A Different Perspective

Just over a year ago, the columnist Spengler at the Asia Times imagined the following conversation between Putin and George W. at Kennebunkport:

Bush: Vladimir, I was hoping we'd come out of this discussion with an understanding of at least one point: Why are you so upset about our putting anti-missile systems into places like the Czech Republic? You know that we can't defend Europe against a Russian missile attack.

Putin: George, it's not just about the missiles. It's about your lily-pad bases in Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and elsewhere in our near abroad. It's about fomenting those pointless color revolutions in Ukraine, Georgia and Kyrgyzstan. You aren't going to get democracy in these places - it's silly presumption. All you will do is foster the centrifugal forces that threaten to tear apart the Russian Federation. Don't you get it, George? We are only three-quarters Russian, and in a generation we might be only half Russian. We haven't recovered from the beating you gave us in the 1980s. Half of adult male deaths in Russia are due to alcoholism. Our women have 13 abortions for every 10 live births. We're fighting for our life. We are not going to let what remains of Russia be torn to pieces.

Bush: Do you think we can find some kind of common ground over Kosovo?

Putin: That's where you are really playing with fire, George. You are proposing to dismember Serbia to add a province to Greater Albania, and you will set a precedent for every breakaway minority that wants to leave Russia. We can't possibly accept this - and I warn you that if you insist on this dangerous and reckless course of action, we will do precisely the same for disputed territories in the near abroad, starting with South Ossetia. (emphasis mine)

I think this is what my former professor George Friedman at Stratfor is trying to get at too. It's uncomfortable for me, because my every instinct screams that Putin is a bloodthirsty ex-KGB thug who has just led his nation to a well-deserved status as a rogue, and damn the strategic considerations.

But Spengler was certainly prescient, writing on July 3, 2007, about Russia reacting to a Kosovo declaration of independence by putting down independence-minded republics in its "near abroad." And Russia's notions of strategic necessity certainly have major points of departure from ours.

Spengler has his obsessions with Islam to be aware of, for example he thinks there's no such thing as a "moderate Muslim," but for all that his take is a usefully contrarian perspective to consider. Read the whole thing.

The Russian aggression against a free Georgia

Russia and Comrade Putin have removed any doubt about their true colors with their violent over-reaction to Georgia's attempt to regain its own territory in South Ossetia. With the latest news just coming that Russia's forces are not only active in seccessionist Abkhazia and South Ossetia, but also have seized Georgia's city of Gori (see this map), it becomes very clear that Russia's intent is to overthrow the pro-western government in Georgia.

Stratfor has been warning for some time now that the Russians were not going to sit still for the steady eastward push of NATO, and would be striking back to preserve their hegemony in what they regard as their "Near Abroad." Unfortunately, they've been proved correct, in spades.

Thomas Barnett weighs in with the following excellent strategic caution:

"Again, you can say, 'Who the hell are these guys!' But a lot of the world says the same about us regarding Southwest Asia (the Middle East)--a place a lot more important strategically to the entire world than the Caucasus. So go easy on that one.

"Also go easy on wanting to ramp up strategic conflict with Russia. It's certainly a familiar emotion for a lot of us over 40, but you have to ask yourself, 'Where are we going with this, given everything else we're trying to achieve right now?'

"Admittedly, Russia does enough bad stuff and Moscow can certainly get itself right back on top of our strategic planning pile, but we're a long ways from that and I don't anticipate that being the ultimate message that Putin seeks to send here.

"Instead, we're going to have to figure out something a whole lot more sophisticated than simply resurrecting the Cold War plot line."

I love Barnett's ability to do the high-level strategic view, because I find it so difficult myself to keep that cool analytical mode going at times like these.

Politically, I think Obama's both sides are at fault sentiments as originally expressed were ridiculous, and his follow-ups not more impressive. McCain always gets tagged as the loose cannon, but his outrage is perfectly justified here, and Russia might want to ask itself if its actions will help elect McCain? Clearly, as per this excellent Tigerhawk post, the Russians prefer Obama even to the extent of seemingly coordinating their statements with him.

The bottom line is this: we certainly are not going to be able to stop Russia from doing what it pleases here, short of a willingness to go to war with them.

Given that we're clearly not going to be doing that, I feel much more confident that a President McCain will show Russia there is a big price to be paid for this sort of behavior. More and more, Obama shows he's looking to step into President Carter's shoes, and that's a movie I saw once before in my lifetime and have no desire to see a second time.