while the Russians have 8,000 troops on a similar training mission in the North Caucasus not far from Georgia. It is hard to credit that in 2008, with the worst of the Cold War behind us, the United States and Russia have thousands of troops facing each on the faultline of an East-West dispute.
The roots of this particular confrontation go well back in the history of American-Russian relations but they are nourished by the new Washington doctrine of full-spectrum dominance which sees no corner of the world as being exempt from U.S. influence. The foundation of the new standoff is based on the decision to move Nato's influence right up to the borders of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) and to aggressively recruit nations that were formerly part of the Soviet empire into the Nato fold.
It was a classic case of kicking a man when he is down: with the collapse of Soviet communism, Russia was chronically weak and unable to respond to a gesture which came out of the blue at a time when Russians believed that they had done everything that was expected of them by dismantling their empire. A brutal crash course in instant capitalism from America's leading experts only served to weaken Moscow further in the short-term. With Russia and the CIS effectively out of the business of threatening anyone it would have been the perfect time to stand down Nato; its job in preventing the Cold War becoming a hot one was effectively over. But Washington had other ideas: transforming an essentially Euro-centred organisation into one capable and ready to project American power on a global scale.
Vladimir Putin, the Russian Prime Minister, has set about trying to redress some of the balance which has further been exacerbated by the recent agreement to set up the first stage of an anti-missile defence system in the Czech Republic. Ostensibly this is to protect against missiles from 'rogue' states further to the east such as Iran and North Korea. How North Korean missiles could loft over the Pole to strike European targets is not related nor is any explanation given for the fact that Iran's missiles, when fully operational, may be able to reach Israel but will not be able to do so with any accuracy and certainly not in the immediate future.
How Washington imagines that it can successfully recruit Georgia into Nato – so far from its shores – against the express wishes of Moscow when the Russian bear has such a demonstrated capability to make life difficult for nations on its periphery is hard to fathom. It is even more difficult to conceive when part of its chosen modus operandi is to get involved in a particularly nasty and brutal local dispute which is being fomented against Georgia by the Russians.
But you don't get much more involved than have your Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, travel to the Georgian capital Tbilisi to denounce Russian attempts to break away the republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Georgia claims that both republics are still part of its sovereign territory.
In the battle for Abkhazia during the 1990s thousands died and atrocities were widely reported as the Abkhaz drove the Georgians out of their self-declared republic. Neither of these breakaway republics was recognised by the international community, including Russia, until this spring when Moscow chose to enhance its links with Abkhazia but stopped short of full recognition. Russia already illustrated where its preferences lay by allowing the Abkhaz to take Russian passports and draw Russian pensions but have no obligation to serve in the Russian army.
After an extended standoff with Russian-administered peacekeeping force holding the lid on a potentially vicious new conflict, Russia moved additional forces into Abkhazia to deter what it said was a planned offensive by the Georgians earlier this year. Tensions were reignited in May when a Russian MiG-29 flying from a base in Abkhazia, according to the Georgians, shot down a Georgian reconnaissance drone over the Black Sea. The MiG-29 then flew north into Russian air space. Two weeks later Abkhazia claimed that it had shot down two Georgian drones in its airspace.
The Moscow Times has made clear why it believes both Georgia and Russia might have an interest in heating up the atmosphere before the consideration of Georgian membership by Nato later this year: 'One way to disrupt Georgia's Nato aspirations would be to heat up the conflict in Abkhazia to a level that would make it unacceptable for the Western alliance, which acts by the consensus of all members, to offer membership. Georgia's leadership could be escalating tensions in the hope of prompting Abkhazia and Russia to make a move that would leave the West with no chance but to intervene.
'Regardless of the motivation, whoever is stoking the conflict must realise that they are playing with fire. This brinkmanship can lead to a full-fledged war. Georgia would probably lose a war if Russia backed Abkhazia, while Russia would lose its hope of becoming a benign global player and would risk seriously straining its ties with the European Union and the United States,' said the newspaper.
Equally the United States and Nato risk stretching their credibility to breaking point were matters to reach the point where the U.S. was pressing for a Nato intervention to 'save' Georgia for the West. Doesn't the alliance already have enough on its plate with the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan? No wonder the Germans are busy trying to cool the diplomatic and military temperature in the Caucasus.
On the other hand there is no doubting the determination of the Georgian strongman President Mikhail Saakashvili to have his nation join the Nato pact but equally the Abkhaz are taking no chances with the suggestion from President Sergei Bagapsh that Russia and Abkhazia sign a military treaty along the lines of the U.S.' treaty with Taiwan.
There is no doubt the Russians resent the increasing American encroachment on what used to be their sphere of influence and the so-called 'colour revolutions' in Ukraine and Georgia but Rice's comments indicate they want to take things even further in the case of Georgia by trying to force Russian troops off what is still, under international law, Georgian territory.
Moscow warned at the time that the West's recognition of an independent Kosovo would have consequences while, for the Americans, Russia's encouragement and arming of Venezuela and its influence throughout America's Latin American 'backyard' is galling.
But, as ever, there are considerations of oil supplies beneath the surface bluster: Georgia is a strategic area of transit for the Anglo-American Caspian oil pipeline from Baku in Azerbaijan to the Turkish port of Ceyhan while the Baku-Tibilisi-Erzurum gas pipeline is key to Azerbaijani efforts to steer clear of dependence on the Russian state monopoly Transneft.
Nothing could perhaps better illustrate the love-hate relationship that drives politicians in Moscow and Tibilisi than the news that the Russians recently voted to name Stalin as their most admired domestic political figure. Stalin was a Georgian.
top |
