REASON, if that can possibly be the right word in the circumstances, appeared to intervene unexpectedly in the Russian excursion into Georgia. With expectations that Moscow was about to commit a reckless blunder, or a calculated provocation, by pushing the tanks on to Tbilisi, a halt was called. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, through his mouthpiece President Dmitri Medvedev, announced in that chilling euphemism that the security situation had been “stabilised”.
he announcement might simply have said: “job done”. After months of contingency planning, all the signs are that Russia cynically and opportunistically deployed its overwhelming military might over Georgia to destroy strategic targets and infrastructure, with scant regard for civilian casualties, in order to humiliate the West-friendly state before declaring a truce and averting international action.
It was a lesson to any government within what Moscow still regards as its sphere of influence which gets too friendly with Nato and the United States, but one which would be more difficult and more internationally dangerous to perpetrate in other countries with restless Russian minorities. Georgia was vulnerable to the bullying bear and was ruthlessly crushed. That a halt was announced in the military assault does not alter the fact that this amounted to a full-scale invasion. Moscow did not need to rumble on to the capital in order to effect regime change when it could cripple the country around President Mikheil Saakashvili.
The reunification of Georgia was central to his presidency, for which he gambled with the lives of thousands of civilians in the short-lived, indiscriminate pounding of South Ossetia’s capital, Tshkinvali, in an attempt to wrest back control of the breakaway enclave. If Moscow can be faulted for long-term planning of this offensive, Mr Saakashvili is equally culpable in providing the excuse for its execution. Buoyed with arrogance from Tbilisi’s increasing ties with Nato, he made the disastrous strategic calculation that Moscow would not retaliate. In doing so he sabotaged Georgia’s credentials as a reliable member-in-waiting of Nato. Russia claims that Georgian soldiers committed atrocities when they took control of South Ossetia, herding people into houses which were then torched, slitting prisoners’ throats and tossing grenades into bomb shelters, claims which deserve investigation.
But the “who started it” argument is fraught with a tangle of disinformation, claim and counter-claim, nationalist mythology, conspiracy theory and historical tides which make the history of Britain’s role in Ireland look simple. And that’s before any examination of the so-called “pipeline war” aspect of the conflict.
As Tribune went to press, European Union foreign ministers were meeting in emergency session to debate a strategy for dealing with the aftermath of what remains a potentially catastrophic flashpoint in the Caucasus. Since both Russia and Georgia have strategic interests in the EU, it is right that Brussels should take a leading role in both the inquest – what really did go on in Tshkinvali? – and the shaping of a longer-term settlement.
That will entail a greater commitment from Moscow to diplomatic solutions in what it clearly still regards as its imperial playground in the Caucasus and a toning down of sabre-rattling rhetoric from Prime Minister Putin and President George Bush. It will also require the West, in the form of Nato, the US and individual members of the EU such as Britain, to stop encouraging Russia’s small neighbours to tweak the tiger’s tail. Georgia’s foolish and callous gambit showed how that can backfire and how futile can be the assumption of reciprocal Western assistance. For the sake of a wider peace in Europe, we do not want to see this volatile mix of domestic politics, Russian foreign policy and the West’s provocative interference put to the test in a similar way in Kosovo.
* * *
AS TRIBUNE takes its annual fortnight’s break from publishing, Labour is in a lull, languishing in the calm before the storm, when politics resumes and the phoney leadership war returns to harry Gordon Brown’s premiership, or turns into a genuine leadership campaign, and ends it. As Mr Brown prepares for the high dive into the shark pool, he must realise he has some way to go if he is to make the perfect splash that will impress the judging voters and scare away the circling sharks.
