Georgian missile batteries firing on South Ossetia
Lost in all of the Obama glory last week was a major news story from the Nov. 6 New York Times. Turns out that the war in Georgia--which erupted this summer and set off a "new Cold War" between the US and Russia--may not have started precisely as we've all been told. The official story from Georgia's president Mikheil Saakashvili was of an unprovoked Russian attack on his small country. Russia however charged that it was the Georgians who attacked the separatist region of Ossetia, killed Russian troops and hundreds of civilians--to which they reacted (or perhaps overreacted). Now, months later, turns out that the truth of the entire sordid affair is coming to light. And Saakashvili is looking less than David facing off Goliath, and more like the boy who cried "wolf."
According to the New York Times:Newly available accounts by independent military observers of the beginning of the war between Georgia and Russia this summer call into question the longstanding Georgian assertion that it was acting defensively against separatist and Russian aggression. Instead, the accounts suggest that Georgia’s inexperienced military attacked the isolated separatist capital of Tskhinvali on Aug. 7 with indiscriminate artillery and rocket fire, exposing civilians, Russian peacekeepers and unarmed monitors to harm.
While not conclusive in this game of "he said, she said," the Times article does call into question Georgia's motives and the painting of themselves as a defenseless innocent against a bullying Russia. Whatever the larger designs of Russia's increasingly autocratic Putin, it is looking more and more that it was Georgia who kicked off this crisis. And given the current state of Russian-Western relations, this has embarrassing implications for Georgia's biggest financial and military backer--the US. For certain, this is a full scale bi-partisan blunder, which had leading American figures like George Bush, John McCain, Joe Biden and (yes) Barack Obama, all rushing to the defense of Georgia, and proclaiming Mikheil Saakashvili the "George Washington of the Caucus."
The question now is, how will this all play out in an Obama presidency, which has (sadly) already cozied up to Saakashvili. Joe Biden has a "special relationship" with Georgia second probably only to John McCain. Georgian diplomats were "special guests" at the Democratic National Convention. What's more, some of those surrounding the president-elect are best described as old Cold War Hawks who are still obsessed with the "Russian threat." And Obama, in a serious lack of good judgment, has previously made statements about Georgia joining NATO. Yet allowing Georgia into such a military alignment would do little more than intensify Russian anger with the West's broken promises regarding NATO expansion, and turn the small country into a flashpoint of conflict--a literal "Kashmir of the Caucus."
About the only promising statement out of the Obama camp regarding Georgia, was his call for "restraint" on both sides during the conflict (which was derided by his detractors) and his preventive assertions long before, that international peacekeepers needed to replace the Russian troops in South Ossetia. Let's hope that kind of good sense prevails in the months and years to come, because (unless you're talking Outkast), contrary to Sen. McCain, we are NOT all Georgians. And the risks of antagonizing an already disgruntled and nuclear armed Russia over Saakashvili (a reckless leader with, at best, pretensions of democracy) is not in this nation's best interest--or anyone else's.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Georgia's Blunder
Saturday, August 16, 2008
Crisis in the Caucus
Last week, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili, ordered an invasion of the breakaway region of South Ossetia--shelling the area and possibly killing Russian troops (deemed "peacekeepers") stationed there. The reaction from Moscow who backs the separatist region, was swift. Within days Russia had not only bombed key cities and strategic areas in South Ossetia and beyond, but had routed the Georgian army that fled in disarray. The response from the US has been a mingle of shock and indignation. The Bush administration has condemned Russia for its aggression, demanding they withdraw from Georgia. But with its own military stretched thin, and tarnished credibility when it comes to invasions and occupations, the US has been able to do little more than lodge sullen complaints to deaf Russian ears. Let the corporate news media tell it, and the narrative coming out of the White House on this crisis is the only valid one. It goes something like this: Russia is having delusions of grandeur from their Soviet days, and has attacked a staunch bastion of freedom and democracy; President Saakashvili is a courageous David up against a menacing Goliath.
Of course, foreign policy matters are rarely that simple.
If Russia is a bully, it is only a greater bully than Georgia itself, who launched the initial attack on South Ossetia. The Russian response has certainly been disproportionate, but in this era of a global War on Terror and Israeli blitzes on Lebanon, restraint is in short supply. While Russia certainly does want respect and power, there is little evidence to the claim this is a move back to Empire. If anything, this flare up has exposed some of the dangerous consequences of American global expansionism. Russia's opposition over NATO moving into their backyard has been voiced since the 1990s, and repeatedly ignored.
And America's friend and hero Saakashvili hardly a boyscout, creating close military ties with the US and suppressing demonstrations with the type of violence that is condemned in China, but ignored in Georgia. What's further, exactly what kind of dangerous game was he playing? Did he really believe that the US would, and should, get into a military conflict with a nuclear armed adversary?
Below are some nuanced and balanced articles on the crisis, pointing out that not only is it complex but perhaps more dangerous than most imagine.
The War We Don't Know
Mark Ames, editor of Moscow's alternative paper The eXile, gives a detailed account of the origins of the Russian-Georgian conflict.
Georgia War a Neocon Election Ploy?
Robert Scheer examines how neconservatives are exploiting Russian conflict to push their Pax Americana agendas, and prop up GOP presidential candidate John McCain--who it turns out has extremely close ties to lobbyists for Georgia.
McCain's War: Playing With Nuclear Fire
Steve Weissman examines the dangerous gamble McCain's intended policies towards Russia means when taking into account the nuclear factor.
Ceasefire and Chaos in Georgia
Georgian journalist Margarita Akhvlediani points out that after the cease-fires are met and the new boundary lines are drawn, someone is going to have to investigate just who started this conflict.
Up to 2,000 Killed as Russia-Georgia Fighting Enters Fourth Day
Amy Goodman interviews Col. Sam Gardiner on the Russian-Georgian war, and the danger of any possible escalation or American intervention leading to the possibiilty of nuclear showdown.
The New American Cold War
Originally published in 2006, this article by Russian Studies Professor Stephen Cohen (updated with a new intro for 2008) predicted much of the current discord between the US and Russia, much of it due to American arrogance and expansionism.
