By John C. Wohlstetter (special to Russia Blog)
Georgian soldiers helping an injured comrade. Georgian troops are wearing U.S. Marine camouflage uniforms; the only difference - the Georgian flag badges.
Ethnic separatism once again has further destabilized world geopolitics, with the outbreak of military conflict between Russia and Georgia over the breakaway regions of South Ossetia & Abkhazia; Russia also attacked Georgian targets in Abkhazia—and as of midday Monday has invaded Georgia and occupied Gori (Soviet dictator Josef Stalin’s birthplace), just 55 miles from the Georgian capital of Tblisi.
While President Bush, out to lunch in China, watches swimming, basketball & baseball in Beijing, here is what one Georgian farmer told a British reporter: “Why won’t America and NATO help us? If they won’t help us now, why did we help them in Iraq?”
Four lessons come immediately to mind:
(1) the risk minor powers pose to major-power relations;
(2) the risk of excessive compartmentalization in policy;
(3) the risk from grossly misplaced strategic focus;
(4) the risk of making a fetish of democracy promotion--especially in the form of volatile multi-ethnic states.
Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili meeting with President George W. Bush at the White House in June 2006 (Photo by: U.S. State Department)
Minor-Power Risk: The August 1914 Factor. Major powers who do not carefully attend to their relations with minor-power allies may find themselves drawn into an unnecessary conflict with a rival major power.
Every State Department employee should be required to utter the following password each time upon entering Foggy Bottom HQ or any embassy or legation abroad: "August 1914". America understandably supports Georgia's desire to join NATO, given that 77% of Georgians express friendship for America, and our support for Georgia's democratic Rose Revolution was justified, but the last thing we need is a war with Russia. Minor powers have been hazardous to great powers not infrequently: think Vietnam for the U.S. and Afghanistan for the late Soviet Union.
Compartmentalization Risk: The Law of Unintended Consequences. Approaching strategic issues with tunnel vision invites unpleasant surprises from secondary and tertiary effects.
Foreseeable secondary and tertiary effects of policies should be kept firmly in mind. Publicly pushing for and supporting independence for Kosovo infuriated Russia, whose Balkan little brother, Serbia, was humiliated. Serbia richly deserved the humiliation, but angering Russia was not worth any schadenfreude we may have felt due to Serbia's frustration. We should have kept a far more restrained public diplomatic posture when the Kosovars did what we could not prevent them from doing, by declaring independence. Russia's brutal re-annexation of Chechnya and suppression of Dagestan show how vital Mother Russia regards the Caucasus region, which is its warm water gateway to the south.
Focus Risk: The Perils of Inattention. Obsessive focus on intractable problems that there is little chance of solving and of marginal strategic value diverts attention from addressing more important, more soluble problems. Every minute that senior leaders spend on Problem A is time not available for Problems B through Z.
Wasting vast efforts and time on marginal problems leaves less space--much-needed--to work on central issues. Every nanosecond Secretary of State Rice has spent from the late 2006 Annapolis conference to date, on trying to broker a Palestinian accord has been a waste of time. Palestinian rockets after Israel withdrew from Gaza three years ago, and the Hamas electoral win in early 2006 gave America a perfect pretext for leaving the Palestinians to fend for themselves vis-a-vis Israel, and telling our European allies that the Palestinians forfeited any right to special attention. We could have confined our efforts to mid-level diplomacy at most, plus the occasional obligatory public pieties about "a just and lasting peace" that are required by Mideast politics, and otherwise not committed so much time and prestige to an accord not only chimerical in prospect, but of far less significance that the situations with Russia arising out of Ukraine and Georgia. Our gracious and charming Secretary of State, a Russia specialist, should have known this and focused her attention accordingly. Instead we risk all sorts of conflict with Russia. Suppose Georgia pushes too far, and Russia occupies Tbilisi, Georgia's capital, and annexes Georgia by force? Will we go to war? Not if we can avoid it. But if Russia forcibly annexes Georgia, America would suffer a huge loss of prestige.
Had we actively, at the highest level, devoted as much energy to Ukraine, Georgia and Russia as we wasted on the Palestinians, it is not likely that the current violent flare-up would have come to pass. Now, a formal settlement between Russia and Georgia, ceding South Ossetia and Abkhazia, a pair of nuisances Georgia might better be rid of in order to join the European Union someday, is out of reach. Russian aggression cannot seem to be rewarded, lest Russia decide to pursue a more aggressive policy against Ukraine, its main target in its attempts to recover what Russia calls the "Near Abroad."
Fetish Risk: Mindless vs. Measured Promotion. Policies otherwise sound when pursued in moderation can easily become unsound when pursued to extremes.
Promoting democracy and a fixation on multi-ethnic states can undermine more pressing priorities, such as avoiding unnecessary wars. If ethnic groups wish to secede, as much as possible we should let them. Forcing them to live together is not worth American blood and treasure. There are literally dozens of potential conflicts like Abkhazia and South Ossetia around the world. As for democracy, we should promote it cautiously, stressing that liberal democracy is the goal, not a terrorist "democracy" under the likes of Hamas. The qualifying phrase in President Bush's 2005 inaugural address--that promoting democracy is "the concentrated work of generations"--seems to have been tossed aside by the Administration. This is a recipe for trouble, lots of it. There are 68 other breakaway statelets waiting in the wings.
America has enough on its military and diplomatic plate, without allowing a situation like the Georgia mess to spin out of control, due to a combination of sloppy thinking, inattention, lack of focus and mindless preoccupations. We must restrain our minor ally, Georgia, and press them to temper their aspirations to those reasonably achievable; we must devote considerable high-level diplomatic energy to extinguishing the Caucasian flash-point.
Earth to Bush administration: Our fundamental strategic interest here is clear: Avoid an unnecessary war with a revanchist Russia, on terms that don't appear to reward Russian aggression. Not one nanosecond more should be wasted on the Palestinians; devote all that time to addressing Russia's threat. Georgia must now be incorporated into NATO, as must Ukraine. NATO should convene immediately and incorporate Georgia and Ukraine as members. As a further sign of our seriousness we should send troops to Georgia, rather than pulling those now there out, drawing from troops now in Germany. Sending troops there would make war less likely, as the stakes would be made clear to Russia.
As of midday Monday America may be just hours from a foreign policy catastrophe that only instant injection of American troops into Tblisi can prevent a fait accompli: Russia’s re-occupation of Georgia, and the instantaneous Finlandization of Europe.
John C. Wohlstetter, a senior fellow at Discovery Institute, spent more than 22 years in the telephone industry. His work included communications law and national security. He is the author of "The Long War Ahead and the Short War Upon Us," and of the issues blog, "Letter From The Capitol."
Comments
Actually, another major difference in the photo are the assault weapons (7.62mm x 39cal.) carried by American-uniformed Georgian troops.
One can only imagine Mexican troops wearing Russian Army uniforms at the American border. The Russians hold the winning hand in the philsophical battle currently waged over the Georgia conflict, and Washington's going to have one hell of a time explaining to the average American precisely why American military advisors were in Georgia to begin with.
Unfortunately, we Americans can often be nakedly chauvinistic when toying with truth and falsehood.
Posted by: R.L. | August 11, 2008 11:47 AM
First, a minor point. As of midday Monday Gori was NOT occupied by Russian troops (while a Georgian official claimed the town' occupation, a Reuters reporter was driving through its streets and saw no military of either side anywhere). The author could well be a bit more discriminating in parsing the "news" coming out of Tbilisi.
More importantly, I can't tell whether the "Earth to Bush Administration" advice (i.e. immediate incorporation of Georgia and Ukraine into NATO, inserion of US troops into Georgia) is meant as a joke or is the product of a late-night anxiety attack. It's mindboggling in light of the very policy principles the author enunciates.
Posted by: vva | August 11, 2008 2:01 PM
I seriously disagree with the author on some points. First of all, accepting Georgia and Ukraine into will not solve any problem with Russia, instead it will make it worse. Saakashvili is partly to blame for this conflict so his reputation with his Western partners will be damaged. If Russia wants a couple of small "buffer", or as I like to call "comfort", zones then let them have it. NATO is large and powerful enough as it is. And expanding NATO to Russia's most sensitive border ignores a large and important historical fact which explains why it so much fears NATO enlargement. Russia has always been threatened from the West. I can go back many times, as I have, and point out the truth. The US has had, quite frankly, the unacceptable privilege of never witnessing a massive and shear destructive foreign invasion of its home soil. The only occasion was the war of 1812, nearly two-hundred years ago. We have long forgotten that. And destruction and casualties were not widespread, unlike World War I and II. We cannot relate to their fears, because we have never experienced there suffering. It's sad actually, to be so indifferent from the rest of the world is absurd. No one is asking the US or Eu to bow down and worship Russia as God, yet all they wish is a little respect and recognition of Russia's traditional and cultural sphere's of influence as well as its historical fear of encirclement. Though Russia should also restrain itself in Georgia. Regime change is not the answer, and I would strongly protest such a move. As much respect as I have for Russia and its proud peoples, invading Georgia proper and overthrowing a sad but truly democratically elected leader, it will isolate Russia from the world and will have long term consequences with Western powers. I believe Russia should make an example of Saakashvili and his reckless attitude towards Russia and its might. Though by humiliating Georgia's military, causing infrastructure damage, destroy key Georgian military and political targets, and driving it completely from South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Saakashvili's political career will be finished at home, abroad, and Georgia will take a new attitude and tone towards its dominating Russian neighbor.
Posted by: Julian | August 11, 2008 3:02 PM
Re (1) we are committed to keeping Georgia free; 4.5 million people left the former USSR in April 1991. Putin's desire to re-annex "The Near Abroad" is utterly unacceptable.
RE(2) fair comment re Gori, although news reports appear to confirm it; I am hearing at 6 PM EST that only 10,000 of 50,000 residents remain in Gori. My belief is that US troops in Tbilisi would establish our seriousness, in the way that a purely diplomatic effort cannot. I concede that this carries considerable risk, but it is all we are left with, having failed to babysit our Georgian allies and make sure that they did not do what they did last week, which was give Russia a pretext for invasion. The size and speed of the Russian move clearly shows long preparation. We must respond effectively, or suffer grave loss of prestige.
Posted by: John Wohlstetter | August 11, 2008 3:08 PM
R.L. is 100% correct. Given the sound tone of the article, and the good advice it offers it is odd that the conclusion is too provoke Russia into a war by sending troops to Tbilisi and allowing the Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO. Is it supposed to be sarcasm or did someone hacker alter the original?
Posted by: Anonymous | August 11, 2008 4:45 PM
Nobody ever mentions the fact that:
1) There was never an independent country called Chechnya
2) Areas so what is now Chechnya were traditional Russian territories incorporated into it during Soviet times.
"Russia's brutal re-annexation of Chechnya and suppression of Dagestan"
Since 92 western intelligence has helped finance and train Chechen militants in Bosnia. As far as these "brutal re annexation" these are the same tales told about the Serbs in the Balkans was a fascist military dictator who created a large private army and a republic given sanctuary and financed by organised crime.
Chechen gangs were harassing and kidnapping ethnic Russians in Chechnya.
It ultimately culminated in an ethnic cleansing campaign against ethnic Russians and a resulting civil war when rival clans fought each other for supremacy.
During the first war the ISI, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Azerbaijan and militants from Bosnia aided the Chechens.
During the period between the two wars militants based in Chechnya were operating trading camps and schools in neighbouring Dagestan’s territory and other major criminal activity. Chechen fighters were sent to camps in Afghanistan, Turkey, Pakistan and Kosovo so they were obviously preparing for a second war.
Most Dagestani’s support Russia since the invasion and massacres by militants in 99 and don’t want to be independent.
How come no one mentions the terrorism aspect?
Paul Murphy’s book Wolves of Islam goes into good detail what type of threat it poses Russia.
Posted by: james | August 11, 2008 5:18 PM
Further replies to reader comments:
1) I re-emphasize that my thought of sending in a small detachment of troops was not intended to go to war with Russia, which no one wants. It was to signal our seriousness, along with a President not playing hooky at the Olympics.
2) Russia's historic fears (Napoleon, Hitler) of invasion tell only half the tale. History teaches that Mother Russia's neighbors ahve ample reason to be nervous. Russia annexed Asian lands in the 16th century, added Ukraine & Siberia in the 17th, and then added the Casucasus in the 19th, re-annexing the Caucasus after World War I. How about three partitions of Poland?
3) Our stake in Georgia's independence does not mean Georgia pays no price. It may have to give up Abkhazia & South Ossetia to get Russia out of the rest of Georgia, if the latter is posible at all; it would be a price worth paying.
4) Failing to aid an ally who sent troops to Iraq would oncce again send the message that Henry Kissinger spoke of after we watched the Shah of Iran fall 30 years ago: If it can be dangerous to be an enemy of the United States, it can be fatal to be our friend.
JW
Posted by: John Wohlstetter | August 11, 2008 5:52 PM
I need to get this out.
Putin said that America agrees with the Georgian attack on forces in South Ossetia.
That's wrong.
We certainly would have preferred if they had not done that.
On a human level there is not much difference between Russians, Georgians and Americans.
The conflicts that arise about our preferences in forms of government should not escalate to this level.
What works in Russia will not work in America.
What works in America may not be best for Russia.
A small country like Georgia may need something totally different that either.
Russia wants the US to stop Peddling Democracy.
The US wants Russia to stop undermining countries by pushing Communism.
Why don’t you both step back and take a more analytical introspect and approach.
Would Cuba today be better off with a government modeled after Switzerland instead of Stalinist Russia?
North Korea?
Dictatorships are always the worst for the people.
How will you make Georgia better?
Certainly not by imposing a puppet dictator.
And certainly not by escalating a mindless bloodbath.
Posted by: Rexreddy | August 11, 2008 5:58 PM
Quote
While President Bush, out to lunch in China, watches swimming, basketball & baseball in Beijing, here is what one Georgian farmer told a British reporter: “Why won’t America and NATO help us? If they won’t help us now, why did we help them in Iraq?”
If the US comes in there, the blood bath would be horrendous. The number of civilian casualties would be astronomical on all sides.
Posted by: Anonymous | August 11, 2008 6:13 PM
"The US wants Russia to stop undermining countries by pushing Communism."
"US troops in Tbilisi would establish our seriousness"?
Who said Russia wants to make Georgia part of it's territory?
Who said Russia wants to build communism???
and please, WHO SAID THE US IS THE GUARDIAN OF THE WORLD ??????
How can Bush recriminate Russia if he ordered an invasion in Iraq under false arguments of "weapons of mass destruction"?
By the way,Russian ambassador to the UN said that Russia didn't occupied Gori and it don't want to take Georgia.Why can't we ever trust anything that Russian officials say?
Posted by: Eduardo | August 11, 2008 9:34 PM
"As for democracy, we should promote it cautiously, stressing that liberal democracy is the goal, not a terrorist "democracy" under the likes of Hamas."
Basically what I would add is that... Democracy should never be forced via military intervention by outsiders, it should be fostered from within.
Plus how can you state "Russian aggression cannot seem to be rewarded" when it was:
1. Georgia that attacked civilians first
2. NO Georgian civilians were killed during Russian retaliation! (I see these statistics were only confirmed after this publication)
3. U.S. gave independence to Kosovo, why is it that people of South Ossetia & Abkhazia are not allowed the same right?
4. U.S. invaded Iraq on false pretences, yet it seems that the anglo-american oil companies are rewarded with exclusive contracts
This just seems like a great representation of DOUBLE-STANDARDS
Posted by: Alex | August 12, 2008 3:02 AM
I do not know as much history as many of the people posting comments. However I think I know human nature and a little history.
In 1989 Russial lost over half of the land they robbed after WW 2. Most people want to regain what they lost. Putin has said so publicly.
Gereral Patton was right when the allies reached Berlin. Lets continue to Moscow.
The Russian military is mainly made up of briggands and criminals. Their equipment is old and outdated. They are desperate.
Yes US forces should be in Georgia. You are dealing with a bully.
Over 60% of Russia's revenue comes from oil and gas. They squandered the fruits on cars, boats, property, you name it. Inflation is 15%.
The oil pipeline from the Caspian avoids Russia and will(in time) provide a large part of European needs. Thats what the Russian aggression is about as well as the land that was returned to its owners.
Do a poll in any western country and ask "Would you trust a Russian?"
I am not a George fan, however he said one or two things I liked " people love freedom", my quote may not be exact.Find freedom in Moscow. You will find State contron, no freedom.
NATO should admit Georgia and Ukraine, thats what they want.
Posted by: Tom | August 14, 2008 5:54 PM
Great comments everyone, and thank-you Charles Ganske.
As I read them and think about NATO and the US having a presence in ex-Soviet states like Georgia, and perennialy poor-old Poland, I am tempted to think about the concerns expressed by Russians about being surrounded by Western Weapons of Mass Destruction. (My paraphrasing).
Mark my words, Russia will neutralize the threat in Georgia, and Poland will not be protected by America and (a pretty toothless) NATO when Russia steamrollers in in a few weeks.
America is threatening Russia now, but when the Bear Bites, Mr Bush will again stand there with his mouth open (like he is this week) and Poland will pay the price for its lack of discern regarding its choice of allies.
It reminds me of 1939. America ignored Poland when it was invaded, while Britain and tiny Australia declared war on mighty Germany, keeping our promise to the Polish people.
Americans, it's time to join your army and prepare to fight Russia to keep your promises. My point is, fight and discharge your obligations (when the time comes) or stop putting the peoples of Europe at risk with empty words. You guys could and should be great, friends, to the world!
Sincerely, David.
Posted by: David in Australia | August 15, 2008 11:40 AM
David,
I don't think anyone is going to invade Poland again, even with all the Polish jokes about fighting the Germans first, then the Russians, in the event of another Hitler-Stalin Pact, "business before pleasure". The worst Russia might do is temporarily interrupt natural gas deliveries to Poland this winter due to technical difficulties. Not a good thing for Russia's image as a reliable energy supplier, but people won't be shivering in Warsaw either.
As for what might happen with the Russian minorities in the Baltic republics, and Russian majorities in eastern Ukraine and Crimea, there is the real potential next flash point. Thankfully, most Ukrainians are opposed to their country joining NATO for precisely this reason, because they don't want to see their nations divided like Georgia was.
Posted by: Dirk | August 18, 2008 12:16 PM
This is it guys...the moment of truth. The west has made the Russians break, losing their patience to a small country who annoyed the hell out of Russia with the support the Yanks. Mind you it was just a jab by the Russians to give the west a bloody nose. Yes, America should see this through without intervention and biased orders but if the Yanks dared to send troops to Georgia(Ex-Soviet State and neighbour)it will totally infruriate the Russians by undermining its territorial integrity and sphere of influence. This is not a Joke to the Russians John Wohlstetter, where you mentioned that troops should be sent, although small it would not be a good idea as it will highlight the intentions of the US.(Global domination according to the non west) Georgia with small man syndrome does what every other guy with small man syndrome does when supported by a large gang. They show off and try to provoke the rival gang by talking trash and thowing useless strikes. Mind you guys but Georgia has comitted the Ultimate sin here. They disrespected the Olympic truce of no conflicts at the start of the Olympics and that has highly disrespected China who is hosting the Games at the moment. Mind you guys but Russia and China has strong ties and if the US gets involved it goes to show that the US has supported what Georgia has comitted and both the Russians and the Chinese would not tolerate this. Lets just see what happens and hope to God that US will use more of their brain this time because I and many peace loving human beings do not want a Major World War.
Posted by: Jet | August 18, 2008 11:03 PM
I think that Bush has to stop supporting ambitious Saakashvili, Ossetians do not want to live in Georgia because they have been massacred by Georgian government (Georgian people is good but its government is bad), all eastern europeans must learn Finland and Switzerland, which do not belong to NATO and are neutral and they do not have problems with Russia, Finland is the model, is neutral and is a neighbour of Russia, but the U.S. government buy poor eastern european governments, please copy Finland.
I want Nagorno Karabakh to be recognized internationally and therefore belonging to Armenia, I want Republika Srpska to be independent from Bosnia, and if Ukraine wants to be in NATO russian-speaking eartern provinces: Donetsk, Lugansk and Crimea have to declare its independence from Ukraine for suporting NATO beacuse Russians feel threatened.
Posted by: marco | August 23, 2008 1:54 PM
Dear all, I made this week an interview to a russian citizen who defend the russian position in this war.
This is the link:
http://www.egiziotrombetta.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=142&Itemid=1
I'll try to translate the interview in english.
egizio
Posted by: egizio | October 17, 2008 3:04 AM