Reading Between the Lines on Georgia
This BBC report makes it sound like bad old Russia is at it again with its prickly southerly neighbor and ex-SSR:
Russia accused Georgia of bringing the South Caucasus to the brink of armed conflict – comments which both Ms Rice and Nato condemned as “unhelpful”.
Sounds like ‘the usual’ when it comes to official frowning over Moscow — a reaction that can’t be separated from America’s reflexive support for the increasingly erratic and obdurate Mikhail Saakashvili (a known egomaniac and possibly sexomaniac who, coincidentally, was educated in the States). But read between the lines a little, and this article — which is not a white paper on US-Russian relations, but is still revealing — tells a different story.
Compare and contrast:
* Ms Rice said before her arrival in Georgia that Russia had made “a number of moves… that in fact have not been helpful in terms of the frozen conflicts there”.
* Nato Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer also reacted strongly to Russia’s comments, saying: “This is unhelpful rhetoric that will not bring parties closer.”
* Georgian Foreign Minister Eka Tkeshelashvili said Russia was “deliberately escalating” tensions in Georgia’s separatist regions.
Pretty pussyfooting rhetoric from the US — notably, even weaker and more roundabout than that coming out of Europe. Could it be that purported ‘Russia expert’ Condi Rice recognizes the extraordinary idiocy involved in needlessly antagonizing the Russians over an issue with the most vanishing of marginal returns to the US? A free and independent Georgia is in American interests, true (all the more reason to pressure Saakashvili for eroding both qualities in the pursuit of personal power). But nothing the US can or should do can resolve the ‘frozen conflicts’ in question by bringing Abkhazia and South Ossetia back into the fold. Indeed, seeing as how the indefinite paralysis of the frozen (but melting) Russo-Georgian conflicts seems so clearly not in the interests of the United States, here’s a wild idea:
The US should broker a peace between Russia and Georgia that involves the official removal of Abkhazia and South Ossetia from Georgian jurisdiction. In plain language, the US should pressure Georgia to accept the Russian position, and the US should clarify, stabilize, and legitimize that position by securing the (token) independence of both Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Russian peacekeeping forces should remain — even increase. And the territorial integrity of the remainder of Georgia should be guaranteed by treaty.
Such a plan resolves a set of conflicts that (1) makes it impossible for the US to treat Georgia like a regular, normal state (and possible future member of key European institutions); (2) interferes with a productive US-Russian relationship; and (3) persistently risks a wider war that greatly complicates the geopolitical situation in the Middle East and Europe alike, and would damage key relationships across the entire frontier of the West. It’s not a perfect plan, but it’s as close to one as I can conceive. What’s clear is that the status quo is untenable, and will change to our disadvantage if we do not elect to help change it first.