There remain questions about Russia’s mostly-withdrawal. Chief among them is Russia’s growing stupidity in not withdrawing to South Ossetia and Abkhazia having unambiguously made their point that they are not to be trifled with. What are they thinking?
Leaving aside the diplomatic war that would ensue upon Russia’s recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia (which was, alas, entirely predictable when many Western countries recognized Kosovo), and even the jarring news that MICEX has dropped 4% since the invasion, Russia’s continued presence in Georgia does not make much sense. It is clear Volodya Putin enjoys seeing the West squirm in its impotence, and this is undoubtedly made sweeter by NATO’s political paralysis (can anyone think of why Russia’s membership in the G8 hasn’t been revoked?). Russia is obviously enforcing punitive measures on Georgia, as if it were Britain and Georgia were Waziristan and this was 1936.
Clearly, Russia is angling to establish a permanent solution to the separatist movements. The only problem is: they are isolated in doing so, and Russia lacks the legitimacy to force a solution. By pushing as hard as they did, they’ve most likely scuttled any chances they might have had for OSCE or NATO approval of a future peacekeeping presence nearby. And the boorish behavior of both Russian troops and South Ossetian militants has poisoned even a remote, slight possibility that Georgia might have accepted some kind of managed autonomy from either region.
I stand by my belief that this will be a wash, a return to the status quo with very little changed save even more entrenched anger and resentment. Again. Russia can demonstrate its impunity all it wants, but the longer it plays that game, the more legitimacy it loses. And no matter what Russia does, it cannot occupy Georgia for much longer—its markets are continuing to decline, it is becoming increasingly isolated, and it is ruining any chances it has of being a global leader of any sort. At best, it is deliberately reducing itself to a regional bully, a role which will never guarantee it the strength or security its people so rightly crave.
{ 4 comments }
“Slight possibility that Georgia might have accepted some kind of managed autonomy from either region.”
Georgia is less of a problem than the Abkhaz or South Ossetian people accepting this.
second try without direct links:
The western media are pushing for a financial angle that simply isn’t there. Like the S&P the MICEX is dropping since May and that has little to do with Georgia and very much with commodity prices (MICEX is 50% oil + 20% metal …) and a temporary US$ strength.
I took the FT apart on that yesterday.
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2008/08/the-financial-t.html
According to point 6 of the ceasefire agreement Russia can implement additional security measures.
Here is how AFP put it:
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iU0z8n94gB9tlTOp-GGBxH7vSjZA
The Russians will make sure that no heavy weapon will be imported through the port Pori and will take care that no artillery gets near South Ossetia.
Those are sensible measures when one reminds that it was a Georgian artillery barrage on a sleeping town that started the big mess.
I doubt that the Russians will go for independence of the small statelets. It would a bad example for other folks in their federation. They will keep them hanging or just simply incorporate them.
The six point ceasefire is here:
http://www.rfi.fr/actuen/articles/104/article_1331.asp
I have added a piece on how the U.S. is trying to manipulate the signed ceasefire agreement.
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2008/08/the-mysterious.html
Russia remains in the G8 for the same reason it remains in the UN. It is a great power and must be consulted with.
G8 is a functional tool to coordinate our economic policies. Membership is not a reward we bestow in friendship, or a prize.
Comments on this entry are closed.