Calm Perspective On The Georgia - Russia Conflict
August 15th, 2008 11:59 pm | by Marc Gallagher | Published in Foreign Policy, History, Liberty, Maven Commentary, Media, Politics, Ron Paul, Video, War | 3 Comments
Much has been argued on both sides of the recent Georgian - Russian conflict. Over at a favorite read of mine Antiwar.com Justin Raimondo calls great attention to the fact that Georgia attacked South Ossetia first. He also points out that Georgian President Saakashvili didn’t exactly come to power democratically no matter what is said on the matter. He is the foil for the current anti-Russian “narrative” from the main stream media in the US.
Both the Russians and Georgians make “information warfare” claims of each other. It seems to me both of their claims are true. Georgia attacked South Ossetia for their goal of independence. Russia used that attack as an excuse to wage all out war with Georgia. A curious interview occurred on the FOX News channel where a 12 year old girl (and her mother) both had harsh words for Georgia for bombing South Ossetia. It was almost as if Vladimir Putin himself controlled puppet strings attached to the girl and her mother. The truth we may never know, but it is a perfect example of the word warfare inherent in this conflict.
Even if Georgia had not initiated this attack it seems that Russia would have found some other excuse to invade/attack Georgia. In fact Ron Paul voiced his own concern for such chaos back in 2002 in an interview with Bill Moyers.
The perfect measured and calm perspective on the blame game in this conflict comes from Daniel Hannan in the UK’s Telegraph.
…prejudice is part of the human condition. We all feel sympathetic to peoples and nations to whom we are tied by history and culture. Heaven knows, it is difficult for any Telegraph writer to disregard the paper’s 150-year-old support for anti-Russian national movements in the Caucasus. The last thing I want is for an emboldened Vladimir Putin - and this war removes any doubt about who is running Russia - to start proclaiming himself the defender of Russians in the Baltic States. Nor is it easy to be sanguine about the Kremlin’s anti-British attitudes, nor its bullying of its neighbours, nor its authoritarianism. (Though Saakashvili is no saint either. He came to power through a coup in 2004, and then awarded himself a Saddam-like score of 96 per cent in an ex post facto election. Like Putin, he knows that a sense of national crisis can bolster an autocratic regime: that is part of the problem on both sides.)
But we ought at least to try to cleave to the principle that the chief factor in determining the status of a territory should be the will of its inhabitants, and that democracy should ultimately trump considerations of geography, history or the convenience of neighbouring states.
Wars throughout history are waged to affect some kind of change. Unfortunately for the warmongers most of the time that intended change is not realized. The world is always at war, cold and hot wars. Lucky for us that most of the time we are in a period of cease fire cold war. People claim they are worried about the cold war making a come back. It seems to me it never left.
Liberty Maven







August 16th, 2008 at 7:17 am (#)
“Georgia attacked South Ossetia for their goal of Independence,” is a paltrey, cowardly and sickeningly dishonest way of describing Georgia’s war crimes against the civilian population of South Ossetia. Georgia did not just “attack,” it bombarded, with massive fire power (supplied by the United States), an innocent civilian population, while they slept (at 1:00 a.m.), without warning and without provocation, targeting schools, hospitals, and private homes, killing thousands of men, women, and children indiscriminately. Whether Georgia did so “for the South Ossetians’ goal of independence” is not likely–the only evident purpose of the bombardment was to murder, not to reintegrate. In any case, Georgia never said why it did so, nor why it persisted over the next several days, with tanks and sniper fire and grenade attacks, in the massacre of the helpless civilians of South Ossetia. That said, the wonder is how so many gutless apologists for such horrors, like yourself, find it all so easy to explain–Where do you all come from? Do you live under rocks, in pits and holes and come swarming out at the smell of innocent blood and the cries of butchered children to say it couldn’t be helped? You are worse than the monsters you apologize for.
August 16th, 2008 at 10:28 am (#)
anatole4dd,
I’m no “apologist” for Georgia nor Russia in this awful situation. As I stated, both sides are to blame. Russia is certainly not innocent and neither is Georgia. Both are being hypocritical as is the United States. As is usually the case the people are victims of their own government’s actions. They are the only innocents involved.
It seems that you are a Russian apologist, perhaps you have a first hand account of the Georgian murders you claim? Your rather sensationalist comment only further illustrates my point in the commentary.
It also reinforces the reasoning behind America’s historical non-interventionist stance on foreign policy. We’ve gone from playing no part, to playing unwilling interventionist, to being vigorous yet selective policemen of the world. I hate to think of the phase on this path to empire. Or perhaps America is already there?
Thank you for your comment,
Marc
August 16th, 2008 at 4:36 pm (#)
I don’t understand 1,000 Israeli’s being advisers to the Georgian forces. I guess they are considered embedded. Why is Israel involved in a war or conflict like this. They seem to have their hand in a lot of things around the world that would seem to a worldly person to be none of their affair.