Latest Events:

The conflict in Georgia is now eleven days old, yet, despite global media coverage, chances are most of the world has not bothered to learn much more than what a newspaper’s or web page’s headlines can tell them. I for one, only noticed the first troubles in Georgia due to a quick skim of Time magazine’s online website. Yet the conflict in Georgia contains a spark that could ignite into a roaring inferno of worldwide dimensions and should not be ignored by anyone who considers them themselves learned. As I hope to place myself in this august body (someday) I decided I had to learn something about this conflict and follow its day-to-day events. Relying on sources such as the leading journals of the day may be a risky move, as newspapers might oscillate from viewpoint to viewpoint as easily as Michael Phelps glides through water. Yet since this conflict as newborn, journalism as, as yet, the only source of information.

The events in Georgia have already been related in another article, therefore I do not feel it is necessary to fill in a background or explain at length the politics of the situation. I can, however, relate the current Georgian situation as BBC and Time view it. BBC, as of August 17 stated that a phone-call between Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and French President Nicolas Sarkozy contained a pledge by the Russian President to withdraw Russian forces from Georgia by Monday (today). However, those troops will withdraw only to South Ossetia, the region originally in conflict, and reinforcements will bolster the Russian position in South Ossetia further.

Other events include German Chancellor Angela Merkel showing solidarity by joining Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili. Apparently Georgia is in talks to become a member of NATO, yet a timetable for membership has been blocked. Meanwhile, the German Chancellor also called for Russian forces to leave Georgia, as they apparently are right now. Time Magazine summarizes the conflict by stating Georgia’s preemptive military action was a feeble attempt to reclaim traditional Georgian territory. This was later crushed by Russian response, which is probably more a gesture of Russian dominance and reluctance to let emergent, once-Soviet dominions gain status as NATO members than an outright territory retention or a renewal of Cold War tensions.

Implications

So what does all this mean? Is Russia merely flexing its muscle in response to a stinging fly? Or is Russia issuing a challenge to the world to show that in Europe, Russia is still dominant and will not let former satellites claim NATO status merely to pry territory off the former Soviet giant. Responses to Russia’s apparent intention to remain as peacekeepers in South Ossetia are varied. Some fear a return to Cold War tensions and conflicts. Others simply shrug it off as a regrettable incident that was precipitated by an unwise choice for a fledgling democracy.

I believe the truth of the matter lies somewhere between. To assume that a second Cold War is upon us is somewhat extremist. The only chances of that occurring would have happened is if Russia blocked American humanitarian aid in the region. Yet U.S. government officials have admitted since the deliverance of goods that making Russian troops leave South Ossetia would be a near-impossible and an unwise decision. In a historical parallel, it would be the equivalent of Russia defending Serbian rights against Austria in the regional argument that sparked World War I. And as South Ossetia was Russia’s before, it appears that leaving it Russian wouldn’t really hurt anyone. And as Russian troops are withdrawing, it would seem safe to conclude that Russia’s main concern was with retaining territory and teaching a lesson to insolent new republics that think they are more powerful than they truly are. The only results of the Georgian conflict, tangibly, are hundreds if not thousands of rough graves, refugees, and destroyed towns in another senseless, wholly avoidable military confrontation. Intangibly, another result might be a not-so-subtle message to Eastern Europe countries: Don’t try to assume NATO status and challenge Russian dominance. Yet, for all that display of Russian force, Poland is currently endorsing a U.S. missile shield defense system. It would seem that Moscow will have to face the facts eventually. Domination in Eastern Europe and northwestern Asia will have to end eventually unless pursued militarily, in which case, perhaps bomb shelters and nuclear fallout stations would be a good investment. Russia feels as if it has more leverage over America than it used to - in view of the tottering financial markets in the U.S. and the military commitments America already pursues globally, this idea might not be that incorrect.

In summary, the Georgian crisis is not as extreme a case of Cold-War mentality as some might fear. However, it does hold some instances that give food for thought, namely how far Russia is willing to go to maintain dominance. Another morsel for mental speculation is the Newsweek report that says ordinary Russians volunteered to fight in Georgia because they believe America is already aiding Georgia militarily. The rampant anti-Americanism displayed must give me, for one, as a patriotic American, much pause.

Footnote: What Should America Have Done?

I am a conservative, therefore, it is not my usual pastime to engage in criticizing President Bush for whatever errors he may make. And consequently, my view of his actions in the present crisis is that he has done all that could be done. He extended humanitarian aid, which was called for, and has refused to do anything unnecessarily warlike such as offering military support to Georgia. Bush’s actions have toed the international line of diplomacy well. However much this is due to American weakness against Russia economically rather than intelligent politics, Bush is still to be commended for not escalating the conflict in Georgia more than it should have been, while still condemning Russia’s overuse of force and establishing U.S. support of Poland.