I thought Russia timed the invasion of Georgia to coincide with the opening of the Olympics as a distraction. Then, I heard that Georgia had entered the rebel region of South Ossetia to place it back under government control, and Russia was "responding" to a threat to "Russian citizens." I was impressed (read: frightened) by the speed and efficiency of their response, because it was patently obvious that they'd had troops in place, waiting for Georgia's move, for only God knows how long.
I thought there might be a connection between Russia's timing, and our involvment in the Middle East. According to Stratfor's analysts, I was probably right about that. And, with their greater access to documentation of what's going on, they have a better idea about why it's happening, and why now.
Let's look at the reasons it's happening, first. Three reasons in Russia's manifesto, as laid out by Putin's puppet, stand out: first, that Russia doesn't like the United States being the most powerful nation in the world; second, that Russia will protect the lives of its citizens, no matter where they are (and no matter the legality of their citizenship); and third, that Russia "has privileged interests" in its former sattelites that it will protect, whether they want that interference or not. And the United States has been interfering in Poland, the Ukraine, and most recently, Georgia.
Basically, Russia is, as I believed, trying to rebuild the power base it lost when the Soviet Union collapsed under its own weight in '91. And it resents that we're in the way.
So, why now? Because "the Russians believe that the United States is off balance in the Islamic world and that there is an opportunity here, if they move quickly, to create a new reality before the United States is ready to respond." They're not worried about Europe and NATO: they practically own them the way OPEC practically owns the US. Basically, Russia chose now because they were ready, and we aren't--yet.
We're still heavily engaged in Afghanistan and Iraq, though the Iraq situation is currently beginning to resolve itself. However. In the '60s, '70s, and '80s, Russia engaged in several different small conflicts with us, through intermediaries that were always completely deniable. The recent meeting with Syria's president is a clear threat that they're prepared to repeat that behavior to keep us fully engaged in the Middle East: "they have substantial interest in maintaining American imbalance and sapping U.S. forces. The Russians have a long history of supporting Middle Eastern regimes with weapons shipments."
Currently, there's not much we can do. In the short term, at least, we have too much riding on solving the problem with terrorist-sponsoring nations to deal properly with a re-emerging power that's hostile to us. The analysts at Stratfor think this is short sighted, that Russia will prove far more dangerous in the long run than an unstable Middle East.
I think they're right. But, out of all the different, currently possible responses to Russia's renewed aggression, I don't think there's a single good option--just bad ones and worse ones.
I thought there might be a connection between Russia's timing, and our involvment in the Middle East. According to Stratfor's analysts, I was probably right about that. And, with their greater access to documentation of what's going on, they have a better idea about why it's happening, and why now.
Let's look at the reasons it's happening, first. Three reasons in Russia's manifesto, as laid out by Putin's puppet, stand out: first, that Russia doesn't like the United States being the most powerful nation in the world; second, that Russia will protect the lives of its citizens, no matter where they are (and no matter the legality of their citizenship); and third, that Russia "has privileged interests" in its former sattelites that it will protect, whether they want that interference or not. And the United States has been interfering in Poland, the Ukraine, and most recently, Georgia.
Basically, Russia is, as I believed, trying to rebuild the power base it lost when the Soviet Union collapsed under its own weight in '91. And it resents that we're in the way.
So, why now? Because "the Russians believe that the United States is off balance in the Islamic world and that there is an opportunity here, if they move quickly, to create a new reality before the United States is ready to respond." They're not worried about Europe and NATO: they practically own them the way OPEC practically owns the US. Basically, Russia chose now because they were ready, and we aren't--yet.
We're still heavily engaged in Afghanistan and Iraq, though the Iraq situation is currently beginning to resolve itself. However. In the '60s, '70s, and '80s, Russia engaged in several different small conflicts with us, through intermediaries that were always completely deniable. The recent meeting with Syria's president is a clear threat that they're prepared to repeat that behavior to keep us fully engaged in the Middle East: "they have substantial interest in maintaining American imbalance and sapping U.S. forces. The Russians have a long history of supporting Middle Eastern regimes with weapons shipments."
Currently, there's not much we can do. In the short term, at least, we have too much riding on solving the problem with terrorist-sponsoring nations to deal properly with a re-emerging power that's hostile to us. The analysts at Stratfor think this is short sighted, that Russia will prove far more dangerous in the long run than an unstable Middle East.
I think they're right. But, out of all the different, currently possible responses to Russia's renewed aggression, I don't think there's a single good option--just bad ones and worse ones.
Update: Are we provoking them? Or are we just being the good guys in the situation. Seems to me that it really could be interpreted either way, considering that we just sent a warship into the Georgian port that the Russians are really occupying illegally.
Hmm. 
No comments:
Post a Comment
Sorry, folks. A hundred plus spam comments in an hour equals moderation on older posts, so until further notice...you're gonna have to wait for your comments to be approved before they show up.