StubbornFacts
Stubborn Facts
Stubborn Facts

Navigation

User login

Subscribe via RSS

Resources

The latest from our partner, the PoliGazette

Blog Roll

Open thread on the Russia-Georgia conflict

Submitted by Simon on Mon, 08/11/2008 - 10:12am

I'm still trying to cobble together a working picture of what's happening on the ground, so I don't want to weigh in on what's happening. Nevertheless, I recognize that it's a big deal, and that commenters may want to talk about it, so here's a place to do so. Just for sake of argument (and to give you something to initially argue back against) let's frame the question like this, initially: if we have no interests adverse to Russia's, and several in common, and if we think that it's important to make a firm ally of Russia, should we really jeopardize that over Russia's back yard? Or should we view this as the reoccupation of the Rhineland and worry that accommodation can easily become appeasement?

Leave your $0.02 in the comments, and for those of you who haven't registered to comment, please take this as an opportunity to take thirty seconds to do so and to weigh in.

Added: Robert Kagan's piece on all this is worth reading, but his claim that Putin "has reestablished a virtual czarist rule in Russia" is very nearly as overheated as the claims from the left that Bush is a virtual dictator in this country. I'd also add that Kagan's assertion that "a geopolitical power struggle has emerged between a resurgent and revanchist Russia on one side and the European Union and the United States on the other" begs an exceedingly important question (one Kagan doesn't answer): why is the United States on the other side of this supposed power struggle, if indeed there is one? Are we? Should we be? Even if you think the answers to these questions are easy, they're questions that merit conscious consideration.

And: McCain:

Post facto:
Orbital redecoration (8/13/08)
McCain Says (8/14/08)
Pushing the first domino (8/14/08)
Making sense of Russia v. Georgia (8/15/08)

I have no clue.What are others' thoughts on Russia's goal here?

I KNOW that I lack the background info that would allow me to make sensible comments. I've got many questions and no answers. So I'll refrain from anything that makes any assumptions about either side's motives, even though I'm dying to assume that Russia has been looking for an excuse and a good time to take actions such as this.

Instead, I am wondering if other folks can, (either instead of or in addition to commenting) point out some resources for decent executive summaries of the conflict.

Among folks more well-versed in the conflict, is the conventional wisdom that Russia is acting merely as a nation in dispute with another nation? Or is the conventional wisdom that Russia's actions are one step towards the goal of making Georgia part of a greater Russia?
_________
I have often said, and oftener think, that this world is a comedy for those who think, and a tragedy for those who feel. -Horace Walpole

I've commented elsewhere on

I've commented elsewhere on Russia's goals in this mess. My take is by no means comprehensive--simplistic takes are for simpletons. Victor Davis Hanson has some related thoughts that also seem quite cogent.

To extend on some of what I said over at Baldilock's place, had Georgia been in NATO, it is unlikely Russia would be in Georgia. But the opening to add South Ossetia (with the approval of Ossetians, MOST of whom also hold Russian citizenship and passports) back into the empire was there, and they took it. It also gave them the cover to bust out the BTC pipeline (see Baldi link) and to grab a few other pieces of disputed border territory--like Abkhazia.

Governments may change in Russia, but The Bear is still the same grasping Bear that it's been since Ivan the Terrible first put on his Ugly Hat and rode out to conquer.

W should go to Georgia or Russia

I fully support Georgia here. And I think that W should provide more than words. They supported us in Iraq when European countries were willing to ignore the tragedy. Now NYT is saying the same thing.
W should go to Georgia or Russia. If not, it will definitely be a black eye on his presidency and rightly so. He would be throwing Georgia under the bus.

I believe Mr. S started it by invading S. Ossetia, a nation that did not want to be Georgian, but two wrongs don't make a right in terms of Russia's takeover.

Rachel

I brew the beer I drink

I read Kagan's piece, and I'm basically in agreement with his

view, that this is part of Russia's autocratic and expansionist plans. They just stomped over Georgia because they felt they could.

"In the world you will find tribulation, but be of good cheer, for I have overcome the world."

John 16:33

Always--and I do mean

Always--and I do mean ALWAYS--look to the cost/benefit line. The Russians certainly do.

Recent comments

Advertisements
StubbornFacts.us does not endorse the content of any advertisement

Featured Movie

Syndicate

Syndicate content

Who's online

There are currently 1 user and 2 guests online.

Online users

  • Rafique