This seems like a reasonable analysis of what’s going on.
Interesting article Sam. This is a very serious development, but I have no f***ing clue what it means. I don’t think we have what it takes to fight Russia, and yes I think Europe would swing toward Moscow if push came to shove. Unless of course we allied with China offering them Siberia. They need room to push their massive population into.
It may be dialing down.
In short, Russia won. Negotiations, such as they will be, will be a means for South Ossetia to become more clearly part of the Russian sphere with Georgia duly chastened. I find it unlikely that Russia will pursue Georgia further unilaterally. They’ll lob a few more for good measure and bet that the West has gotten the point: stay out of our back yard unless you want to take us on.
What happens next is a critical branch point for the West. It will signal to Russia whether or not they can slowly but surely rebuild empire and expand their grip upon the regions natural resources and their transport. The West as a group needs to decide, and needs to decide now, exactly where it will build its fence and then make it clear that the fence is secure. It cannot just put tentative stakes in the ground over where it may build the fence in the future and then be shocked when Russia rips those stakes out and growls.
Fast tracking Georgia into NATO is making a committment and a scary one at that. Anything short of fast tracking Georgia into NATO right now however will give Russia a clear message that Europe will do nothing to stop Russia from virtually anything she wants to do, whether it be by power soft or hard.
These are complex times and the players are repositioning themselves rapidly. I don’t mind saying that I am a bit afraid.
Are you kidding? This is freaking scary stuff!
ETA: This is almost Cuban Missile Crisis scary, only I was five years old then.
How so? No nuclear power is going to go to war with Russia over the question of South Ossetia’s independence.
No, but according to CNN, Ukraine is now getting involved. If I’m not mistaken, Ukraine is part of NATO now, isn’t it? (Or is it?) We’re possibly looking at WWIII.
This is a scary situation because so many nations could get pulled in so easily. We’re talking a tiny country in the middle of everywhere.
Cue perfect coincidence - a big rumble of thunder in my background. 
No, it merely has a “promised invitation.” See here.
Seems to me what Russia really wants is just to be a great power again – or, rather, they believe they have never stopped being one. Great powers can wield hegemony over their weaker neighbors’ internal affairs as it suits them without direct imperial rule – as the U.S. historically has done in Central America and the Caribbean.
South Ossetia? South Ossetia is a little thugdom and why Georgia even wants it is beyond me. But how the West responds to the clear message that Russia is sending is key. Georgia is a prize that Russia still has eyes on. Georgia is a critical transport corridor of oil and natural gas to the EU. One of the only transport corridors not already controlled by Russia. Russia wants to control it and controlling South Ossetia is part of that mission.
This conflict is Russia sending the message that it will control these areas. It is Russia reclaiming its right to be the bully of the block by picking on the first little kid who foolishly tries to keep his lunch money and laughing as all the other kids just look the other way.
Yes it is scary.
Dseid is right on the money on all this, as far as I can tell. And he’s right - the west needs to respond with a show of solidarity. If the west isn’t willing to say, “THIS is the line you may not cross”, then Russia will continue to probe and test for western weakness. That’s very destabilizing.
This situation is also dangerous because the world is a far less stable place than it was during the cold war. There are more factions, more rich countries, and less of a ‘bipolar’ tension in the world. There are also more countries with nukes, and too many bad actors who are no longer constrained by cold war politics.
If Russia is not sent a clear message, the next battle may be in our backyards - there is a big fight brewing over control of Arctic oil resources, and Russia has already tried to make tentative claims over oil regions which are clearly in Canadian territorial waters. As the arctic ice retreats and these areas become exploitable, there’s a real chance for conflict. If Russia does something stupid like declare new territory and then try to hold it militarily with submarines and warships, we’ll have a big damned problem on our hands.
No way, no how Georgia gets “fast-tracked” into NATO now. Exactly the message the Russians wanted to send and they’ve done so quite convincingly.
It’s their backyard and they aim to keep it that way…
Can’t say that I blame them either in light of so much US-led Western huffin’ and puffin’
Bear’s back and needs to be treated with caution…hell, even Bush knows as much.
Sorry, Sam. Although I know you’re always itching for a fight this one is just not gonna happen…even the dimwit cowpoke still at the WH knows it’s too much (and waay too hot) to handle.
Jebus H. Bishop on a pogo drum, but I’m agreeing with the hawkish positions of Sam Stone! (And DSeid, but that’s much more common) This is something the US and Europe must agree to unify about and stand up to Russia on, or there will be serious repetitions. Obviously not in South Ossetia*, but in other parts of the former USSR.
*“Today for the 417th time in two years, Russia has invaded South Ossetia” doesn’t make very good copy or international political strategy.
It’s clear to me that what Russia wants is to control a serious oil route that connects Europe and the Middle-East so that more nations need to deal with them to get their oil. I don’t think this is about great power status in the sense that the Soviet Union was a great power. No Russian largesse will be sent to support Marxist guerillas in Central America.
Heh, when push comes to shove, EUrope will drop the US and kowtow to Russia.
I’d think we’d want Georgia over Kosovo any day of the week!
The US has been doing a lot of huffing and puffing. But not particularly toward Russia. Bush seems to have considered Putin his BFF among foreign leaders. I always figured it was because he intuitively understood him, having the inclination if not the ability to be a dictator in the mask of a president himself.
I’d think there was at least as good a chance that Georgia has nukes rolling around somewhere from USSR days as that Iran has managed to develop them yet. Not that I expect Georgia to be able to get them to work even if they were to find any. I don’t think they’d want to, and I doubt they could if they would. I’m not at all sure Russia has any working nukes left. I feel fairly sure Israel has working nukes; their situation makes them sufficiently paranoid that I imagine they make damn sure their nukes are in good working order. But Russia is so corrupt these days that I wouldn’t take anything for granted about the working order of their tech. NOT that I want to try it.
What message can be sent here?
Russia has no ideological agenda any more. The government’s sole interest is in retaining and increasing its members’ own wealth and power. It’s easier to substitute Mafia for government, I think. You have to perform some services for the people and put out some propoganda, or you’ll get overthrown. But other than that, as far as I can tell, Russia and its surrounds are just one big all-you-can-eat buffet for the government and big businesses.
ETA: In that respect, I really do respect China’s government more, because I think there is a sincere ideological belief in stability as a virtue in and of itself. In other words, I think they are actually acting in what they truly believe to be to some degree to be the best interests of the Chinese people, after, of course, securing their own personal power.
Well China has the Confucian history to ground themselves in. Russia’s history was always the rule by strongmen.
I believe the word you are looking for though, is ‘Plutocracy’.
I’m not itching for a fight - I’m itching to avoid one. When will people learn that appeasement in the face of aggression is the best way to ensure a conflict?
There are lots of ways to send a message. A classic one is military manoevers. During the Cold War, if the Soviets showed signs of aggression somewhere, the response would sometimes be a new set of wargames designed to show combat ability and resolve. Or moving a carrier group near the hostile country. More aggressive patrols of border regions.
Another way is diplomatically - NATO could offer accelerated membership to Georgia, for example. Or the U.S. could initiate new defense agreements with other states in the region.
No one’s talking about a military confrontation.
That’s hard to do when your resources are tied up doing that near Iran.