Marching Thru Georgia

The conflict in Georgia as described in the news is without context or background. First, here’s a linguistic map of the area.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Caucasus-ethnic_en.svg

The Ossetian’s are culturally related to Persians, the Georgians are Orthodox Christians. The Ossetia’s and Georgians have not gotten along, for a very long time, going back to the wars between Rome/Byzantium and Parthia/Persia. So, this goes way back, old old hatreds. Russian troops have done in Ossetia, the same thing we have done in Kosovo. Just as Tibetans want to be free of China, Ossetian’s want to be free of Georgians. As do the Abkhaz people, in the other area of “Georgia” that wants self government. The Ossetia’s know independence is unsustainable, but they prefer the remote and light hand of Russia to the close and heavy hand of Georgia. Let it go.

Georgia is physically as close to Russia as Cuba is to the U.S. The Russians appreciate our interference in Georgia probably as much as we appreciate their interference in Cuba. The United States has no national interests in Georgia; Russia does. Push comes to shove, we won’t go to war for Georgia and should therefore not indicate or imply that we would, it makes the Georgian’s take excessive risks. The oil pipeline doesn’t rise to a national interest of ours, it was never realistic to begin with, because it was predicated on a straight line graph prediction that Russia would remain at the nadir of power similar to the late 90’s.

Straight line predictions are almost never right, and Russia was bound to recover, as it has done before. Students of Russian history know that in 1917, Russia government collapsed the country fell apart in chaos, revolution and civil war. Twenty Eight years later in 1945 they were the greatest land power on the planet. They had beaten the vaunted German Wehrmacht and planted their flags in nine capital cities. They conquered Manchuria and Korea, a territory as large as Western Europe in around three weeks. This easily surpasses the early Wehrmacht success in Poland and France. And they stopped. And they proved reasonable over Finland. Russia will have Abkhazia and Ossetia, the real question is will they have Georgia proper too. Russia wins any fight over that.

We Americans need to take stock, of our true national interests and the real world. The nonsensical chest thumping since the fall of the USSR has cost us a lot. Missed opportunities, unproductive ill will, diminution of goodwill, and failure. The fall of the USSR and its meaning has not sunk in too many in the U.S., I’m looking at you Dick Cheney, but that is its own blog topic. Our attempts to apply a different standard to our actions than the actions of other countries is pointless feel good rhetoric. Our national geographic and historical ignorance serve us ill. NATO has got to pull back to Western European countries only, in this I include the Baltic States, Finland, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, and Croatia, and exclude Turkey and Greece. See, the funny thing is we are actually less powerful, not more powerful with the USSR gone. Against the USSR/East bloc we could assert ourselves with cheap nukes. Against a chaotic world, we can only assert ourselves with infantry, and we don’t have nearly enough, not remotely. The stink of our foreign policy failures is rife. Let’s not further add to the list.

Advertisements

6 Responses to Marching Thru Georgia

  1. batguano101 says:

    The first objective and goal of every nation on earth is to remain a nation.

    You offer a nice dose of lemonaide to make the pill go down better for Americans.

    But the Georgians would surely, and rightly, argue the issue.

  2. Your comment seems to miss my point. Is English your first language?

  3. batguano101 says:

    Your point appears to be rationalization for Russia invading Georgia, with an isolationist/non-interventionist subliminal political slant.

    The obvious objection to the points you make is that Georgia is or was an independent nation and wishes to remain an independent nation but is currently occupied by Russians, not to mention the removal of the Georgian flag from the contested area.

    Interestingly, rather than address my remark directly, you present no defense to the obvious validity that Georgia does not want to be occupied by Russians, so you apply denial and imply that I do not have command of the English language.

    I would have to say from this you would not like to consider the Georgians views in this situation, but my point of view is that their interests are significant, and supersede the interests of the USA or Russia in fact if not in practical application today.

    Oh, yes, the English question- my first under graduate degree was in English Literature.

  4. Ah, I see, you did miss my point. I may have to rewrite to make my point more simply for those who drop in as compared with those who have read enough of my posts to get a sense of my viewpoint.

    You too have a viewpoint and insist that my own must fit into some paradigm you have in your head. I didn’t address your point because of two reasons. 1. Your comment didn’t address what I wrote as far as I could tell, and wasn’t interesting. 2. I have provided no one with any expectation or promise of, anything.

    My essential point is that America is foolishly overextended and has no true interests at stake there. My subsidiary point is twofold. 1. The latest happening is like many around the world, ethnocentric conflict over land, and all parties have dirty hands 2. Only autocratic nations can be multi cultural/ethnic. Country’s aspiring to democracy must be at least culturally consolidated.

    May i suggest that when you comment on the writing of someone that you do not know, either read some of their work before making universal assumptions or at least hedge a little by avoiding snarky jargon, bromides, and canards. And make your comment interesting and relevant!

  5. batguano101 says:

    Please accept my apology for making a remark on your blog topic.

    Perhaps if you closed your topics to comments when you post them
    it will be more comfortable for you.

    I will not trouble you with remarks to your blog in the future.

  6. Thats all right. But you should be better informed before you comment in the future. And try to comment on what the original post is actually saying, don’t repackage the argument and then argue against the argument you manufactured. I don’t close my comments because I am awaiting interesting, informed, and relevant comments. One must wade through dross and trolling inevitably though. Good Luck.

%d bloggers like this: