America the Impotent
In what is becoming an increasingly-tragic and bizarre coda to the Bush Administration, Russia has steamrolled through South Ossetia and is reportedly on its way to the Georgian city of Gori. Russia has effectively achieved its military objectives by repelling Georgian forces from South Ossetia and from Abkhazia. Where the war goes from now is anybody’s guess.
But the implications so far are clear: the US, NATO and the EU have done nothing to stop the Russian advance. And Georgians increasingly feel betrayed by the West’s refusal to aid Georgia in this crisis. Considering the promise of the Bush Administration after Georgia’s Rose Revolution in 2003, which put pro-Western President Mikheil Saakashvili in power, Georgians feel the US has failed to live up to its obligations. After all, Georgia sent 2000 troops to help the US in Iraq. Why can’t the US return the favor and stand up to Russia?
There are several reasons why the US has issued little more than vague pronunciations.
To understand this, we need to look at the South Ossetian War through three different, but related lenses.
Local
South Ossetia is ethnically tied to North Ossetia over the Caucasus Mountains in Russia. South Ossetians have never accepted Georgia’s rule. And when Georgia declared independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, South Ossetia immediately fought to separate from Georgia.
The parallel is West Virginia during the Civil War, which seceded from Virginia after Virginia seceded from the US. What made West Virginia last, however, was the presence of Union military troops. In the case of South Ossetia, however, Russia did little more than provide weapons and money for South Ossetian separatist guerrillas through the Roki Tunnel. Since 1993, South Ossetia has been a no-man’s land. Officially it remains part of Georgia, but Georgia has not been able to exercise any political authority in the region. In fact, Russia even responded to Georgian attempts to establish control in the area in 2006 by issuing Russian passports. South Ossetians willingly snapped up these passports as a protest against Georgian efforts to wrest control of the province; a referendum (not officially recognized) in 2004 gave almost unanimous approval for independence.
President Saakashvili has made it a number one priority to establish “constitutional authority” in South Ossetia (and Abkhazia to the west). And Saakashvili had reason for optimism. He was successful in taking control of a third province in the southwest called Ajaria in 2004. In this case the issue was not ethnicity but political power. A local strongman refused to accept the new Georgian President and led a rebellion against Tbilisi’s rule. But peaceful opposition within the region itself convinced the local strongman to leave and Georgia established full control.
Ominously, however, President Saakashvili, fresh off his Rose Revolution in November 2003 and now his victory in Ajaria declared, “It will be the beginning of Georgia’s territorial integrity.” Obstacles to Georgia’s “full territorial integrity” would prove much graver in South Ossetia and Abkhazia than in Ajaria.
The local dynamic, then, is Georgia’s attempt to establish national control over its recalcitrant provinces. In the case of Ajaria, the new pro-Western President Saakishvili was very successful. Emboldened by this effort Saakashvili tried to negotiate for the creation of a semi-autonomous South Ossetia within Georgia, but met resistance from the South Ossetians themselves. Like the Kurds in 1990s northern Iraq, the South Ossetians had achieved de-facto independence and so had no reason to yield to Georgian demands. Diplomatic breakdowns in 2007 and 2008 led to the situation of today. On August 8, President Saakashvili felt he could enter South Ossetia militarily and occupy the capital of Tshinvali. Attacks on Tshinvali resulted in the deaths of hundreds of South Ossetians and provoked a refugee crisis. In response, Russia launched its invasion of the region.
Saakashvili clearly has made a grave mistake by invading South Ossetia. He assumed that Russia would ignore the region and let Georgia establish control without hassle. And if he worried about Russia’s involvement, surely he felt the US and NATO would come to his side.
Regional
The second lens of this conflict is regional. The Caucasus has long produced destabilizing wars going back to the days of the czars. Georgia and Russia have never cared for one another, to put it mildly. Even though Georgia produced Joseph Stalin, the Soviet Union never lent any special favor to Georgia.
After the Rose Revolution, President Saakashvili launched a vigorous effort to establish deep political, economic and military ties with the West. Politically, Georgia has served as one of President Bush’s great examples of democracy promotion. Saakashvili, a US-educated man, has close ties to many people in the US government. John McCain’s top foreign policy adviser, Randy Scheunemann has done lobbying for the Georgian government. Obama’s foreign policy advisers have also been very close with the new Georgian regime. Militarily, Georgia lent 2000 troops to the US-led effort in Iraq. In return, the US has trained the Georgian army. And economically, Georgia has served as a vital gateway for oil between the Caspian Sea and Europe. The famous BTC pipeline, going from Baku in Azerbaijan, through Tbilisi and on to Ceyhan in Turkey transports vast quantities of oil to Europe through means that Russia cannot control.
If Georgia has sought closer ties with the West, Russia has worked to spread its sphere of influence around its long border. Georgia is one of Russia’s greatest thorns. NATO’s promise of a future admission of Georgia terrifies Russia. Georgia’s BTC pipeline threatens the Russian petrostate’s hegemony in the region (leaving Iran as the only country in the region controlled by neither the US nor Russia). And politically, Putin and his successor Dmitri Medvedev feel that Georgia sets a dangerous example for other pro-Russia powers.
Geopolitical
The final lens through which we should examine this conflict is geopolitics. One couldn’t help but notice President Bush and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin in Beijing together. Russia’s vigorous expansionism and authoritarianism have been well-understood for years. But what to do about it has tied Washington in knots.
Neoconservatives, including John McCain, want a much more vigorous and confrontational approach with Russia. In fact, Georgia is one of the prime examples of the need for a more-forceful US presence in the region, according to this view. The US must re-establish hegemony in the Caucasus in order to keep Russia in check, allow unfettered US investment in energy, and promote democracy in the heart of the old Soviet bloc.
The problem for neoconservatives is that the US has spread itself so thin. Economic sanctions are useless right now, as Russia controls so much of the oil and natural gas in the region already. The UN Security Council will never pass a resolution condemning Russia, given Russia’s veto. And the US military is bogged down in two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Sabre-rattling by the neoconservatives has never looked more buffoonish than now. Even with the aid of a united Europe, we hold no cards against a resurgent Russia in the Caucasus.
The realists – of which both Bush and Obama seem to adhere on this issue – argue instead that the US should not needlessly antagonize Russia. Instead, the US must recognize the important role of Russia in pressuring Iran to give up nukes. Preserve the BTC pipeline at all costs. Those are our interests in the region. But be sensitive to Russia’s wounded pride after the Kosovo declaration of independence and Georgia’s movement in South Ossetia. Don’t get in a big propaganda battle with Russia over this.
What makes this so troubling for Bush is that he has already established a reputation as a true neoconservative, willing to “fight for freedom and democracy around the world.” But if he isn’t willing to do that in Georgia – which he clearly isn’t – then what does that say of the whole doctrine at this hour?
It’s ironic that after eight years characterized by two wars in Muslim countries, the Bush Administration has been kneecapped by a conflict having little to do with the War on Terror. The West – and America in particular – has been rendered impotent in this crisis. We can only hope that Russia does not occupy all of Georgia, depose Saakashvili and take over or destroy the BTC pipeline. And what message does this send to pro-Western forces elsewhere in the region?
Perhaps this is the revolution of rising expectations that has bit us. We raised a lot of hope in these countries that the US would back them come-hell-or-high-water. As we learned in the Basra uprising in 1991, when the US encourages peoples to rise up against dictators, we are supposed to follow through.
But we rarely do.
And so, this might just be the end of the great neoconservative dream of democracy promotion backed by military might. The only question now is if our politics and rhetoric catches up to this new reality.
18 Responses to “America the Impotent”
[...] Original The Moderate Voice – Domestic and international news analysis, irreverent comments, original reporti… [...]
On August 8, President Saakashvili felt he could enter South Ossetia militarily and occupy the capital of Tshinvali. Attacks on Tshinvali resulted in the deaths of hundreds of South Ossetians and provoked a refugee crisis. In response, Russia launched its invasion of the region.
I would suggest this probably answers the question as to where is the EU, Nato and the United States.
I would also suggest this is why Nato, EU and the US are not rushing to the Aid of the Georgian President.
We can only hope that Russia does not occupy all of Georgia, depose Saakashvili and take over or destroy the BTC pipeline.
My question of you is what would we have done if they had? If the US and Nato were not engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan. If all was well with the world what is it you think we would have done differently today? What would McCain do? What would Obama do?
Are you suggesting that Nato and the United States Attack Russia for this?
If President Bush were to offer military assistance to Georgia – and I'm predicting he will – Elrod will be one of the 1st to scream bloody murder. Just as our present lack of overt action is cause for Elrod to criticize Bush. Elrod does not provide a thoughtful analysis, but an America-centric (or blame-America-centric) view, in which all evils of the world are ultimately President Bush's fault.
More on the Georgia-Russian Conflict (Opinion Round-Up)
by Damozel | I have spent a certain amount of time trying to understand the conflict between Georgia and Russia, and wrote a piece providing some background into the conflict here. Elrod at The Moderate Voice—who is a historian—has posted an analys…
Quite to the contrary, I would say it's an excellent analysis. The fact is that if this were the late 90's and our military was not occupied elsewhere and our NATO alliances were all still strong, the U.S. probably *could* provide direct military assistance to the Georgians, while making it clear to the world that we had no intention of invading or “defeating” Russia, but simply maintaining Georgia's border integrity. As things stand, our options are a lot more limited. There are already troubling signs that Russia is leaning toward Iran's side in the current worries, and antagonizing them might only drive them further into their arms. We don't have the available military muscle to really go to the mat with the Russians in far off Georgia right now and the results would likely be horrid if we tried. Our alliances are greatly weakened compared to ten years ago, and distrust of the US is somewhat higher. We just don't have the leverage we once did, and the “chickens are coming home to roost” – as people love to say – during this crisis.
Should Russia have attacked the United States on behalf of the Iraqis?
We can't aid Georgia. That's just the flat out truth. And those using this in the great American Partisan Wars '08 just sound stupid. The Russia-Georgia situation is messy and complex. And Russia is very well-armed to boot. This isn't pre-invasion Iraq with ragtag soldiers.
Just supplying arms to Georgia may help but reality is that Georgia needs our military might. So that would be three wars: Russia-Georgia, Afghanistan, and Iraq. All which would be (are) protracted conflicts. Too much at this point. I feel bad for the Georgians.
Excellent background and analysis Elrod, thanks. Not real tuned up on history of Georgia, that was very helpful.
I suppose you skipped the first two thirds of the analysis where I looked at it purely from the perspective of Georgia and Caucasus politics. The Bush/neocon angle only comes in for the third part.
The failure for the neocons is that this war even started in the first place. Did Saakashvili not bother to consult Bush before moving on South Ossetia? If so, then he is a bad ally. Did Bush secretly give the OK signal to a move on South Ossetia? If so, then Bush miscalculated Russia's response. Either way, there is a problem in this relationship.
Actually, we've airlifted Georgian troops from Iraq back to Georgia. Putin (who of course remains in charge of Russia) has harshly criticized this with a bizarre projection of his government's own behavior in describing the USA (“white is black, black is white” …)
I wonder how many among the Move On extremists would rage at the USA if it were to do anything more and if it already considers the USA a “bully” [sic] once again, and treats Russia as a “victim” in this situation.
“We can't aid Georgia.”
We aren't going to fight Russia, any more than the European nations so dependent on Russian gas are going to fight Russia. Yes, we are in over our heads already. Russia is exploiting this (as well as continuing to exhibit much pathological behavior as it regresses toward its old undemocratic and “defensive expansionist or interventionist” self).
in 2003 Russia indicated to the world at a conference in Indonesia that she is a Muslim country. Facts indicate that she is quickly being assimilated by Muslims and in fact the next big war in this world will be with Russia.
Russia is funding her rearming with huge oil prices. We should do everything we can to encourage the price of oil to go upward so that Russia has even more money to arm themselves and become the powerful Muslim superpower that Vladimir Putin proclaimed in Indonesia in 2003.
The Russians will be surprised to learn they are predominantly Muslim now. The Patriarch of the Orthodox Church will be even more surprised.
“Russia’s vigorous expansionism and authoritarianism have been well-understood for years. But what to do about it has tied Washington in knots.”
Because the NeoCons are doing the same in the USA. Some will deny it but this Administration has been the most authoritarian in recent history. Expanding the power of the Executive branch (both President & VP) and ignoring, or just circumventing, the Judicial & Legislative branches.
“Did Saakashvili not bother to consult Bush before moving on South Ossetia? If so, then he is a bad ally. Did Bush secretly give the OK signal to a move on South Ossetia?”
Two very good questions too bad we don't have the answers.
No where did I say she is predominantly Muslim. I said she is quickly being assimilated by Muslims. If you want to have a debate bring facts and truth to the table. I won't even bother to look up the facts for you. If your interested go look them up yourself. If not, continue on in your blissful ignorance of world affairs outside of the USA, Iraq and Afghanistan.
To be honest, as soon as wrote my remark, I regarded it as dumb and off-track, so I edited it out about 40 minutes later (you can do that with comments on Moderate Voice); if you look, it now says something like “Deleted – my mistake.”
I continue to read your posts with interest.
Regards,
Brian
Obama, then McCain, on the situation
OBAMA:
I want to just speak briefly about the situation in Georgia. It’s a situation that continues to deteriorate because of Russia’s escalation of the use of military force. At this point I have spoken to President Saakashvili, and conveyed my deep regret over the loss of life, and the suffering of the people of Georgia.
For many months, I have warned that there needs to be active international engagement to peacefully address the disputes over South Ossetia and Abkhazia, including a high-level and neutral international mediator, and a genuine international peacekeeping force – not simply Russian troops.
No matter how this conflict started, Russia has escalated it well beyond the dispute over South Ossetia and has now violated the space of another country. Russia has escalated its military campaign through strategic bombing and the movement of its ground forces into the heart of Georgia. There is no possible justification for these attacks.
I reiterate my call for Russia to stop its bombing campaign, to stop flights of Russian aircraft in Georgian airspace, and to withdraw its ground forces from Georgia. The Georgian government has proposed a cease-fire and the Russian government should accept it. There is also an urgent need for humanitarian assistance to reach the people of Georgia, and casualties on both sides.
The United States, Europe and all other concerned countries must stand united in condemning this aggression, and seeking a peaceful resolution to this crisis. We should continue to push for a United Nations Security Council Resolution calling for an immediate end to the violence. This is a clear violation of the sovereignty and internationally recognized borders of Georgia – the UN must stand up for the sovereignty of its members, and peace in the world.
I welcome the visit of the French and Finnish foreign ministers to Georgia as a first step toward mediation. There should also be a United Nations mediator to address this crisis, and the United States should fully support this effort. We should also convene other international forums to condemn this aggression, to call for an immediate halt to the violence, and to review multilateral and bilateral arrangements with Russia, including Russia’s interest in joining the World Trade Organization.
The violence taking place along the Black Sea is just miles from Sochi, the site for the Winter Olympics in 2014. It only adds to the tragedy and outrage of the current situation that Russia has acted while the world has come together in peace and athletic competition in Beijing. This action is wholly inconsistent with the Olympic ideal.
While returning to a pre-August 8th military posture is a necessary first step towards resolving this crisis, we cannot tolerate the unacceptable status quo that led to this escalation. That means Russian peacekeeping troops should be replaced by a genuine international peacekeeping force, Georgia should refrain from using force in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and a political settlement must be reached that addresses the status of these disputed regions.
Going forward, the United States and Europe must support the people of Georgia. Beyond immediate humanitarian assistance, we must provide economic assistance, and help rebuild what has been destroyed. I have consistently called for deepening relations between Georgia and transatlantic institutions, including a membership action plan for NATO, and we must continue to press for that deeper relationship.
The relationship between Russia and the West is long and complicated. There have been many turning points, for good and ill. This is another turning point.
Let me be clear: we seek a future of cooperative engagement with the Russian government, and friendship with the Russian people. We want Russia to play its rightful role as a great nation, but with that role comes the responsibility to act as a force for progress in this new century, not regression to the conflicts of the past. That is why the United States and the international community must speak out strongly against this aggression, and for peace and security.
MCCAIN:
Americans wishing to spend August vacationing with their families or watching the Olympics may wonder why their newspapers and television screens are filled with images of war in the small country of Georgia.
Concerns about what occurs there might seem distant and unrelated to the many other interests America has around the world. And yet Russian aggression against Georgia is both a matter of urgent moral and strategic importance to the United States of America. Georgia is an ancient country at the crossroads of Eastern Europe and Central Asia, and one of the world’s first nations to adopt Christianity as an official religion. After a brief period of independence following the Russian revolution, the Red Army forced Georgia to join the Soviet Union in 1922. As the Soviet Union crumbled at the end of the Cold War, Georgia regained its independence in 1991.
But its early years were marked by instability, corruption and economic crises. Following fraudulent parliamentary elections in 2003, a peaceful Democratic revolution took place. Led by the US educated lawyer, Mikheil Saakashvili, the Rose revolution changed things dramatically and following his election, President Saakashvili embarked on a series of wide ranging and successful reforms. I’ve met with President Saakashvili many times, including several trips to Georgia. What the people of Georgia have accomplished in terms of Democratic governance, Western orientation and domestic reform, is nothing short of remarkable. That makes Russia’s recent actions against the Georgians all the more alarming. In the face of Russian aggression, the very existence of independent Georgia and the survival of its democratically elected government are at stake. In recent days Moscow has sent its tanks and troops across the internationally recognized border into the Georgian region of South Ossetia.
Statements by Moscow that it was merely aiding the Ossetians are belied by reports of Russian troops in the region of Abkhazia, repeated Russian bombing raids across Georgia, and reports of a de facto Russian naval blockade of the Georgian coast. Whatever tensions and hostilities might have existed between Georgians and Ossetians, they in no way justify Moscow’s path of violent aggression. Russian actions in clear violation of international law have no place in 21st century Europe.
The implications of Russian actions go beyond their threat to the territorial integrity and independence of a Democratic Georgia. Russia is using violence against Georgia in part to intimidate other neighbors such as Ukraine for choosing to associate with the west and adhering to Western political and economic values. As such, the fate of Georgia should be of grave concern to Americans and all people who welcome the end of a divided Europe and the independence of former Soviet Republics.
The international response to this crisis will determine how Russia manages its relationships with other neighbors. We have other important interests, strategic interests, at stake in Georgia, especially the continued flow of oil through the Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan pipeline, which Russia attempted to bomb in recent days. The operation of a critical communication and trade route from Georgia through Azerbaijan and Central Asia, and the integrity and influence of NATO, whose members reaffirmed last April the territorial integrity, independence, and sovereignty of Georgia. Yesterday, Georgia withdrew its troops from South Ossetia, and offered a ceasefire. The Russians responded by bombing a civilian airport in Georgia’s capital, Tblisi, and by stepping up its offensive in Abkhazia. This pattern of attack appears aimed not at restoring any status quo ante in South Ossetia, but rather toppling the Democratically elected government of Georgia. This would be unacceptable to all the Democratic countries of the world, and should draw us together in universal condemnation of Russian aggression. Russian President Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin must understand the severe long-term negative consequences that their government’s actions will have for Russia’s relationship with the United States and Europe.
It is time we moved forward with a number of steps. The United States and our allies should continue efforts to bring a resolution before the United Nations Security Council condemning Russian aggression, noting the withdrawal of Georgian troops from South Ossetia, and calling for an immediate ceasefire and a withdrawal of Russian troops from Georgian territory. We should move ahead with a resolution despite Russian veto threats and submit Russia to the court of world public opinion. NATO’s North Atlantic Council should convene in emergency session to demand a ceasefire and begin discussions on both the deployment of an international peacekeeping force to South Ossetia and the implications for NATO’s future relationship with Russia, a partnership for peace nation. NATO’s decision to withhold a membership action plan for Georgia might have been viewed as a green light by Russia for its attacks on Georgia, and I urge the NATO allies to revisit the decision. The secretary of state should begin high level diplomacy, including visiting Europe to establish a common Euro-Atlantic position aimed at ending the war and supporting the independence of Georgia. With the same aim, the United States should coordinate with our partners in Germany, France and Britain to seek an emergency meeting of the G-7 foreign ministers to discuss the current crisis. The visit of French president Sarkozy to Moscow this week is a welcome expression of trans-Atlantic activism. Working with allied partners, the U.S. should immediately consult with the Ukrainian government and other concerned countries on steps to secure their continued independence. This is particularly important as a number of Russian Black Sea Fleet vessels currently in Georgian territorial waters are stationed at Russia’s base in the Ukrainian Crimea. The U.S. should work with Azerbaijan and Turkey and other interested friends to develop plans to strengthen the security of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline. The U.S. should send immediate economic and humanitarian assistance to help mitigate the impact the invasion has had on the Georgian people. Our united purpose should be to persuade the Russian government to cease its attack, withdraw its troops, and enter into negotiations with Georgia. We must remind Russia’s leaders that the benefits they enjoy from being part of the civilized world require their respect for the values, stability and peace of the world.
World history is often made in remote, obscure countries. It is being made in Georgia today. It is the responsibility of the leading nations of the world to ensure that history continues to be a record of humanity’s progress toward respecting the values and security of free people. Thank you. This is the total of my recommendations for right now.’
The U.S. and the E.U. are both completely impotent to influence Russia to change any course of action they choose to take anywhere in the world, no matter what it is. Russia will use their oil and gas reserves as a weapon and the rest of the world has no answer to it. This is what comes from depending on the dictatorships that control so much of a resource that our modern society can't live without.