The hypocricy over the Georgia debacle
August 28th, 2008 by Torstein Schiøtz Worren
Although Russia is showing scary tendencies in its new and aggressive foreign policy, the American and European outcry that followed the Russian intervention in Georgia and the breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, is hypocritical to the extreme.
First of all, what took place was that the president of Georgia chose to use force of arms to reclaim a territory where the inhabitants, albeit after expelling a large part of the original and ethnic Georgian population during the civil wars of the 1990s, do not want to be part of Georgia. It does not excuse the subsequent and aggressive Russian intervention, but it was still reckless and dangerous. Russia had admittedly been escalating the confrontation in the months building up to the war, but Georgia is to blame for starting the conflict and for atrocities in South Ossetia.
Russia has been widely and rightly criticised for its bombing of infrastructure and civilian targets in Georgia when war first broke out, but the attacks follow a pattern used by the USA and Western European countries in similar conflicts. In Serbia, when the decision was made to intervene in the conflict in Kosovo in 1999, NATO aircraft bombed targets that were supposedly dual-use, meaning they were used both for military and civilian purposes. This meant that bridges, factories, power plants, and communication networks were targeted. Similarly, in Iraq in 1991, when a coalition of forces were liberating Kuwait from the occupying Iraqi forces, the whole country was reduced to rubble, inflicting damage that at the time was expected to take decades to rebuild (which of course did not happen as the subsequent sanctions left the country with no income and killed off more civilians than Saddam Hussein was able to do on his own). As always, it is the civilians that are left to suffer the consequences. To Russians, the intervention was just as legitimate as other Western interventions in regions of strategic importance.
Instead of focusing on the reasons for the conflict, the EU and the US are competing to be the loudest in the condemnation of Russia and for coming up with the most impressive and escalating response. We have only ourselves to blame for the deteriorating relations.
First of all, the recognition of independence for Kosovo set a dangerous precedence for future conflicts. Instead of letting Kosovo remain a semi-autonomous part of Serbia, what actually took place was that NATO granted the new country its independence through force of arms. Instead of trying to build a system whereby two peoples can co-exist peacefully in one state, the organisation implied that co-existence would not be possible and South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transnistria/Transdniestria, Kurdistan, Uyghurstan and all the world’s little corners with plans for independence could hope for international recognition if they only get the West on their side.
Furthermore, the rabid Russian response is also a result of the West’s lack of concern for security concerns that are very legitimate to Russia. The missile shield is going ahead regardless of Russian misgivings and is an obvious provocation. Planning to expand NATO to Georgia, an indefensible outpost with an aggressive leadership right on the Russian border that has unresolved territorial disputes with the military giant, is unnecessary and silly.
And now, after NATOs actions in the Balkans, the West is lining up behind the Serbia of the Caucasus and threatening sanctions and escalation with Russia. Surely, this will make Russia think twice about its actions and come crawling back to the negotiating table to repent?
KNAR wrote on 08/29/08 at 15:06 :
Well written and argued article. As for double standards nothing beats the flagrant examples of Russian intervention in Georgia’s neighbouring republic, in order to defend territorial integrity. A phrase the Russians refuse to use in the UN SC referring to Georgia. This time ‘a humanitarian intervention’ was deemed necessary to protect Russian citizens. No matter that these citizens were living outside Russian territory.
Torstein Schiøtz Worren wrote on 09/5/08 at 10:03 :
Undoubtedly. But so many people were criticising Russia I thought it would be more interesting to write from the opposite angle. In any case, cleaning up one’s own act makes the criticism more legitimate.
Poppe wrote on 09/22/08 at 20:42 :
Oh my God! You are just amazingly narrow-minded! I am sure that you are the first to (rightfully) cry out against American invation in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere - why can you not just simply blame Russia when Russia deserves to be blamed? There is no excuse for Russian aggression. Why should you always look to the West for a scapegoat?