conflict between Georgia on the one hand and Russia and the separatist groups of South Ossetia and Abkhazia on the other, the «hot» phase of which fell on August 8–12.
It is stated that although Ukrainian and foreign historiographies already have some work on this military confrontation in the Caucasus, in all these cases it is mostly an analysis of the events of August 2008 in Georgia only through the prism of political history with a predominant chronology of the conflict.
The main stages of the Russian-Georgian military confrontation in August 2008 and further attempts to resolve it through diplomacy are briefly outlined.
It was stated that the «hot phase» of the confrontation on the territory of Georgia immediately became the center of attention of Ukrainian politicians.
From the first day of the military conflict among Ukrainian political circles, there were two camps – pro-Georgian and pro-Russian – attitudes to which were correlated personal and collective political, ideological, mental, and even pragmatic sympathies, often turning from assessments of the foreign policy situation for disputes and discussions within the country.
It is noted that the circles close to the then President Viktor Yushchenko took an openly pro-Georgian side, and the Ukrainian head of state himself visited Tbilisi against the background of the threat of Russian occupation in support of his counterpart Mikheil Saakashvili.
It is stressed that the neutral attitude to military actions in the Caucasus prevailed among Ukrainian politicians, especially among Prime Ministers Yulia Tymoshenko and Volodymyr Lytvyn, who headed the bloc of the same name in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.
It is shown, that representatives of the Party of Regions and the Communist Party of Ukraine took a pro-Russian stance in assessing the military conflict, blaming official Tbilisi for the start of hostilities and supporting the idea of recognizing Russia’s independence after Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
It is concluded that despite the presence of such a diverse palette of views, it was not possible to adopt a clear consolidated official position within the walls of the parliament, despite the relevant appeals of Speaker Arsenii Yatseniuk.
Keywords Russian Federation, Georgia, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, war, politicum, Ukraine.

Related Results

Some Issues of the Economic Aspect of the Georgian National Mentality
Some Issues of the Economic Aspect of the Georgian National Mentality
The national economic mentality, which was formed over the centuries under the influence of various factors, determines the nature of the nation's socio-economic rules and their en...
Serhii Tymoshenko: Ukrainian Architect and Diplomat
Serhii Tymoshenko: Ukrainian Architect and Diplomat
This research is focused on the life and legacy of Serhii Tymoshenko (1881–1950), Ukrainian political emigrant, political activist, statesman, and a member of the Ukrainian nationa...
Visual frames of the Russian-Ukrainian war in Ukrainian culture
Visual frames of the Russian-Ukrainian war in Ukrainian culture
The purpose of the paper is a formalization of the visual frames of the Russian-Ukrainian war as the parts of a truly multiplex of its vision. Every of its frames must be produced ...
UKRAINIAN-POLISH INTELLECTUAL CONNECTIONS: THE CHALLENGES OF HISTORY
UKRAINIAN-POLISH INTELLECTUAL CONNECTIONS: THE CHALLENGES OF HISTORY
The article examines the characteristics and particularities of Ukrainian-Polish intellectual and scientific exchanges from the late 19th to the early 21st centuries. It reveals th...
IVAN KRYPIAKEVYCH AND THE POLITICAL EMIGRANTS OF NADDNIPRIANSHCHYNA: RELATIONS AND COOPERATION (1910 – 1930)
IVAN KRYPIAKEVYCH AND THE POLITICAL EMIGRANTS OF NADDNIPRIANSHCHYNA: RELATIONS AND COOPERATION (1910 – 1930)
The study deals with Ivan Krypiakevych's relations with political emigrants of Naddniprianshchyna during the Ukrainian people's struggle for the state and national-cultural rights....
Events in Ukraine 1914–1922 their importance and historical background (Part 4)
Events in Ukraine 1914–1922 their importance and historical background (Part 4)
The editorial board continues to publish the most important documents that characterize the state and progress of the Ukrainian national liberation movement, the attitude of other ...
LANGUAGE PORTRAIT OF KYIV IN PERCEPTION BY UKRAINIAN AND FOREIGN STUDENTS (2018-2022)
LANGUAGE PORTRAIT OF KYIV IN PERCEPTION BY UKRAINIAN AND FOREIGN STUDENTS (2018-2022)
The article analyzes the results of language observation and surveys of Ukrainian and foreign students of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, conducted in 2018, 2019, 202...
Russia’s Military Invasion of Ukraine in 2022: Aim, Reasons, and Implications
Russia’s Military Invasion of Ukraine in 2022: Aim, Reasons, and Implications
The publication examines the legal nature of wars, looks into the law of war genesis, reviews its conventions, as well as identifies the aim, objectives, causes together with the c...

Back to Top