Is Russia determined to be an empire again?

[tagos]

[QUOTE=DSeid]
I think we agree up to this point. The question is: what would be the stupid move?

South Ossetia? Gone. No problem. Georgia allowed itself to be goaded into exactly the action that Russia wanted - Georgia deserves to lose that little cesspool for that stupidity.

But “Russia uses energy as a political tool” Do you you really think that the EU should just look the other way as Russia grabs control of one of the only means for gas and oil to reach Europe that Russia does not already control?
[/QUOTE]

Hence the question. What can we do? It doesn’t look like Russia is annexing Georgia.

Our pawn has made a bad move and gotten itself taken. Russia, who already has Europe by the balls energy-wise, has won this round. We can scream and bawl ‘not fair,’ we can posture and bluster to no effect, or we can start thinking.

To begin with we can go for energy independence with new technologies. We can also smarten up our diplomacy and see things from the Russian side. NATO is encircling them from their point of view and don’t tell me that is not a deliberate policy. We can stop the ridiculous ‘missile shield’ shit.

But somehow we also have to make it clear that Russian empire-building is over. I don’t know - instead of expanding NATO we find some mutual defence and guarantee structures that all sides can agree on.

The bottom line is Russia sees its ‘near abroad’ in the same way the US views hostile states in its own backyard. Like Cuba. That’s the diplomatic field of play.

And maybe if we don’t want Big Powers invading who the frack they like on jumped up pretenses we should look at the motes in our own eyes.

[tagos]

[QUOTE=Magiver]
The main oil and gas pipelines into Georgia come from Azerbaijan not Russia. I’m sure the Russians would love to run a pipeline through Georgia though.
[/QUOTE]

You are wrong. Russia played exactly that card in 2006.

[tagos]

[QUOTE=slaphead]
Damn right they did. What they did not do was roll several armoured divisions into Serbia proper.
[/QUOTE]

War is war. You don’t get to make convenient self-serving distinctions. NATO bombed because the West is casualty-averse.

[E-Sabbath]

But what can the EU do? They’re all but disarmed, they don’t need armies anymore. Because war is a thing of the past. At least, so I’ve been assured. The US is occupied in our little horrid disasters, so we can’t help much at all.

[tagos]

[QUOTE=E-Sabbath]
But what can the EU do? They’re all but disarmed, they don’t need armies anymore. Because war is a thing of the past. At least, so I’ve been assured. The US is occupied in our little horrid disasters, so we can’t help much at all.
[/QUOTE]

That’s the question. It has to be diplomacy backed with the ability to levy sanctions. Diplomacy begins with the recognition that states have different interests. The USA claims the right to dictate how Cuba can act, what military can be deployed there but denies Russia a valid interest in what goes on on its borders.

As i said - maybe we have to recognise the diplomatic reality that Russia will not allow itself to be encircled by a potentially hostile alliance so some other way of guaranteeing the security of former soviet states than NATO membership has to be found.

Diplomacy is give and take. Remember that Kennedy quietly withdrew nukes from Turkey as the quid pro quo for the USSR backing down over Cuba.

The reality is that at this moment Russia is a major energy power and just like the USA cannot do anything about the vile regime in Saudi - which actively proliferates the most extreme views of Islam that are the jihad source of terrorism - because of energy dependency then neither can Europe with Russia.

In both games the black hat guys hold the better cards.

That’s why a big push for alternative energy should be made. If they hold the stronger hand then let’s change the game being played for starters.

for the time being it looks like Russia is not going to annex Georgia. They’ve made their point - they can slap down any government in their sphere that won’t play ball. Just like the USA has behaved in Central America.

We have to start from reality and the reality is that Europe and the USA are not able or willing to start WW3 over Russian activities on its borders and it’s no use chest-thumping neo-con wanabees wailing on about it. We got through the Cold War with diplomacy and we can deal with Russia the same way again.

That requires clever diplomats, not ‘other peoples son’s and daughters’ neo-con ranting.

Sure - it’s not ‘fair’ that Georgia etc might not in practice be able to join NATO. It wasn’t ‘fair’ that South America suffered decades of US installed and supported brutal dictators either. Or that the people of Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan continue to suffer under western backed dictators.

Diplomacy is the art of the possible and sometimes what is possible is not what is ideal.

[DSeid]

tagos, “It doesn’t look like Russia is annexing Georgia.”? All but. Representatives of the EU are hand delivering a Georgian signed cease fire agreement to back up what Georgia has already stated several times: “We give.” Yet knowing it is coming Russia pummels away like a group of Chicago cops on some punk who was stupid enough to resist arrest. The only motivation there is to force Georgia into puppethood and to make an example of her: “This is what happens to a country near our borders who doesn’t do what we tell them to.” Control is more important than annexation…

WAIT. Update. Before posting I just went and checked CNN to get an example of continued Russian attack and instead see this.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev announced Tuesday that he has ordered an end to military operations against Georgia.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has called a halt to the advance of Russian troops in Georgia.

The announcement came minutes before French President Nicolas Sarkozy was to land in Moscow to meet with Medvedev to negotiate terms for a possible cease-fire.

“I have reached a decision to halt the operation to force the Georgian authorities to peace,” Medvedev said. “The aggressor has been punished and has incurred very significant losses. Its armed forces are disorganized.”

“The statement on the halt of the military action by Russia is the news we had expected. It’s good news,” Sarkozy said, according to an Interfax report…

Before the Russian president said he would halt military operations, a Georgian Interior Ministry official said Tuesday that Russian bombs hit one of the three pipelines carrying oil to the Black Sea port of Poti.

So, assuming that Russia does stop the beating, how tagos do you propose the EU should proceed from here?

[DSeid]

Let me clarify. You are right that from this point the response is “clever diplomats” … this is the weapon of choice. Unified and clear messages from the EU (and America to a lesser extent) are essential. What should be the message and how should it be sent?

[DSeid]

Then again, as of now Russia is still bombing away, despite having said that they will stop. Medvedev may have said stop, but until Putin says so, it won’t happen?

[E-Sabbath]

Yes, but what can the EU do? They don’t have the US to help, effectively. So what are their options?

[spazattak]

Anyone have a map with where the pipelines currently run? I thought I read that they’re currently going through SO. What about re-joining NO and SO (handing it over to russia) and building a new infrastructure/pipeline that bypasses russian controlled territory?

[tagos]

[QUOTE=E-Sabbath]
Yes, but what can the EU do? They don’t have the US to help, effectively. So what are their options?
[/QUOTE]

Long term. Remove our dependence on their energy. I don’t see what short term moves we have. Russia poisons people with radioactive shit in London hotels without any shame. They to all intents and purposes force our energy companies to relinquish joint holdings, they close our diplomatic missions.

We basically have to re-engage diplomatically and probably lead by example.

The first thing to do is stake the moral high ground. We storm around the world invading who we like, snip off bits of other countries and call them ‘independent’, destabilising who we like, installing bases where we like - as in the Ukraine and getting cozy with murderous dictators when it is convenient.

We can hardly complain when Russia also takes a robust real-politick approach to its ‘sphere of influence’ and compared to what we did in Iraq this is chicken-shit stuff. If Russia set up military bases in Cuba, Canada and Mexico and then invaded the Ukraine the USA would be kicking up a firestorm. What is sauce for the goose etc.

We might also reconsider whether we want shit pseudo-democracies who think shelling cities and villages is a fine way to resolve problems.

Russia doesn’t need our capital and it doesn’t need our raw materials. It’s hard to see what to do but that’s why we have diplomats.

[tagos]

[QUOTE=spazattak]
Anyone have a map with where the pipelines currently run? I thought I read that they’re currently going through SO. What about re-joining NO and SO (handing it over to russia) and building a new infrastructure/pipeline that bypasses russian controlled territory?
[/QUOTE]

The western ones run through Georgia. We’ve spent untold billions building them already.

[RTFirefly]

[QUOTE=Sam Stone]
I’m flattered that you think of me so much, but really, there are better venues for driveby snipes.

And you might want to take note of the fact that I blasted Bush vehemently yesterday in this thread.
[/quote]
For staying in Beijing. Isn’t that kinda trivial compared to giving the Georgians reason to believe we’d stand shoulder to shoulder with them? That’s like chewing out a felon for getting a parking ticket. BFD.

And I’m highly disappointed in Rice, unless there’s something going on behind the scenes. When this first broke, one of my thoughts was, “Finally, Rice will be of some use. She’s a major expert on Russia. Time for her to get in the game.” Apparently, she feels differently.

Actually, I doubt if it was Rice’s decision. I suspect someone in the administration, probably Bush, made the decision that they should continue with business as usual as some sort of message. That’s the only explanation I can think of. And if so, it was an amazingly boneheaded decision. Not surprising.

Well, good of you to finally recognize, in the eighth and final year of the Bush Administration, what a bunch of fuckups you’ve been supporting all these years. (Note to Magiver: that’s the point. And I can’t think of a better time for making it.)

[RTFirefly]

McClatchy:

One problem in under-estimating the Russian response, another U.S. official said, was “a dearth of intelligence assets in the region.”

U.S. “national technical means,” the official name for spy satellites and other technology, are “pretty well consumed by Iraq, Afghanistan and now Pakistan,” the official said, and there was only limited monitoring of Russian military movements toward the Georgian border.

As I’ve been pointing out since 2003, Iraq is a diversion of resources on multiple levels, but I’ll admit that the limitations on what spy satellites can track catches me by surprise. But it’s the same basic principle: there’s a huge opportunity cost to the Iraq war. Resources committed there mean resources unavailable elsewhere. The longer we were fighting a major war in Iraq, the more likely that somewhere, sometime, we were really, really going to need those military resources elsewhere.

Yes, kiddies, we’re there yet.

Until recently, though, we had one substitute for those resources. However, we fucked it up:

Additionally, the United States had lost access to vital information when Russia dropped out of the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty in December to protest U.S. plans to build missile defense sites in Europe.

Under the treaty, Russia had been required to exchange reports on troop, armor and aircraft deployments with the United States and other members on a monthly basis. But once Russia dropped out, that information was no longer available.

“I wouldn’t say we were blind,” the official said. “I would say that we mostly were focused elsewhere, unlike during the Cold War, when we’d see a single Soviet armor battalion move. So, yes, the size and scope of the Russian move has come as something of a surprise.”

Guess it must’ve been mighty important to us to put those missile defenses in Poland and the Czech Republic. I keep hearing that they’re not that useful in practical terms - that their value is more symbolic than useful. If so, our Administration apparently decided to trade the practical for the symbolic, and wound up flying blind with respect to Russia.

Guess Bush saw all sorts of good things in Putin’s eyes.

Not to mention, it’s time for the “it’s always Munich 1938” crew to admit that the Neville Chamberlain of our time is none other than George W. Bush:

At the same time, U.S. officials said that they believed they had an understanding with Russia that any response to Georgian military action would be limited to South Ossetia.

“We knew they were going to go crack heads. We told them again and again not to do this,” the State Department official said. “We thought we had an understanding with the Russians that any response would be South Ossetia-focused. Clearly it’s not.”

[tagos]

If you can’t trust a former KGB head turned gangster capitalist front man I just don’t know who you can trust any more.

[spazattak]

[QUOTE=tagos]
The western ones run through Georgia. We’ve spent untold billions building them already.
[/QUOTE]

I know they run through Georgia, but what part of Georgia? SO? And I’m pretty sure the EU and NATO would pony up to secure their own energy delivery - given Russia’s penchant for using pipelines as a means for extortion.

[tagos]

[QUOTE=spazattak]
I know they run through Georgia, but what part of Georgia? SO? And I’m pretty sure the EU and NATO would pony up to secure their own energy delivery - given Russia’s penchant for using pipelines as a means for extortion.
[/QUOTE]

Georgia. The clue is in the name. An the EU is dependent on Russian gas more than oil. The latter we hope to get from all the other little dictatorships we are cosying up to.

[RTFirefly]

[QUOTE=Sam Stone]
This editorial by the National Review almost exactly mirrors what Holbrooke and Asmus are saying. This is looking more like an emerging consensus as to what the correct course of action should be.
[/QUOTE]
From the link:

In the long term, however, America and its allies must demonstrate that Russia has lost more than it gained from this conflict. One first step must be for the U.S. to agree with its NATO allies to confirm an offer of NATO membership for both Georgia and Ukraine. Poland, the Baltic states, and other central European countries are already calling for an emergency NATO summit that might issue such a declaration. Only Germany seems to stand in the way of such a decision — and the Germans should be told firmly that their opposition to Georgia membership earlier this year encouraged the siloviki to mount this attack. Time for them to forget Rapallo once and for all, and join the rest of the West in resisting the re-emergence of the USSR.

OK, but NATO had better be ready to commit enough troops to Georgia to hold off any further Russian incursion for long enough to bring in reinforcements, and the reinforcements had better be sufficient to hold off however many troops and however much conventional firepower the Russians are capable of bringing.

Because they’re almost surely willing to raise the stakes pretty damned high. If we’re not serious about matching them, then we’d better not play pretend games. Georgia’s just gotten its ass fried because they believed we’d be there for them.

Right now, I don’t see that we have the chips to stay in this game. Maybe in 2010, after President Obama has gotten us out of Iraq, we might.

Second, we should ask Poland and the Czech Republic to hold any necessary referendums on installing a missile defense system to be held at once — and campaign on the argument that Russia has just shown that it cannot be trusted to be a good international neighbor. Such a victory would lose the Kremlin far more than it gained in the Caucasus.

I expect it’s too late to get Russia to rejoin the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty, but maybe we ought to try that first. How many times do we want to get caught with our pants down?

If there’s clearly no way to undo that trade, then, sure, do the missile defense systems, since we’ve already paid the price for them.

Third, once the fighting has definitively stopped, the U.S. should offer a generous rebuilding program in Georgia — to be carried out, in part, by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. That is one piece of social work that the Pentagon should relish.

Assuming they’re not also putting in overtime in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Magiver]

[QUOTE=tagos]
You are wrong. Russia played exactly that card in 2006.
[/QUOTE]

What card? What are you talking about? I stated that Georgia got its oil from Azerbaijan and not Russia.

[spazattak]

Lookee what I found… a map. Tbilisi seems to be the main thoroughfare.