The situation in South Ossetia causes sad recollections of the residents of Abkhazia - in 2004 Moscow's favorite lost in the presidential election, and he did not recognize the results either. And for a few months Russia could accept his loss, actively supporting him. The country almost came to a civil war and only Stanislav Lakoba’s denial of the post of vice-president in favor of the favorite let Sergei Bagapsh get the first post.
Six years of Bagapsh’s presidential rule proved clearly that he was no less pro-Russian politician than the former favorite of Moscow. By the way, it is with him Russia recognized Abkhazia's independence.
The conclusion is univocal andno sense to bustle for in Abkhazia there are no politicians of other orientations.
Moscow has learned the lesson of 2004 and the next presidential election it correctly behaved. Even after the special presidential elections in August 2011 giving some preference to Sergei Shamba, the Kremlin has quietly acknowledged the evident victory of Alexander Ankvab and established a relationship with him at once.
There is no politician inSouth Ossetia not pro - Russian oriented so no need to bustle there either. These presidential elections have caused the hope of inhabitants of a small country for a more fair distribution of Russian aid and real economic recovery. Definitely during the ballot counting one found the inscriptions on the bulletins: "Thanks for oxygen," "It's a breath of freedom," "At last we will begin to live! " ,etc. And such rising of spirit of the people wasbroken off. By the way, in theelectorallawofSouthOssetiathereisanitemthathasnoanalogueintheworldlegislation- observers fromallpresidentialcandidatessigneachballot, andit entirely eliminates thepossibilityofelection fraud.
After the election Alla Dzhioeva publicly declared her pro-Russian orientation and Russian citizenship, but her victory is being taken away, as once it was done with Bagapsh.
Having recognized the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Russia spoiled relations with the West to a large extent and in coming weeks after the recognition 18 $ billion had been withdrawn in protest from Russia. God knows how many were not invested for the same reasons. Russia has invested considerable amounts of money in the development of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. It would seem all of this shows the seriousness of Russia's intentions to support the independence of both countries. Then why to make such overt interference in internal affairs of South Ossetia, the population of which is deeply grateful to Russia for aid and security guarantees, but now feels insulted in their best feelings with such meddling. Is it right to jeopardize the country's reputation in the interests of several officials controlling the Russian money flow into South Ossetia? Political dividends of such an act are already evident - for example, the American newspaper "National Review" asserts thatSouth Ossetia’s elections showed that Russia's influence weakened, and "trends, which would entail significant and mainly good consequences for the United States" have appeared. Many Western newspapers frolic in the same topic.
And all of these passions do run high for the sake of filling bottomless bureaucratpocket?