Military Review

The Treaty of Abkhazia and Russia did not like NATO

63
24 November, the presidents of the Russian Federation and Abkhazia signed an agreement on strategic partnership. Something in this treaty is extremely disliked by the Western powers. First of all, the "hegemons" were alerted when they learned that the document included a clause on military alliance. The NATO bloc also became alarmed: the local secretary general, having learned that Russia and Abkhazia could now together reflect external aggression, declared that the alliance did not recognize the treaty. Not recognized him, of course, and the United States. Needless to say that the agreement outraged Georgia?

The signed document is primarily strategic. The agreement refers to a military alliance: the parties pledged to assist each other in the event of external aggression. The theory will be supported by practice: Russia and Abkhazia will create a unified military grouping. According to the agreement, it will be formed no later than one year from the day the document enters into force.

Also, the Treaty of Alliance and Strategic Partnership includes clauses on investment and social projects.

As transmits RIA News", the estimated amount of funding for the program of socio-economic development of Abkhazia for 2015-2017 years may be more than 4 billion rubles annually. This was stated by Vladimir Putin.

“Russia will continue to help the republic in solving social problems and strengthening the real sector of the economy,” the president said.

Moreover, in 2015, funding will exceed 9 billion rubles.

According to "Russian newspaper"The document reflects the high level of interstate relations. This is particularly emphasized Vladimir Putin.

"This is a new step in the implementation of the agreements that were reached earlier, the improvement and strengthening of the legal framework formed in previous years," he said.

Next year, Abkhazia will receive 5 billion rubles for the purpose of implementing the treaty, Putin said, and cited some economic data: “Over the years since the independence of the republic has been recognized, a lot of joint work has been carried out to establish cooperative ties.”

Today, Russia ranks first among the partners of Abkhazia. More than 50 enterprises with the participation of Russian capital are represented in the areas of fuel and energy complex, communications, mass communications, banking services, tourism.

As part of the investment program to promote the socio-economic development of Abkhazia for 2013-2015 years, as the president said, it is planned to complete the construction of fifty-four objects.

The draft program for 2015-2017 has, according to the President of the Russian Federation, an estimated amount of funding in the amount of "more than 4 billion rubles annually." Vladimir Putin explained that funding will be doubled. That is, next year, if we make a comparison with the current year, the financing of Abkhazia will almost double, to 9,2-9,3 billion rubles.

“Important historical an event in the relations between states and peoples ”, writes further“ RG ”, called the signing of the agreement Raul Khadjimba. “We are a small country, but over the years we have consistently focused on Russia, and this sequence has received support from the Russian Federation,” said the Abkhaz president. He expressed sincere gratitude to his Russian colleague "for everything that you have done to support our people."

It cannot be said that this assessment is shared by everyone in Sukhum. At the same time, two meetings were held in the Abkhaz capital.

This was told by Gulya Arifmezova and Dmitry Alexandrov ("Sight") in a report from Tbilisi.

As the correspondents report, both supporters and opponents of the new agreement came out in Sukhum.

At the first rally, people welcomed the policy of Khajimba and the new treaty with Russia. But the participants of another rally, organized by the Amtsakhara party, expressed their distrust of Khajimba, because, in their opinion, the treaty "infringes upon the sovereignty of Abkhazia."

The number of protesters is about a thousand people. At the same time, there were more supporters of the agreement - about two thousand.

Also, the publication reports on the promotion. located on the border of Russia with Abkhazia. Representatives of the organization "Women in Politics" came here. They had posters with slogans in their hands: “Do not drive a wedge between Russia and Abkhazia!”, “We are with Russia, not in Russia,” “The people will not allow them to risk their independence!”

The newspaper cites the opinion of a leading Abkhaz public figure and blogger Roin Agrba. He believes that holding two rallies shows that Mr. Khajimba is fulfilling election promises about the openness of government and public dialogue. But the arguments of the opponents of the treaty are unfounded, Agrba said. “Let me remind you that the discussion and amendment lasted for more than two months. A new text was created on the basis of all wishes, ”the newspaper’s source said. He also explained the behavior of the opposition: “The current opposition is still looking for its niche and is in fact only being structured, seeking self-expression. They use this public outlet to declare themselves to some extent. ” Moreover, in the composition of this new opposition is practically the composition of the government that signed the previous similar 2009 agreement of the year, Agrba noted.

Nor was the reaction of the West, known for its selective approaches to resolving international issues, late.

The reaction of the NATO bloc was very quick. A message in four languages ​​- English, French, Russian and Ukrainian - appeared on alliance website 24 November.

Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that NATO supports the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia, and therefore does not recognize the "so-called agreement on alliance and strategic partnership, signed between the Georgian region of Abkhazia and Russia on November 24."

Quote:

“This so-called treaty does not contribute to a peaceful and long-term settlement of the situation in Georgia. On the contrary, it violates the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia and is clearly contrary to the principles of international law, the principles of the OSCE and the international obligations of Russia.

We continue to urge Russia to de-recognize the regions of Georgia - South Ossetia and Abkhazia - as independent states and withdraw their troops from Georgia. ”


Following NATO, a separate statement was received from Estonia. His newspaper leads "Postimees".

Speaking at a meeting with Swedish Foreign Minister Margot Wallström in Stockholm, Estonian Foreign Minister Kate Pentus-Rosimannus stated that the treaty between Russia and Abkhazia indicated Russia's desire to annex part of Georgia.

“There is a danger that this may lead to the annexation by Russia of a part of Georgia. This step violates the sovereignty of Georgia, contrary to the norms of international law and obligations that Russia assumed before the Council of Europe, and the so-called sixth paragraph of the peace plan, ”said Pentus-Rosimannus and added that the treaty destabilizes the situation in the entire region.

By the way, the Baltic republics are becoming more militant. It even creates the impression (false) that they are ready to fight with Russia.

The other day, Newsweek magazine issued an article under the title: “Tiny Baltic countries are preparing to repulse powerful Russia” (the source of the short translation is "Inopressa"). Journalist Elizabeth Bro reminded readers that at the beginning of this month the Russian warship entered the exclusive economic zone of Latvia. In general, in 2014, Russian warships approached fifty times the waters of Latvia. What to say about the aircraft, too, of course, the military: they approached the air borders of Latvia about 200 times.

And once such a thing, Latvian Defense Minister Raymond Veyonis said in an interview that the country is ready to fight back: “We have special plans of action. Together with the Ministry of the Interior, we conduct exercises, training our troops and the police in case of different scenarios. But, of course, we need to cooperate more with our neighbors, as well as with our NATO allies. ”

Unpleasant testimony addressed to Russia came from Lithuania. Her presidency, Dalia Grybauskaite, called Russia a "terrorist state." Moreover, she said that the Russians threaten both Ukraine and the whole of Europe.

“Ukraine today is fighting for peace in all of Europe, for all of us. If a terrorist state that is carrying out aggression against its neighbor is not stopped, then aggression can spread throughout Europe and beyond, ”the president quotes "Delfi" with reference to the radio station "LRT".

Finally, spoke and Washington. No, it was not Obama who spoke out (he was distracted by the “Maidan” in the 38 states, which was recently launched in Ferguson). Jeff Ratke, the State Department press service, spoke briefly on the topic of Abkhazia with the media.

“The position of the United States with respect to Abkhazia and South Ossetia remains unambiguous: these regions are integral parts of Georgia, and we intend to continue to support Georgia’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity,” he said. "Voice of America".

The State Department document also notes that the United States does not recognize any “contracts” between the Georgian region of Abkhazia and the Russian Federation.

Jeff Ratke’s statement states: “We again urge Russia to fulfill all the obligations stipulated in the cease-fire agreement concluded in 2008, return troops to the positions they occupied before the conflict began, renounce the recognition of the Georgian regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent states and ensure unimpeded access to these regions for the provision of humanitarian assistance. ”

However, let us add on our own, the position of the United States, as well as of the entire West (ending with the Baltic republics), is clear. The quick response of the NATO Secretary General is also understandable.

Georgia is a candidate member of the alliance. She has been trying to join him for almost 10 years (February 14, 2005, NATO and Georgia signed the Partnership for Peace agreement). But then there was a 2008 year, a short war, as a result of which Georgia ingloriously retreated and received the so-called "territorial problems", during which the road to the alliance was ordered to it. Since 2009, NATO has been putting pressure on Russia for the recognition of Georgia’s territorial integrity within its “internationally recognized” borders. Simply put, we are talking about Russia withdrawing from the recognition and support of both Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

However, as the contract from November 24 of 2014 showed, Russia did exactly the opposite. How else? Moscow is well aware that, following Georgia, Ukraine will reach NATO (and is already stretching). Therefore, concessions, of course, will not. As a result, Georgia remains outside NATO; Ukraine will also be outside the bloc - it also has “territorial problems”.

And in general, isn't it time for the "defensive alliance" (the words of the US ambassador to the Russian Federation John Tefft) to take up defense somewhere in Ferguson? It is desirable on the side of the rebels: after all, they are defending ...

Observed and commented on Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
63 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Fedya
    Fedya 27 November 2014 06: 50
    +9
    nyatka listen - do not respect yourself!
    1. Canep
      Canep 27 November 2014 08: 05
      +11
      First of all, the "hegemons" were wary of learning that the document included a clause on the military alliance. The NATO bloc was alarmed: the secretary general there, having learned that Russia and Abkhazia can now reflect external aggression together, said that the alliance would not recognize the treaty.
      And they, in fact, no one asked him to recognize, it is not their business, whether they recognize this agreement or not will not change anything.

      Georgia started the war, killed the Russian peacekeepers, and lost these territories. NATO can only impede the implementation of this treaty by military means, that is, at the cost of turning Europe and North America into a glass desert.
      1. Romira
        Romira 27 November 2014 22: 41
        0
        I totally agree
    2. Kostyar
      Kostyar 27 November 2014 12: 16
      0
      Pentus Rosimannus

      After that, the middle name, Estonian anus I can't read further ... and these freaks imagined themselves to be the rulers of the "world" ...
      1. RUSOIVAN
        RUSOIVAN 27 November 2014 15: 08
        +3
        Interesting: but this "ACCEPT-DO NOT ACCEPT" how does it affect the initial velocity of the bullet?
    3. Zhekson
      Zhekson 27 November 2014 20: 10
      +1
      Latvians, unhappy, how do they feel bad ...
    4. 17085
      17085 28 November 2014 02: 40
      0
      Quote: Fedya
      nyatka listen - do not respect yourself!


      In general, it seems that they all have one brain and that from the psaki
      1. mmk
        mmk 28 November 2014 05: 29
        0
        Something she has not been seen for a long time, probably the training manual on stupid excuses ended.
  2. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 27 November 2014 06: 55
    +5
    and clearly contrary to the principles of international law, OSCE principles and Russia's international obligations.

    It’s time for the West to recall its obligations and principles of international law.. In each barrel a gag.
    1. Canep
      Canep 27 November 2014 08: 52
      +3
      Quote: rotmistr60
      contrary to the principles of international law, OSCE principles

      The West did not give a shit about the principles of the OSCE in the 91st recognizing 15 republics in the place of the USSR, then there was Yugoslavia, and Kosovo. The OSCE was created to maintain the world order adopted at the Helsinki Conference, the main core of this world order is the INSULABILITY OF BORDERS. Having recognized the republics of the USSR and the SFRY as independent states, the West swept away all the Helsinki accords.
      1. _my opinion
        _my opinion 27 November 2014 13: 09
        0
        right, but "here" it is necessary to recall how IT fought for the "territorial integrity and independence" of Yugoslavia by its bombing ...
  3. testerman
    testerman 27 November 2014 06: 56
    +10
    I hope to live to see the day when the representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation says in plain text to all interested persons - go on .... I want to see the reaction of Western liberals as their poor fellow will
    1. _my opinion
      _my opinion 27 November 2014 13: 13
      +1
      ours send very politely ...
  4. hz123
    hz123 27 November 2014 07: 14
    +6
    NATO doesn’t suit me, I think it does not contribute to the settlement, though I don’t care
    ps: "This so-called treaty does not contribute to a peaceful and long-term settlement of the situation" - the war ends in victory or does not end, and international law is absurd, in the world there is only the right of the strong, when the strong is not alone to have to agree on some kind of restrictions, that's all.
  5. pvv113
    pvv113 27 November 2014 07: 15
    +3
    did not like the Western powers.

    Something the Anglo-Saxons did not go according to their plan wink
    1. sherman1506
      sherman1506 27 November 2014 10: 47
      +3
      Putin's talent is unpleasant to surprise the West, I think they will find many such surprises. Stock up on diapers gentlemen partners.
  6. aszzz888
    aszzz888 27 November 2014 07: 17
    +3
    On November 24, the presidents of the Russian Federation and Abkhazia signed an agreement on strategic partnership. Something in this treaty was extremely disliked by the Western powers.


    Yes deeply and a lot of us. To these western powers. And let the merikososny deal with the shooting of blacks. At the same time, wish America to feel the Maidan. And the State Department and the monkey in lustration !!!
  7. Aivengo
    Aivengo 27 November 2014 07: 23
    +9
    It should be reminded to Mexico that once Texas was their territory, let it be muddied, then the United States will have disputed territories and they will have to leave NATO. wassat
    1. meriem1
      meriem1 27 November 2014 07: 42
      +2
      Hawaii also crookedly got into the United States. how about California (ask the Spaniards) and Alaska.
  8. Flinky
    Flinky 27 November 2014 07: 40
    +6
    Was it worth writing such a wall of text to convey one simple phrase "Fuck you!"?
  9. Bassoon
    Bassoon 27 November 2014 07: 56
    0
    Yes, and nevermind on NATO.
  10. parusnik
    parusnik 27 November 2014 07: 59
    +2
    the local secretary general, having learned that Russia and Abkhazia can now together reflect external aggression, said that the alliance would not recognize the treaty ... Like, it's not fair ... smile
    1. Dormidont
      Dormidont 27 November 2014 08: 41
      +4
      Who cares about your recognition or not OUR agreement? Ots. whine. We are not interested in knowing what you think there.
      1. tkhonov66
        tkhonov66 27 November 2014 14: 32
        0
        "... There is such an apt saying. It is not the one who best plays by the rules that wins, the one who determines these rules always wins.
        ..."
        .
        and so far, they have been identified by the USA-Europe.
        But somehow it is getting harder and harder for them to "define" them.
  11. Zomanus
    Zomanus 27 November 2014 08: 14
    +2
    Yes, everything is fine. Or did you miss those times when all government decisions were approved in the West? We do, they hiss. And nehai hiss further, and we still will ...
  12. A1L9E4K9S
    A1L9E4K9S 27 November 2014 08: 16
    +1
    What is their dog business, with whom Russia concludes an agreement and who gave them such a right to recognize or not recognize this agreement, and let them not stick their nose where a stray dog ​​x .... doesn’t bother, otherwise you can stay without a nose. (Oh, that I was completely talking, because we are not threatening anyone, according to our President)
  13. sub307
    sub307 27 November 2014 08: 25
    +1
    In general, Russia continues to disentangle the fruits of the "works" of EBN and others like him. It is not clear why the real content of these works is not given at the state level? All some "merits" are listed according to any "anniversary dates" ....
  14. mgfly
    mgfly 27 November 2014 08: 27
    +4
    recognize, do not recognize ... what difference does it make to the exclamations from the side that has nothing to do with the contract !? the main thing is that now any potential tie eater will think three times whether to shoot.
  15. Rusich1980
    Rusich1980 27 November 2014 08: 45
    0
    Quote: Zomanus
    Yes, everything is fine. Or did you miss those times when all government decisions were approved in the West? We do, they hiss. And nehai hiss further, and we still will ...


    If they hiss, they wriggle and twist, then we do everything right! Their opinion is like a litmus test - the more acidic the West is, the sweeter it is for us.
  16. pts-m
    pts-m 27 November 2014 08: 45
    +1
    Well, yes, they forgot to ask "Nothing" how Russia should act. Probably the Yankees remember "the hero of the Yankees of the corrupt mill Haidar." He would have screamed about the wrong path of Russia. The Lord took care of it. I would have tidied up Haidar's other friends for one thing.
  17. kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 27 November 2014 08: 47
    +1
    The dog barks and the caravan moves on! We really need the confessions of some pederastic politicians who once again "combed" in one place that bitches forgot 1945, so we can remind you! And in the end, stop looking at the practically rotten West and the decayed United States for any reason. In practice, they are already starting their "color" revolutions.
  18. dchegrinec
    dchegrinec 27 November 2014 09: 00
    +3
    We have always supported the integrity of Yugoslavia and the sovereignty of Libya, Iraq, Syria and other countries. Therefore, the extra snouts are not a decree for us. The choice of the people is crucial! Democracy .... comrades!
  19. Ogans
    Ogans 27 November 2014 09: 31
    0
    Journalist Elizabeth - Bro west but not us))
  20. pan_nor
    pan_nor 27 November 2014 09: 46
    0
    Yeah. Without agreement with nata, it is necessary to recognize the contract as not valid! :-)
  21. Kibalchish
    Kibalchish 27 November 2014 10: 01
    0
    It is dangerous to put all your eggs in one basket. Russia has no friends. They never were.
  22. Sochi
    Sochi 27 November 2014 10: 04
    0
    Who is NATO? - a roadside confused, lacking an opinion, and blathering that they would order them in the Faitington regional committee ... So do not care about such an opinion.
  23. SILAnov
    SILAnov 27 November 2014 10: 06
    0
    You can recognize or not recognize, but there is a contract, and this circumstance will have to be reconciled to all the naty and naty !!! You can try to argue, it will be interesting to see !!!
  24. hohryakov066
    hohryakov066 27 November 2014 10: 27
    +1
    stated that the alliance does not recognize the treaty

    Well, I would have liked it! It is for this purpose that it is concluded that the hairy legs would be shortened. And in general, since when are two countries that have agreed to cooperate in any field should wait for the approval of some alliance or a completely foreign country? Doesn’t the brain already boil?
  25. crambol
    crambol 27 November 2014 10: 29
    +1
    The Treaty of Abkhazia and Russia did not like NATO



    Here they just forgot to ask him!
  26. The comment was deleted.
  27. Yasondinalt
    Yasondinalt 27 November 2014 10: 45
    0
    Western mallards got wild. Especially touched by the old gangbanged lesbian. That's what it means to work out paid grandmas well.
  28. Ajent cho
    Ajent cho 27 November 2014 10: 48
    0
    The Treaty of Abkhazia and Russia did not like NATO

    Neither Russia nor Abkhazia likes NATO. I think she doesn’t like it even to herself.
  29. andrejwz
    andrejwz 27 November 2014 10: 56
    +1
    “We again call on Russia to fulfill all the obligations stipulated by the ceasefire agreement concluded in 2008, to return troops to the positions they held before the conflict began, to refuse to recognize the Georgian regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent states and to provide unhindered access to these regions for humanitarian assistance. ”

    Humanitarian aid as in 2008? What other assistance does Russia hamper in the dressing of Abkhazia and South Ossetia? Maybe the standard of living in Georgia is much higher than that in the republics?
    We ourselves can provide help. For example, hand out cookies in Ferguson.
  30. Oleg1
    Oleg1 27 November 2014 11: 24
    +1
    "The NATO bloc was also alarmed: the local secretary general, having learned that Russia and Abkhazia could now repel external aggression together, said that the alliance did not recognize the treaty. Of course, the United States did not recognize it either." Their opinion is not ... they are superfluous at this celebration of life ...
  31. Amorales
    Amorales 27 November 2014 11: 25
    +1
    Yes, they went to ..y..y. We will look back on them.
  32. Aleksander
    Aleksander 27 November 2014 12: 09
    -2
    And why is Novorossia worse than Abkhazia, in which, by the way, not everyone loves Russia?
    1. Commissar of the NKVD
      Commissar of the NKVD 27 November 2014 20: 44
      0
      She's no worse. But if, at the time of recognition, Abkhazia had already formed as a state, then Novorossia still did not.
  33. Mama_Cholli
    Mama_Cholli 27 November 2014 12: 33
    0
    I liked the statement I saw on TV of one political scientist. He said that the citizens of the Baltic republics who did not live in the USSR (under 30) are afraid, they are terribly afraid of Russia. This feeling is skillfully "played" by representatives of the local authority and the media.
  34. silver169
    silver169 27 November 2014 12: 46
    +2
    Do not recognize? And these are their problems. Russia with whom he wants with that and signs the agreement. This is her exclusive right. And to listen to every. - not to respect yourself.
  35. bob
    bob 27 November 2014 12: 52
    +1
    this is a big plus to keep it up, now in Abkhazia we need a powerful modern military base with aviation and navy
  36. Thompson
    Thompson 27 November 2014 13: 35
    0
    Quote: Amorales
    Yes, they went to ..y..y. We will look back on them.

    It’s high time to just DO what we consider NECESSARY for US and put it on the opinion of the West. It is necessary to recognize Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Transnistria, Donetsk, Lugansk ... and those following them. RECOGNIZE! ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT THIS! DELIVER all before THIS FACT !!! And let them howl like jackals. In my opinion, they have long crossed the line of decency (by political and other measures) and it is time for Russia to show its teeth at a geopolitical level, rather than rely on some understanding of its position.
    1. g1v2
      g1v2 27 November 2014 14: 43
      +4
      Probably I will surprise you, but we have already recognized Abkhazia and South Ossetia for a long time. We recognize Pridnestrovie only if it borders on us or a friendly state, or at least has access to the sea. Otherwise, Transnistria, sandwiched between dill and Moldova, will be strangled by a blockade and we will have to get involved in a senseless war. If the scenario of a large Novorossia is implemented with the obligatory inclusion of the Odessa region in it, or if a power allied to us comes to power in dill, only then the PMR will be recognized and nothing else. To recognize the DPR and LPR, which control a third of their territory and are at war with dill, means declaring war on it and cuts everything that the Russian Federation has been doing since May, because then we will have to do what the dill and the Americans want - to officially introduce troops ... Dill then immediately stop the official database and withdraw troops from Donbass, after destroying all infrastructure and leaving the partisan detachments and drg from the volunteer bats and udk. And they turn out to be victims and all in white, and we are insidious aggressors who are at war with the "peaceful population". Accordingly, we receive even more sanctions, and we will not be supported by either the BRICS or
      CIS, even Belarus and Kazakhstan. In general, the result is sanctions, the loss of the majority of the allies and in the hands of 6 million people and the territory with destroyed infrastructure, which will have to be rebuilt with money from the budget and a constant counter-terrorism operation in which our troops will already have to fight in cities and will die from our troops. including civilians, and ukrsmi and the west will show it all on all channels. Well, is it worth it to substitute after a brilliant operation in the Crimea? Now we have excellent positions - dill is already obvious to everyone to carry out punitive operations against the peaceful people and our media remove and show it. Dill in the ass, those who cover them are also splattered. Ukraine spends all its money on a meaningless atom, in which it cannot win and splits from the inside. Western sanctions are not too dangerous, as BRICS and the CIS are with us
      trade and understand our position. In general, we are all in white, but we can’t wash the dill and the west with shit from our ears. The inevitable war against the Russian Federation is taking place on foreign territory, and not somewhere in the Caucasus or in another region of the Russian Federation, and Ukrainian citizens and other enemies of Russia are dying in the east of Ukraine, and they are not killing a minder somewhere in the Krasnodar Territory. In general, everything is going well and GDP will not do stupid things.
  37. Stallker27
    Stallker27 27 November 2014 14: 00
    +1
    Saved Abkhazia and South Ossetia from the genocide. Saved from the destruction of the Crimea. God forbid, we will help to withstand New Russia. Unlike NATO, we make friends, and not acquire territories for the deployment of missile defense. And deeply AT-CPA, whether someone likes it or not. wink
  38. Siberian
    Siberian 27 November 2014 14: 22
    0
    I do not like, and I do not like. Pluralism of opinions. We do not declare war on them for this, do not impose sanctions, we do not declare even a banal boycott. They have the right to have an opinion, liberal democracy and all that jazz. It doesn’t turn out very well in European, completely in Asian, but in our country, lads, Eurasia!
  39. den848
    den848 27 November 2014 15: 03
    0
    as our commander liked to say: the problems of the Sheriff Indians do not care
  40. Ural45
    Ural45 27 November 2014 15: 41
    0
    So what? I do not like it, well, and sob silently into the pillows of everyone who does not like it. For example, Oh, I don’t like Byak in Barak, Merkul or Alkand, so what? I do not go around the village and do not yell about it at all outskirts. What a cocky manner, to crow and fearfully look around, and whether they will give along the ridge.
  41. razvedchik7
    razvedchik7 27 November 2014 16: 09
    0
    Well, if NATO did not like it, then we are doing everything right.
  42. ma_shlomha
    ma_shlomha 27 November 2014 16: 21
    0
    "NATO did not like the agreement between Abkhazia and Russia"
    But now this small country of Abkhazia, which is now protected by the wing of RUSSIA, can boldly supply to Novorossia its own, "which it does not need" Russian weapons. So Russia will be legally clean before the hunters from Brussels and Strassburg.
  43. parafoiler
    parafoiler 27 November 2014 16: 51
    0
    To listen to what the Amer-Geyropian shit-dogs blather is not necessary at all and it is not necessary all the more. Each ass wiped ...
  44. Danilich
    Danilich 27 November 2014 17: 48
    0
    I just can’t understand something, who are they who would dictate the terms to us ??? Yes, it’s so brazen as if they were putting us in a surrender agreement! am
  45. Tribuns
    Tribuns 27 November 2014 18: 11
    0
    Two-faced America

    With Jeffy Ratke
    What bribes ...
    A lie, a lie
    Full pocket!
    Kiev lawyer, -
    No one in the Donbass is happy with her!
  46. Nyrobsky
    Nyrobsky 27 November 2014 18: 20
    +1
    Let the West first restore Yugoslavia within its former borders and get out of the newly-minted "different countries" - and then we'll see. yes
  47. andrew42
    andrew42 27 November 2014 18: 27
    0
    Nice contract. It was high time. Now you can go to Abkhazia with your family for a vacation.
  48. fktrcfylhn61
    fktrcfylhn61 27 November 2014 20: 00
    0
    The NATO bloc was alarmed: the secretary general there, having learned that Russia and Abkhazia can now reflect external aggression together, said that the alliance would not recognize the treaty. The United States did not recognize him, of course. Needless to say, the agreement outraged Georgia?

    And the homosexual there, and the rest of the cockerel and the humpbacked and the hunchbacked will never agree! Baba Yaga is against, and that’s it! But do not send these ... directly into the dense forest! Still would ask any flawed and blissful advice!
  49. xomaNN
    xomaNN 27 November 2014 20: 04
    +1
    Whatever one may say, but the "hot spot" is Abkhazia, once a part of Georgia and will not allow it to be admitted to NATO. The British + Germans will not want to fight for the Georgians in the Caucasus. bully
  50. Victor-M
    Victor-M 27 November 2014 20: 20
    +1
    The Western "partners" will agree that they will have to invalidate the Belovezhskaya agreement on the collapse of the USSR, signed by Yeltsin, Kravchuk and Shushkevich. It's time to put everything back in place.