MarkGrebner.Org

Russia invades Georgia

—

by

Violet
in
by: Grebner

Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 17:21:21 PM EDT

I don’t know anything about foreign policy, but I know that Russian tanks are rolling across its small southern neighbor in an unprovoked invasion.  It doesn’t appear from news accounts that “tension” or “misunderstanding” is at the center of the clash; the only question is exactly what Putin has decided to do.

War is bad news for Democrats and liberals.  (Of course, it’s actually bad news for all living things, but somebody else can work up that theme. Here I’m talking about political calculations.)  When the public gets scared, they rally ’round the flag, and the best flag-wavers are Republicans.  Every sensible suggestion that a Democrat would propose, like trying to organize Europe into a united front, can be quickly warped into sound-bites about “appeasement” and “weakness”.

This is a hell of a time to have the entire U.S. military machine pinned down in an irrelevant war against – I’m sorry, who exactly are we fighting in Iraq?  It sure makes our saber-rattling against Iran seem stupid.  You have to wonder the feasibility of additional troops in Afghanistan.  But that’s not what the public is going to think, if Russian troops continue marching south and overthrow the elected government in Georgia.  Nobody’s going to spend time thinking how W‘s stupidity facilitated the outbreak of real war, by his fixation on his childish “Mission Accomplished”.  When the world turns bellicose, hardliners flourish, and reason retreats.

At this writing, neither presidential candidate shows signs they’re paying attention.  If I were running Obama’s campaign, I’d be spending a lot of attention right now on how to establish a position that will strike the public as “strong” and “firm”, and worrying like hell about saying anything that the Cheneys  and Limbaughs of the world could seize on.

If we’re lucky, and Putin is really bluffing and plans to limit his involvement, maybe it won’t turn out to be a big deal.  But if Putin has already made up his mind to effectively re-annex Georgia, it can’t help but profoundly change U.S. political calculations.

One thing is sure: N.A.T.O. membership isn’t going to be thought “quaint” or “redundant” by anybody east of the Rhine again for at least 50 years.

This is of course the same Vladimer Putin of whom W said:

I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. We had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul; a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country. And I appreciated so very much the frank dialogue.There was no kind of diplomatic chit-chat, trying to throw each other off balance. There was a straightforward dialogue. And that’s the beginning of a very constructive relationship. I wouldn’t have invited him to my ranch if I didn’t trust him.


I find myself amazed that I could discover new levels of incompetence in our President, but I can.  Allowing the U.S. to be played for a sucker by a guy holding nothing but a pair of nines – and threatening to allow Russia and Putin to get back into the game for real.  

Comments

22 responses to “Russia invades Georgia”

  1. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    oh for god sakes
    You should have stuck with the 7 words of your diary and left it at that.
    The democratically-elected government of Russia is defending the defacto independence of South Ossetia. Georgia hasn’t had control over South Ossetia or Abhazia for over 14 years, because the democratically-elected governments in those regions and their people don’t want to be part of Georgia.

    The last thing Democrats should do is ratchet up some Third Cold War in order to out-hawk Rush and Dick.

    There isn’t a chance in the world that Russia is going to re-annex Georgia.

    As for the entirely idiotic notion of the third to last paragraph, you might want to note that Georgia is not a NATO member and that Saakashvili’s Georgia began the hostilities against the democratically-elected government of South Ossetia.

    Stick to voter lists in the future.

    Were you this upset about Kosovo’s unilateral independence push?

    West Michigan Rising: The Progressive Blog for Our (future) Left Coast

    by: philgoblue @ Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 20:17:53 PM CDT

    Reply
  2. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    You misunderstood most of my comments.
    First, I’m mainly interested in the effect on presidential politics in the short-run. As I said, if the tanks stop and the talks start, maybe it’s no big deal. But serious “planning” is mainly concerned with low-probability events, and the possibility of Georgia being portrayed as a test of Obama is something his campaign ought to worry about.
    Leaving behind American politics, and plunging off-topic, I think you’ve misconstrued what I said.

    Georgia’s boundaries are irrational, but that’s typical of the Caucasus. The boundaries were recognized by everybody, so you can’t really fault the Georgian government from clinging to them, however self-defeating their political system.

    I don’t think anybody has ever suggested Russia would literally “annex” Georgia. The more realistic threat would be a re-creation of something like the old U.S.S.R. scheme of a powerful Russia within a “federation” of vassal states.

    You completely misunderstood my comments about N.A.T.O. membership. My point is that if Georgia is subdued by force of Russian arms, no border state is going to feel safe in any condition short of membership, with the guarantee that brings. Any assurance less than membership will be like the “assurances” given Yukos Oil about the primacy of law, which turned out to mean nothing once the Russian government arrested Khodorkovsky and seized control.

    As far as my personal views about what’s best for other people – I’m just a typical “Rodney King liberal”, hoping that we can “all just get along”. Russia’s reemergence as a militaristic and autocratic regime doesn’t make me feel cheerful. But as you say, it’s not my field.

    by: Grebner @ Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 23:02:41 PM CDT

    Reply
    1. Violet Avatar
      Violet

      I haven’t misunderstood a thing you wrote
      You called it an
      unprovoked invasion
      That is completely false. Georgian President Saakashvili has stated since forming an administration that his goal was to “reunify” the country by any means necessary. On 8 August, he moved troops into the capital of South Ossetia to overthrorw the elected government there. Russia simply intervened in a territory where 75% of residents hold Russian citizenship to return to the status quo. In addition, Georgia has been building a massive military base outside Gori for the last year to threaten the people of South Ossetia. It is the destruction of that offensive base that the Russian military forces now have as their mission.

      You wrote:

      if Putin has already made up his mind to effectively re-annex Georgia
      Which, as I stated it a silly and dangerous idea that puts you in league with Cheney and McCain on this issue. And, it seems you stick with this Cold War III dillusion of a refamed USSR.

      Yes, the bounderies of the USSR don’t really make ethnic sense after the collapse, just as those of Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia — the other multi-ethic federations didn’t. Slovakaia split from the Czechs, Yugoslavia was split up and then Serbia was split up, there is no reason to start a Third Cold War over a place with about 75,000 that only a handful of Americans had ever heard of on 7 August 2008. If you’d like a history of South Ossetia, I can put one together for you, but you should note that it was an autonomous oblast within the USSR.

      I do understand that you want to overreact and return NATO to an aggressively anti-Russian organization. It’s a horrible idea that can only backfire.

      As for you claim that your post was mostly about what Obama should do. Well, thankingfully, he didn’t take your advice which would have made him sound like the warmongers Cheney and McCain. It’s exactly this kind of “let’s be very afraid of Republicans on foreign policy and be hawks like them” that got us the Iraq War Resolution. I’m shocked to hear such hawkish statements in the progressive blogosphere, especially one based on acknowledged ignorance.

      Of course, it seems your knowledge of Russia is weak. It’s not autocratic. It has an elected government. And, it’s hardly militaristic, it is a rational actor protecting its interests, and in this case the interests of the South Ossetian people who voted 98% for independence from Georgia.

      But I guess you would have supported Britain against those colonial rebels back in the day.

      West Michigan Rising: The Progressive Blog for Our (future) Left Coast

      by: philgoblue @ Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 07:43:11 AM CDT

      Reply
      1. Violet Avatar
        Violet

        Again, militarily speaking ….
        Today, Russia announced that it was sending another 350 armored vehicles into South Ossetia, and had lost up to eight aircraft (probably a mix of helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft). Two days ago, the Russian military sank one of the two biggest ships in the Georgian navy with a ship-launched guided missile. All of this is happening while the Russian military already in the province has driven out most of the Georgian forces.
        This is not an humanitarian response, nor something that appears to be based on a desire to assert self-rule for the Ossetians. When we intervened first in Bosnia (’95) and then in Kosovo (’99), we stopped genocide and ethnic cleansing — over the insistences of Republicans — purely through air power. The reason is simple. You destroy military formations carrying it out, you destroy the military infrastructure supporting it, and you destroy the ethnic cleansing. With almost all, or not all, of South Ossetia under Russian control, there is no need to continue bombing to stop ethnic cleansing. Again, you can’t cleanse territory you don’t control.

        Among the Trees

        by: Eric B. @ Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 09:37:15 AM CDT

        Reply
        1. Violet Avatar
          Violet

          Sure
          The current operations in Georgia proper are meant to destroy large sections of the Georgian military infrastructure to convince Saakashvili that his expansionist goals come at a very high price and should be ended.
          You might want to note that the US military campaign against Serbia bombed electrical power plants, bridges, etc, which punished Serbia for their actions in Kosovo. American bombing was not limited to the area in dispute and indeed the bombing in Kosovo was largely ineffective.

          Plus, the Russian military remains in a WWII — ground assult — mindset (and has limited smart bombs they’d probably not be interested in using). I mean in worked then and saved the world, so why change.

          West Michigan Rising: The Progressive Blog for Our (future) Left Coast

          by: philgoblue @ Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 09:55:10 AM CDT

          Reply
          1. Violet Avatar
            Violet

            Expansionist?
            The province remains — according to international law — part of Georgia. You can’t expand by taking territory you already own. And, again, you can talk about the wishes of the Ossetian people and referendums and such, but no international body recognizes Ossetian secession.
            As for Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Georgia, and yes, it was an unprovoked invasion … when you say that you are invading to stop ethnic cleansing, and then occupy the territory in which you claim ethnic cleansing is taking place, you can stop launching air strikes in support of your operation to stop ethnic cleansing. You can also very certainly lift a naval blockade and stop sinking someone else’s ship when the ethnic cleansing is taking place in a landlocked province.

            Finally, when we used force in both Bosnia and Kosovo, we built a great deal of international support beforehand (you might remember when Russia seized the Pristina airport with paratroopers at the end of the Kosovo conflict).

            Among the Trees

            by: Eric B. @ Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 10:53:36 AM CDT

          2. Violet Avatar
            Violet

            Um…
            Finally, when we used force in both Bosnia and Kosovo, we built a great deal of international support beforehand (you might remember when Russia seized the Pristina airport with paratroopers at the end of the Kosovo conflict).
            In direct violation of international law. Preemptive war can only be approved by the UN Security Council.

            We used NATO because the Russians would have vetoed any military actions.

            But then, we lost the ability to complain about this stuff when we entered Iraq.

            by: Nazgul35 @ Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 11:26:52 AM CDT
            [ Parent ]

          3. Violet Avatar
            Violet

            The U.N. has no military assets
            We went into Bosnia and later Kosovo as a NATO force because NATO already has a command-and-control structure in southern Europe, and also because the war threatened to drag two NATO member nations — Greece and Turkey — into the war on different sides. I mean, why create a command-and-control apparatus when you’ve already got one that’s been in existence for decades?
            The Russians who came into both conflicts were absorbed into the NATO command-and-control structure, even though they aren’t NATO member nations.

            Among the Trees

            by: Eric B. @ Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 11:56:23 AM CDT

          4. Violet Avatar
            Violet

            Still a violation
            of international law. Only the UN Security Council has the power to authorize military action against a sovereign state.
            The only time it doesn’t is if it is in self-defense, ie: you were attacked.

            Kosovo was genocide committed within the sovereign borders of Serbia and hence fell under the direct mandate of the UN Security Council.

            by: Nazgul35 @ Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 12:27:36 PM CDT

  3. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    The NATO campaign and the Russian invasion…
    I would hope that we wouldn’t have to actually hash out the differences between an aerial campaign meant to stop a months-long and well-documented ethnic cleansing, and a ground invasion by one nation over its neighbor over a day-old security crackdown.

    Among the Trees
    by: Eric B. @ Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 12:49:02 PM CDT

    Reply
    1. Violet Avatar
      Violet

      Evidently we do
      to at least understand the difference between whether an act is in compliance with international law and the other is based upon issues of morality.
      One does not have anything to do with the other.

      And when you are going to jump up and down declaring something in violation of international law, you better be prepared to keep it in that venue, because this country has done considerable amounts of BS in the name of morality.

      by: Nazgul35 @ Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 13:07:10 PM CDT

      Reply
  4. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    Kosovo in Reserve
    Mark, I normally have the highest respect for you, but international relations isn’t your strong suit. To call Russia’s intervention in South Ossetia an “unprovoked invasion” is entirely false. Georgia, a Bush ally, has been waging ethnic cleansing and forced ethnic mixing for years until the Ossetians threw them out and declared de facto independence. Georgia no more belongs in Ossetia than the Serbians belong in Kosovo. I fully expect Russia to invade Georgia proper, but only temporarily to force Georgia to give up its claims to South Ossetia. Russia won’t attempt to annex Georgia proper into the Russian Republic. While Russia is certainly acting in its own self interests, it’s also acting on behalf of the wishes of the Ossetians. They alone should determine their future.
    Other than that, I get the point of your post but I think it’s futile to attempt to “organize Europe into a united front”. Bosnia was far closer to home for our European allies than Ossetia is and look how miserably they failed there. Western European countries are still far too troubled by their past to quickly respond to these situations, even those involving obvious genocide.

    by: Brady @ Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 21:44:02 PM CDT

    Reply
    1. Violet Avatar
      Violet

      It’ll certainly be interesting to see what happens next.
      Big international problems often begin with mutual miscalculations. American presidential campaigns are tremendously sensitive to shifts in international climate. Maybe nothing happens beyond a few more days of fighting, and then some sort of deal. My point was that this could escalate as a public issue into something much larger than the typical border skirmish; this has some of the feel of re-creating the Cold War, at least in the mind of the American public.
      To wander off-topic, is the Soviet Union really done? Is it possible for a country to border Russia without being either a vassal or an armed enemy? If Putin and Russia manage to put the Georgian genie back into its bottle, there are half a dozen bordering states which must wonder exactly what separates their status from Georgia’s.

      I suppose two weeks from now we’ll know what Putin is planning, so there’s little point in speculating now. But he may be playing for higher stakes than South Ossetia.

      by: Grebner @ Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 22:19:35 PM CDT

      Reply
      1. Violet Avatar
        Violet

        I still don’t agree…
        that is means doom and gloom for the democrats.
        I believe most people don’t trust anybody in government right now. I think an over the top response from the Republicans would fall on cynical ears. If Obama can present a viable solution that is different from the chest beaters, I think most people will gravitate that way.

        Pray for the dead, fight like hell for the living. – Mother Jones

        by: chanupi @ Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 07:41:51 AM CDT

        Reply
  5. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    Militarily speaking…
    Georgia today reported that it’s forces had cleared out of the region. The Russians today continued to launch airstrikes into Georgia (if reports are correct and the aircraft are Su-24s, these are dedicated bombers … draw your own conclusions about why dedicated bombers would intrude into another nation’s airspace), and have engaged its ports with a Naval blockade (on the one report I saw, I saw the Russians had deployed a Kirov-class nuclear-powered guided missile cruiser, which is the closest thing to a battleship left afloat in anyone’s fleet … all of our Missouri-class battleships were mothballed during the 90s).
    That’s quite a bit of firepower to call out when you already control the territory you want to control.

    Further, because no one actually recognizes South Ossetia’s independence, Russia has violated Georgia’s sovereignty. They also did it unilaterally and without bothering to at least consult the U.N. Security Council. If we’d done the same thing, say sent support to Chiapas during the 90s without consulting anyone … hoo boy, look out.

    By the way, considering their own recent history in Chechnya, Russia has no business intervening in anyone else’s affairs in the matter of genocide and ethnic cleansing.

    Among the Trees

    by: Eric B. @ Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 23:31:08 PM CDT

    Reply
    1. Violet Avatar
      Violet

      See Phil’s Post Above
      Titled, “I haven’t misunderstood a thing you wrote”. Minus the confrontational language, he’s 100% right on the money. To claim that Russia is violating Georgia’s soverignity by intervening in Georgia’s attack on South Ossetia may be legally correct. From a humanitarian standpoint however, it’s the right thing to do. Georgia, by its actions, has ceded any moral right to South Ossetia over the past decade. Russia’s intervention has come at the invitation of South Ossetia. Another brutalized region of Georgia, Abkhazia, has also intervened militarily on South Ossetia’s behalf. While Russia is clearly acting in it own self-interests, it’s military intervention is prevent continued genocide. I only wish some of the western European powers had had the backbone to intervene in Bosnia or the African states in Darfur. The U.N. Security Council has shown many times that it is unable and unwilling to prevent genocide, one of its key roles.
      For those just joining this story, South Ossetia is a region in Georgia (the country, not the state) bordering Russia. In 1991, Georgian nationalists attacked ethnic Ossetians, killing over 1,000 and forcing 100,000 to flee to Russia. In 1992, Russia intervened and since that time South Ossetia has had a de facto, although not internationally recognized, relatively peaceful independence from Georgia. The majority of South Ossetians want their region to rejoin North Ossetia as an autonomous part of Russia. Three day ago, Georgia invaded South Ossetia in a hostile attempt to retake the breakaway region. Russia, backed up by South Ossetian and Abkhazian militants responded over the weekend, forcing Georgia out of South Ossetia. Georgia, a strong U.S. ally, has tried to use the Bush administration to intervene in the conflict through Cold War style politics.

      by: Brady @ Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 08:49:04 AM CDT

      Reply
      1. Violet Avatar
        Violet

        Legally correct
        When it comes to waging war, there is no such thing as “may be legally correct.” Those rules were written after centuries of warfare had taught us that if we didn’t have legal structures to govern it that we were going to destroy ourselves. Russia, by not consulting anyone before taking unilateral military action has very clearly violated international law and the basic rules for waging war. The fact that Georgia had to invade South Ossetia to bring it under control makes the claim that Georgia has engaged in a campaign of ethnic cleansing somewhat eyebrow raising — it’s awfully difficult to conduct ethnic cleansing in territory you don’t control.
        Russia isn’t acting on humanitarian principles. I mean, their own track record with their own ethnic Muslim minority ought to tell you that (i.e. their use of nerve gas against the Chechnyans). Furthermore, despite having driven the Georgians mostly out of South Ossetia, Russia continues to bomb targets inside of Georgia and blockade its ports. The other day … the Russian Navy used a ship-launched guided missile to sink a ship in the Georgian Navy … how do we get naval combat over a landlocked province?

        The answer is that Russia could give a rat’s ass about the South Ossetians, and are very probably up to something else while using humanitarian principles as a cover for what is a very clear violation of international law and the protocols of waging war.

        Among the Trees

        by: Eric B. @ Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 09:26:43 AM CDT
        [ Parent ]

        Reply
        1. Violet Avatar
          Violet

          Eric, you’ve got a chonology problem
          On 8 August, Georgian forces moved into South Ossetia (and from the few villages the Georgian forces have controlled), occupied towns and villages and proceeded to shell the capital. By 10 August, those forced had been repulsed by joint Ossetian-Russian-Abhazian forces and pushed out of South Ossetian territory.
          So, if shelling population centers is ethnic-cleansing, then the Georgians were involved in it (30,000 Ossetians fled the area).

          West Michigan Rising: The Progressive Blog for Our (future) Left Coast

          by: philgoblue @ Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 10:00:28 AM CDT

          Reply
          1. Violet Avatar
            Violet

            Eric
            Phil, Eric knows he’s wrong on this. But given past history, I’d no more expect him to admit this than to see you admit that in hindsight, Edwards may not have been the best choice for President. 😉
            by: Brady @ Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 10:05:36 AM CDT

  6. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    Here’s a shocker
    I’ll go even farther than “may not”:
    In hindsight, Edwards was not the best choice to be our nominee.

    I’m still proud of the work I did on the campaign as he had the best platform by far and there was no noise at all about this problem. For the advancement of a progressive Democratic Party and the best known general election candidate at the time, it was the right choice.

    Would the affair have been a killer if he was the presumptive nominee now? No, not against McCain. But his chances now would be significantly worse than Obama’s are now (despite my fear that Obama’s campaign is floundering and playing cautious with a perceived lead).

    I’ll always thank John Edwards for bringing me into politics, but I’m personally angered by what he did to Elizabeth, the family, and all of us that worked for him and believed in him. It was a horrible display of judgement on so many levels. I’m saddened that our strongest voice on poverty, labor and healthcare issues has silenced itself.

    Still, no one is perfect, and I wish John and Elizabeth all the best in the future.

    And that’s about all I’d like to say about that.

    Thankfully, my politics have moved far beyond Edwards since January (and I’m certainly not going to get involved in the current troll diary).

    West Michigan Rising: The Progressive Blog for Our (future) Left Coast

    by: philgoblue @ Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 11:58:03 AM CDT

    Reply
    1. Violet Avatar
      Violet

      Teasing
      I was just teasing you, Phil. But you couldn’t have given a better answer here. Neither of us supported the winning candidate during the primary but it’s encouraging to see were both now strong supporters of Obama.
      by: Brady @ Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 12:10:34 PM CDT

      Reply
  7. Violet Avatar
    Violet

    Chronology has nothing to do with it…
    We’re not talking about what Georgia has done here. That’s another matter, entirely. We’re talking about what Russia is doing here, which is masking a land invasion of a neighboring country under the guise of humanitarianism.
    Under international law, South Ossetia remains a part of the nation of Georgia. There is no international recognition of Ossetian secession, which makes this — internationally and legally — an internal matter. Georgia may not be sparkling clean on this, but that’s entirely besides the point.

    Ethnic cleansing is not something you can undertake in the space of two days, especially if part of those two days involves first invading and conquering the territory you hope to cleanse.

    Among the Trees

    by: Eric B. @ Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 10:43:17 AM CDT

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *