Russia and Georgia—Guns of August Again?

On August 8, during China’s big Olympic debut, Russia invaded Georgia, ostensibly to protect Georgia’s breakaway state, South Ossetia. “Peacekeeping,” they said. Could this be another “Guns of August” that launched World Wars I and II? Maybe not, but Russia appears willing to pay plenty to regain the “respect” (fear) of its former colonies and notice of the world.

Georgia, an ancient principality, broke from the Soviet Union in 1992. When empires break up, new nations emerge--ready or not. From the beginning, Russia has meddled with two pieces of Georgia, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, creating breakaway provinces. South Ossetia is said to be run by old Russian KGB thugs and a criminal underworld. Georgia, of course, does not want their country fragmented and has foolishly fallen for Russian provocation.

The US has a mixed history on fragmentation and breakaways. We fought a civil war to keep our south from breaking away, but then aided Texas (and all the southwest that came with it) when they broke away from Mexico. Since the 20th century, we always side with breakaways.

With presidents Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, Ronald Reagan, and the Bush father and son, American foreign policy has promoted the spread of democracy around the world. Unfortunately, democracy is not just voting, but depends upon a solid base of civil custom, education, and rule of law. We need to reconsider the folly of this well-intentioned but deeply flawed policy.

The breakup of Yugoslavia, a multiethnic state, brought the west nose-to-nose with the Russians—who hated the breakup and supported their once co-religionists, the Serbs, who dominated it. Russia lost that argument, and the country not only fragmented, but the independence of Kosovo, once part of Serbia, enraged them. They bear a big grudge and they still smart from the collapse of their own empire, which they enormously resent.

China and Russia don’t like each other, but do agree on national sovereignty and they oppose any sort of interference in even the worst of states, such as Sudan and Zimbabwe. Russia’s position on dismantling any country is the same as China’s (think Tibet) and human rights abuses do not matter to them. Although Russia seems to be defending states breaking away from Georgia, look harder—they are trying to reenstate the sovereignty of their own lost empire.

So here is the mess: Georgia had become a client of the US (its only protection against Russia) and desperately wants admission to NATO. The Russians were offended with this, considering Georgia in their sphere of influence and none of our business. The Russians don’t forget; we crossed them in Yugoslavia—so they are crossing us in Georgia. “Invading a sovereign country is wrong,” we say. “Oh,” they reply, “and what about Iraq and Serbia?” And how about “regime change!” They want to do it too with Georgia and they certainly tried with Ukraine. The difference, of course, is intent; we extend freedom; they smash it.

What makes the Georgia issue urgent is its geography—where oil and gas pipelines will go to bring energy resources to Europe and the world. The Russians want the pipelines to go only through Russia—and we (and the Europeans) most emphatically do not. If Iran were more trustworthy, that would have been the logical (and shortest route) for that pipeline. But nobody trusts Iran. If Russia can dismantle Georgia, there goes the alternate pipeline.

This may not be another Guns of August, but it could be if we fail to mend it. The US and Europe must have a unified energy policy, and Russian paranoia must be addressed. There is a price that they may pay for their brutal actions—but we should also try to refocus them on the real dangers to us all if there is hostility between us. The only beneficiaries of a new Cold War are the Islamists, who are the real enemy of both. It would be stupid to forget that.

663 words

Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman is a historian, lecturer, and author. You may contact her at Lfarhat102@aol.com or www.globalthink.net.