August 10, 2008

Georgia on my Mind

In his own way, Zbigniew Brzezinski is as wacko as his former boss Jimmy Carter.

Dinocrat has a series of informative posts here, here, here and here.
****************************
Two rhetorical questions:

1. If we've known for years that Saakashvili is a loose cannon, why was George Bush trying to get Georgia into NATO?

2. As Putin leaves Beijing to direct the Russian onslaught against an American ally, why is George Bush letting himself be photographed with bikini-clad volleyball amazons?

Maybe he knows some tremendously good news of which the rest of us are not yet aware.

That's one possibility. There are others.
*************************
Even thuggish imperialists can have arguable pretexts. Consider how supportive the Enlightened Nations were of Kosovo's secession from Russian ally Serbia.

Cold comfort is better than no comfort. The Russians are paying lip service to the diplomatic process.

Addendum 20080811. Putin has compared Saakashvili to Saddam:
Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin on Monday harshly criticized the United States for airlifting Georgian troops from Iraq back home.

Putin said the U.S. move would hamper efforts to solve Russia's conflict with Georgia over the breakaway province of South Ossetia.

"It's a pity that some of our partners, instead of helping, are in fact trying to get in the way," Putin said at a Cabinet meeting. "I mean among other things the United States airlifting Georgia's military contingent from Iraq effectively into the conflict zone."
...
"Of course, Saddam Hussein ought to have been hanged for destroying several Shiite villages," Putin said. "And the incumbent Georgian leaders who razed ten Ossetian villages at once, who ran elderly people and children with tanks, who burned civilian alive in their sheds — these leaders must be taken under protection."
There is still a threadbare reference to due process, but it sounds like Putin may intend to install a puppet government.

I have no problem with throwing Saakashvili to the wolves--to the bear, actually--if that's part of a deal that will prevent that outcome.

Second Addendum 20080811. Bush's recent statement is here. The White House site also has a video.

Wretchard offers his usual clear-eyed insight and, notwithstanding the armchair generalissimos among them, I found his commenters worthwhile. For example, one asks what the US intelligence community was doing during the Russian build-up, which begs the question of what that community is good for going forward.

This is pathetic (see also Bush's gaffe):
Rice spoke with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov by telephone yesterday, one of several conversations the two have had since Friday on resolving the crisis, and Khalilzad referenced their exchange in an emergency session of the U.N. Security Council.
...
Lavrov, Khalilzad said, told Rice "that a democratically elected president of Georgia -- and I quote -- must go." And the U.S. ambassador challenged Russian envoy Vitaly Churkin, "Is your government's objective regime change in Georgia, the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Georgia?"

"Regime change is an American expression," Churkin countered. And he scolded Khalilzad for revealing the contents of a secret diplomatic discussion.
(Cf. also Bush's gaffe in the statement mentioned above.) It pains me to say this when my country is in a confrontation, but why the devil are our diplomats publicly quoting confidential discussions?! Protocol exists for a reason; some of it is silly and anachronistic, but some of it is important. (Hey, we're the good guys and we're for freedom and stuff. That's alright then. Nevermind.)

The WaPo piece I just linked quotes McCain as calling for revisiting the decision to withhold NATO membership with Georgia. I was unpersuaded because the degree of our national interest is not clear to me. Remarkably, McCain's full statement addresses the point. I'm still unpersuaded, but my opinion of McCain has risen. Even if I don't agree, I can support a President who demonstrates competence and policy coherence.

No comments: