I remember the conversation so clearly, as if it happened yesterday. I was meeting with Alex Rondeli, a tall, smart, well-connected Georgian involved in the formation of the country's foreign policy. Everyone interested in the foreign policy of the region, I was told, who traveled to Tbilisi, had to meet with him. So I did. Obviously I don't have my notes of the interview with me, as they are in storage back home in America, but I remember when the conversation turned towards NATO and America helping Georgia. Alex was clear that he thought, from a rational, realpoplitik perspective, that Georgia's best hope was in joining the West and all its institutions. But he was also realistic enough to realize that Georgia had to find a way of living with its giant northern neighbor.
And I asked him, point blank, "what makes you think the US will keep its promise to Georgia in the event of war with Russia? Can you really trust the US?" And then I made it clear, before he answered, that I thought it was folly to trust the US, that Georgia's best course was to find a modus vivendi with Russia and develop its economy on its own terms because the Russians aren't going away. They haven't. Now they are attempting to split the country. And Georgians are wondering, where is NATO? NATO isn't coming. Deal with it. Saakashvilli staked his presidency on it and failed. Find new leaders, leaders who will find a way of satisfying Russian demands. Otherwise, nothing will ever get better or change in Georgia.
Alex told me, "the Russian military, they've cooked up this bloody dish. But now they don't know who to serve it to."
Looks to me like they have found someone to serve it to the Georgians and his name is Saakashvilli. He provoked this fight--just as he did the one with Abashidze in Adjaria--but without realizing one critical difference: the Russians were, for once, prepared. They weren't going to get caught flat footed like they did in Adjaria. And as they continue their drive to Gori it's clear that when this is over and the time to make peace arrives Russia will be in a position of strength for a change.
How will Bush and Condi, his Russian expert, deal with the man whose soul he looked into this time?
As for Major Georgi, I would answer his thusly: "democracy, Sir, is not a means to an end, or a means to having powerful allies. It is an end in itself. And that end is in having the freedom of holding your leaders accountable in your hands, not in the hands of powerful allies. If you remember that you may yet keep your democracy."
It's a lesson we need to remember here in America too.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 48
Your article is Featured in the Triple Name Club.
Something different.
Saakashvilli has neglected Georgia's economy, education, health, and minorities from day one, spending instead on the military. It is a corrupt government. He was foolish to imagine Russia would allow him to get away with this or that the US or NATO would support him.
Nice Article.
As an aside, did/do you ever receive any flak for the question about trusting the US?
Of course, BUSH, has already threatened to "cut" political ties with Russia, if they don't back off, NOW.
What "promise" would that be, exactly?
As far as I know we have no mutual-defense treaties in effect with Georgia. Georgia is not a NATO member (thank God--otherwise we would be obligated to intervene on their behalf in a shooting war with the Russians. Just what we don't need.)
Judging by Bush's interaction with Putin in Beijing--practically holding hands like love-struck teenagers--good ol' Du(m)bya apparently ain't too concerned about what's going on in Georgia. ("Not MY problem, baby. I'm outa here!")
And I disagree, had Georgia joined NATO, Putin wouldn't have had the guts to attack. He knows he has an army full of paper tigers.
it's good to know someone with their finger on the Pulse, and a stethoscope in their mind's-ear...
Thanks for your perspective. This whole thing makes my heart ache.
Georgia is a transit country for oil and natural gas exports from the former Soviet Union that threatens Russia's near monopoly. It is a struggle for regional influence, and transportation right of way.
Consider the scheming, the timing. The Kremlin sent in the 58th Army (The butchers of Chechnya) during the time when everyone is in China at the Olympics. Reminiscent of a David and Goliath?
Russia has, in the past, done everything within their power to keep Georgia out of NATO, BECAUSE they couldn't have launched an attack like this. Also, they have become increasingly uncomfortable with Georgia's democratic elected government growing stronger since Saakashvili took office in 2004, and accepted military aid from the USA. Georgian's are now accusing Russia of Imperialism.
When South Assetia broke from Georgia, with Russian support and coaxing, the Russians rushed right in, issued those citizens passports and declared them Russian citizens. So now...it's under the guise of the Kremlin protecting their citizens from the awful Peacekeeping forces, and Georgia's influence and military strength.
This would be akin to Mexico attacking the US to claim Texas as theirs because so many of their citizens live there.
But.... a good and timely occasion for Bush to show what you can do when you, "Sit down and talk with these guys."
I submit, ( Svetlana ) that you dispute the harshness of Russia’s invasion of Georgia because you are resentful of the Sovereignty of Georgia, which was a separate “state” with their own separate Nationality, language, and ( I believe ) alphabet, but had been annexed by Stalin (Yukashvili, who was Georgian, but had changed his name to appear more “Russian”) in the last Century. You resent them because of their pro-Western, pro-Freedom leader, who was educated in the United States. You prefer to refer to him as a “puppet” of the United States; however, he merely prefers freedom from Russia, (in much the same way that you prefer a Leftist ideology to that of the Georgian leader, Saakashviili), while they do not. Your Leftist view of the West, and of the United States, betrays your motive.
In addition, in retaliation for Kosovo’s secession from Serbia, Russia is willing to enable and assist Ossetia to secede from Georgia. It is NOT because they care for the future of the Ossetians; but because they resent the Sovereignty of Georgia, and desire to “weaken” them, and see them “broken up” in much the same way.
How does this whole thing relate to ME? I do have my priorities!
And there are far too many of them that have risen to seats of power in our world. Too bad there isn't some selective virus in the natural world that targets the brains of such exploitive thinkers.
Excellent article and documentation. Thank you, Sean-Paul.
The issue of Georgia is like many of the small societies of Eurasia, whose xenophobic problems never were resolved by WW II, and are only getting strategically exploited here and there on the front pages.
But do we remember the countless innocent peoples caught up in all this? Those who in one moment might be enjoying a family diner, and the next moment, half the family is destroyed and the other half left to pick up the pieces?
We think we are so safe in our own homes, but as long as we keep electing these war mongers, no matter how safe one's own home and country might be, it could end in a Kremlin/DC/Beijing instant of someone deciding, "I am right and he is dead wrong!"
Where are the people who could turn out a million protesters in Berlin on the eve of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, but couldn't turn out a crowd large enough to populate a bistro dining set to protest the Russian invasion of Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Afghanistan and now Georgia?
The simple truth is that the "Peace/Anti-War Movement" has always been primarily an instrument of Russian imperial aggression.
The saddest example of this was their utter silence during the Serbian (Russian supported) aggression in Bosnia, when the people who later would go into hysterics over Bush in Iraq found nothing troublesome in Serbian snipers picking off school kids in Sarajevo.
So how about it folks......where are the protests?
Where are the anti-war/peace activists? So where are the millions?
(the sound of crickets)
Please post to Political Futures
The United States has been largely receptive to Saakashvili's efforts, championing Tbilisi's attempt to join NATO, helping to train Georgia's armed forces, and offering diplomatic support on the Abkhaz and South Ossetian conflicts.
Europe, on the other hand, has been largely divided. Some EU members like Germany and France, wary of antagonizing Moscow, have been reluctant to offer Georgia anything more than lukewarm support. Newer member states like Poland, the Czech Republic, and the Baltic states, with fresh memories of Soviet domination, have been more forceful in support of Tbilisi.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/JH12Ag01.html
I don't know why Europe has not learned that they need to unite and stand up to Russia.
Liberal mindset. Drives me nuts.
(crickets)........
"MJ, I love it when you are logical dear!"-- Lois
Only when YOU are watching, Hon!
"How does this whole thing relate to ME?"-- Lois ( the lovely )
EVERYTHING relates to You as far as I'm concerned, Lois!
Very nice to see You. And by the way, Your hair is looking rather fetching, this evening! ;)
How about MY hair? Does it look fetching? (Fetching??)
Although I understand this combat between Georgia and Russia is important, especially to the world's supply of OIL yet, I'm saddened to think not one major news outlet in America has informed the public that the nearly 130,000 people have fled their homes because the Philippine government is attacking their Islands with artillery and warplanes.
I find this Vladimir Putin fellow a bit frightening. Hold me MJ!
I guess you see now how much good it does to put your faith in the "promises", implied and otherwise, of a guy like George Bush. They are, obviously, not worth the paper they're not written on. The Georgians even named a street after their good buddy Dubya. I wonder when we're going to see a photo of a Russian tank parked in front of one of those "George W. Bush" street signs. Remember how Papa Bush left the Kurds hanging out to dry--and be slaughtered by Saddam--after Gulf War I? Same story here.
And it wasn't the Kurds we left hanging: it was the Shi'a of southern Iraq, especially the Marsh Arabs. We did back the Kurds up and helped them to create their defacto state in northern Iraq.
Sean-Paul, So are you implying that our troops should defend Georgia? Should we go to war so that Georgians can affirm their trust in George Bush? Please explain your last comment.
"And it wasn't the Kurds we left hanging: it was the Shi'a of southern Iraq, especially the Marsh Arabs. We did back the Kurds up and helped them to create their defacto state in northern Iraq. "
Sean-Paul, I assume you support the war in Iraq and our efforts to bring democracy there.
Second: No, I am not implying our troops should defend Georgia. We have no strategic vital interests at stake in Georgia. I have been there, unlike you, and understand the situation better. And, unlike John McCain, who's chief foreign policy adviser was until a few months ago THE foreign agent for Georgia, I don't have any conflicts of interests.
Third: No, Kay, you make an incorrect assumption. I did not support and I do not support our illegal occupation and aggression against Iraq and I want to bring our troops home. I support our troops in the belief that the only time a nation should go to war is when a vital strategic interest is at stake.
Finally, in 1990 vital interests were at stake. They were not in 2003 when we invaded Iraq--our vital strategic interests were elsewhere, in Afghanistan, where the attacks of 9/11 originated and were planned. There were no WMD, no ties to al Qaeda, there were no Iraqi ties to 9/11 and no Iraqis in the planes that day. Furthermore, I know this is hard for you to grasp but I will say it in plain, kindergarten English: our invasion has only made us weaker and less able to defend the real interests we have in the world, like rebuilding Afghanistan and preventing Pakistan from dissolving into a fundamentalist mess with nukes.
I know you would prefer to wave the flag, but I could care less. Flag waving doesn't mean squat unless you are protecting vital national interests. That is the prime duty of the statesman. None is more important.
There are no vital interests of America at stake in Georgia. None. You cannot name me one.
Have I answered your questions sufficiently?
That's called realism. Not neo-conservative, emotional jingoism. It's called pragmatism.
NO, I am certainly NOT saying that. George the First got it right when he demurred from the opportunity to roll tanks into Bagdad. His idiot child should have taken a lesson from that decision. George HW did, however (as you should know) screwed the pooch--and the Kurds--when he allowed Saddam to fly his helicopters, supposedly for "humanitarian relief" purposes. He promptly, and predictably, used them to resume his genocidal pogrom against the Kurds, making our president look like a two-faced babe in the woods. And your revisionist history is patently wrong, K. We didn't impose a no-fly zone to protect the Kurds for quite some time. In the meantime, many thousands of them had their blood spilled, thanks to George HW.
Paul G., Aug 13, 2008, 10:48am EDT
You tell me Paul, since you are not pretending.
Second, NATO wasn't around to assist Georgia, because Georgia had not been inducted into NATO. Had Georgia made it into NATO, NATO troops would have been involved. One should note that NATO has requirements regarding settled borders (Austria/Italy is the exception). In the Baltics, NATO required better treatment of minorities' (e.g. Russian) rights before admitting the three even less defensible than Georgia states.
The US hasn't made any clever moves or friends with their foreign politics in a long time. We'll see how the Obama administration will deal with these issues.