Though it seems Georgia did initiate military force in an operation against South Ossetia, not coincidentally during the Olympics, the Russian “reaction” is premeditated and is anything but an attempt to protect Russians or minority rights. Georgia miscalculated, but that does not excuse Putin’s actions since then.
A small, actively pro-Western democracy is in peril of becoming a eunuch state (to use Fred Barnes’ term) in increasingly aggressive Russia’s sphere of control. Russia’s behaviour toward Ukraine is based on that same Russian intention of reclaiming control over the former Soviet Union by creating puppet states that will defer to Russian demands.
Clearly, Russia feels unthreatened by the UN, the EU, and NATO. The United States will not use military force, but it is the only power that can use leverage to make Russia, at the very least, rethink some of its aims in the current war.
So what can the United States do, short of military force?
Charles Krauthammer suggests several courses of action. Removing Russia from the G-8 would be a start, as would freezing as talks with Russia on accepting them into the World Trade Organization. The Russians are hosting the Winter Olympics in 2014 in Sochi, twenty miles from the Georgian border. The United States and NATO should threaten to boycott those games unless Russia accepts a cease-fire.
And, most importantly, says Krauthammer on FoxNews, NATO needs to head Russia off at its big target, Ukraine. Stationing troops there, and making commitments to Ukrainian sovereignty will prevent the West from being taken by surprise again.
What about accepting Georgia into NATO, as Bush proposed this year? The problem with accepting countries that border Russia into NATO is that all NATO countries will be obligated to come to Georgia’s (or any other NATO country’s) defense if attacked. If the U.S. is not ready to send its troops into Georgia, than it cannot accept it into NATO.
Georgia put much at stake by becoming so openly pro-Western. They are suffering the consequences right now, as Russia seeks by force to shove them back into Russia’s sphere. Unless there are clear benefits in a time of crisis to openly allying with America, other countries near Russia will be less likely to do so. And for all the respect and understanding shown Russia by United States during Bush’s presidency, Russia has now shown that it will do what it wants regardless. Hopefully this will cause the West to be much harsher with Putin.
This should be a big advantage for McCain in the election. The war will likely remind voters that the world remains a dangerous place, and a president who is thought of as weak or inexperienced can cause certain countries to become more aggressive and hostile. McCain has seized the opportunity to show his toughness and knowledge of the issue, while Obama, unluckily (for him), finds himself on vacation in Hawaii.
This could also remind Americans that Bush is a good man to have in control in some situations. Here is an opportunity for Bush to speak clearly and forcefully on an issue that has a good guy and a bad guy, and a fledgling democracy that needs defending. So far, he has shown patience and disciplined, incremental ratcheting up of rhetoric. He did say that he looked into his eyes and saw Putin’s soul, but Bush can confidently say that Putin was given every chance, even the benefit of the doubt, and it is time for a much tougher strategy against him.
The war will likely remind voters that the world remains a dangerous place, and a president who is thought of as weak or inexperienced can cause certain countries to become more aggressive and hostile. McCain has seized the opportunity to show his toughness and knowledge of the issue, while Obama, unluckily for him, finds himself on vacation in Hawaii.
it’s worse than that:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/30911_Obama_Calls_for_UN_to_Pass_Resolution_Condemning_Russia_Forgets_Russia_Has_UNSC_Veto
as to whether this will make a difference for the public, permit me to doubt it.
Comment by oao — August 12, 2008 @ 8:43 am
I don’t know if there are any “lessons” to be learned from this conflict. First of all, should it help McCain? I don’t know, and I certainly hope not.
What does toughness mean in this context? We were “tough” in Afghanistan and Iraq, and where did that get us? If anything, Bush’s blunders during the last two terms have given us lessons enough.
Somehow, we shouldn’t be stuck choosing between doing nothing or sending in jet bombers; there should be a range of reactions in between. And that’s especially true in this case. This is Russia, guys. And it’s not to be trifled with. We don’t want our “toughness” to spark a major war.
We have a real dilemma here. The more we support the countries of Russia’s “near abroad,” especially allowing them into NATO and the EU, the more Russia feels excluded and encircled. And so the more hostile and confrontational Russia gets. Yet the less we do to forge links with the democratic or democratizing countries of this region, the more Russia will feel emboldened to assert its traditional hegemony.
So, we have to think of intermediate steps that are tough enough to make Russia back off, yet that won’t get us embroiled in a war that would augur no good. Remember, we’re over-streteched in Iraq as it is. It’s not as if we had any manpower to spare.
Perhaps the answer lies in the great importance the Russians give to their prestige. The idea of threatening Russia’s exclusion from the G8 is a good one. So is threatening a boycott of the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, especially if Russia views it as a showcase. In other words, we should try policies that will hurt, but will not engender a military response.
As for Abkhazia and South Ossetia, I’d like to more about their independence movements. Even if Russia may be using them cynically, their desires for independence may be valid. Whatever happens, any settlement will have to include some consultation with Russia as a matter of form, but it will have to be devised without Russia’s heavy hand.
Please, let’s leave our bombers at home. This isn’t Bosnia.
BTW, here is a good column from, of all places, The Guardian: http://tinyurl.com/598673
I found it via Oliver Kamm. It suggests the G8 and Olympic ideas mentioned above, though those ideas I think have been bandied about elsewhere. In any case, its overall analysis seems quite sensible. I wonder how it made its way into The Guardian.
Comment by Joanne — August 12, 2008 @ 2:24 pm
the west will do nothing and russia, iran and china will do what they want at its expense.
the western era is over, folks. get used to it.
Comment by oao — August 12, 2008 @ 9:28 pm
Reagan’s phrase ‘evil empire’ has grown on me over the years. Russia was an empire under the Czars and grew under Communism and Putin is trying to restore it. PCP2 fits Russia way better than it fits the US or Israel. Oh sweet irony. Personally, I prefer Krauthammer’s characterization of the US as a commercial oligarchy. But Russia is still a gold plated imperialist empire and needs to be seen and opposed on those grounds.
I don’t think Russia understands the brand of win win that has developed in the West. Like any empire they only understand win lose, but it is not the unbearable inner conflict of honor/shame that drives Russia. It is like they are caught in a twilight zone between the late Roman empire and the modern world. They still need the strong man - the Caesar/Czar/Father figure - and can only partake partially of the modern European based Western enlightenment. Perhaps that causes a terrible inner conflict too - hence the music, the art, the terrible dictators.
Comment by Lorenz Gude — August 13, 2008 @ 8:27 am
BTW, oao, you can use www.tinyurl.com to make links shorter. I once got upbraided (not here) for not doing so.
Comment by Joanne — August 13, 2008 @ 1:22 pm
BTW, oao, you can use www.tinyurl.com to make links shorter. I once got upbraided (not here) for not doing so.
a site-screening program i use warned me about that site and I avoid it.
Comment by oao — August 13, 2008 @ 11:04 pm
Be specific, oao. What was the warning? The person who upbraided me for not using it is a blogger of longstanding. I’ve used it since with no problems.
Please let me know what in heaven’s name that warning was. Maybe that knowledge will be useful to me.
Comment by Joanne — August 14, 2008 @ 9:13 am
i have a program that screens all links in a google search result and warns if a site misbehaves by placing a red mark besides it. the warning is not specific, it can be about privacy or security. it just says it’s better not to go there.
now it does not warn anymore, so it looks like it’s OK. I will use it in the future.
Comment by oao — August 14, 2008 @ 9:57 am
Joanne,
I’m worried. I cannot understand what you are trying to say in #2.
So, we have to think of intermediate steps that are tough enough to make Russia back off, yet that won’t get us embroiled in a war that would augur no good.
How?
The best would be for the US to pull out of the UN and leave it to the oil rich nations to carry it. Then leave the G8, or get any democratic nations to pull out of it and leave Russia to itself, as Charles Krauthammer is suggesting. And then?
Or is it just yadda, yadda yadda over oysters/caviar and champagne? And that’s just to get the “saviours of the peace” out of cutting Georgia in half?
(One does not have to bomb Russia into oblivion but when I saw the scenes in Gorli I was all for letting rip at Moscow apartments and their inhabitants.)
The one thing the world needs now from the US is NO reinforcing of the paper tiger image.
Bush’s real blunders started after 2004 when the “realists” set to work again.
Maybe Americans should be forced to watch the “Dog Whisperer” to understand the difference between reality and Hollywood Dreaming.
Then again I’m beginning to doubt that the 21st Century’s Educational System is capable of providing the necessary training, anywhere in the world, to compete with M(pty) T V(ision).
Comment by Cynic — August 14, 2008 @ 1:45 pm
That’s ok, oao, now I’m reassured, too, about tinyurl. Thanks.
Cynic, wow, I can see you didn’t understand what I was saying. Sorry if I was unclear. I wasn’t anywhere near suggesting that the US leave the UN (!) or the G8. I was supporting suggestions that Russia should be threatened with being kicked out of the G8. I should add here that Russia should be made to understand that its chances of joining the WTO would be compromised as well. I also mentioned the idea of threatening to boycott the planned winter Olympics at Sochi.
As I mentioned in my prior comment, I saw a dilemma. If we bolster the countries near Russia, then the Russians will be angry, but if we are more receptive to Russia, the Russians will see it as a green light for their expansionism. I’m not for yadda, yadda, I’m for action. But, as I said, it should consist of threatening to hit Russia where it hurts (prestige, economic gains) without our having to launch into another military adventure. We cannot manage another invasion now, and we shouldn’t welcome the chance to confront Russia militarily.
Comment by Joanne — August 14, 2008 @ 6:42 pm
If America was of sound mind it would have made sure of its energy self-sufficiency years ago so as not to be blackmailed.
(If the French can produce 75% of there energy needs using nuclear power without upsetting Kerry then it should be no big deal for the US.)
Being energy independent of imports would make it one up in the “imposition stakes” and able to dictate Russia’s, as well as Iran’s and goodness knows who else’s, ability to leverage advantage from their oil reserves and threaten consumers.
But apart from Hollywood actors in poker games nobody else, least of all the realists, has been able to gauge the the reactions of others.
All the screaming about Bush going to war for oil and here we have the very Russians doing exactly that.
Comment by Cynic — August 15, 2008 @ 11:39 am