The Politics of War: Treating Russia Like China, and McCain's Petulance
Over the weekend, Georgia rather than Iraq seemed set to become the dominant foreign policy issue of the 2008 election. The McCain camp sounded as if they were hoping so. On the surface, they had a point. McCain's proposal to eject Russia from the Group of 8 (G-8) looked wild and reckless six months ago. Today, it looks a lot more sensible. But a closer analysis of recent events yields a very different conclusion.
If Russia had continued its military assault all the way to Georgia's capital, Tbilisi, and overthrown the democratically elected government, as many feared a couple of days ago, this crisis would indeed have overshadowed almost everything else on the foreign policy agenda. A great power invading and occupying a neighbor over the objections of the rest of the civilized world would have been both an outrage and a world-historical event.
Instead, despite the protestations of right-wing commentators here at home, this crisis is likely to simmer down and before too long it will be just another item on the international agenda. All of this assumes that the French-led effort to establish a cease-fire holds and diplomacy starts to focus on the location of Russian and Georgian forces and possibly a new peacekeeping force established on the disputed territory of South Ossetia.
But there are still important questions that remain to be debated. Did the Bush administration mislead the Georgian government into thinking support for membership in NATO meant military support in a crisis? What should U.S. policy be toward Russia? And will John McCain be able to score political points out of this tragedy?
Complete answers to these questions may take months. But some conclusions can already be drawn. First and foremost, Georgia has become yet another example of stunning incompetence by the Bush administration. Let's remember it was Chancellor Merkel of Germany who became the power broker when leaders at the NATO summit debated the subject of Georgia this spring. The United States, which has traditionally led NATO on such subjects, failed to push through a so-called Membership Action Plan for Georgia. That failure, as much as anything, gave Moscow a crucial signal that the West could not muster a serious response should it crack down on its troublesome neighbor. And while we don't know exactly what was said by Washington to Georgia's President Saakashvilli, clearly he was not deterred from acting.
Whoever was responsible for the initial provocation, we can also conclude that Russia should pay a heavy price for its actions. The Russian government desperately wants the West to treat it as an important and respected great power. We can and should withhold that treatment. No diplomatic business as usual. And above all, we should reject as not worthy of consideration Russia's proposal last month for a new European security architecture.
In general, treat Russia like China, an important power whose policies and practices merit regular criticism. That doesn't mean cutting off relations. It just means realpolitick. Certainly, there should no more cozy Bush-Putin-soulmate treatment handed out by the next President. Some worry that a tougher policy would jeopardize cooperation from Russia on key issues like Iran's nuclear aspirations. But the truth is Russia is joining the international community in putting sanctions on Iran not as a favor to the United States. It doesn't want to see an Iranian nuclear bomb any more than we do.
As for the politics here at home, McCain may say his policy shows prescience. But what it really shows is petulance. John McCain, despite all his claims of unique experience, is just the wrong man to lead American foreign policy in the twenty-first century. Kicking Russia out of the G-8 a year ago wouldn't have made things better. It would have just caused a bigger split with our European allies. The same goes for his argument that we should have demanded that NATO give greater support for Georgia. We learned in recent weeks that when Europe and America are united, Russian opposition is neutered. On missile defense, NATO has come together and Russia's complaints have quieted. It was the split in NATO over Georgia, a split that a McCain approach would have widened, that gave Russia reason to believe the West would acquiesce in its military aggression.
Which brings us back to the politics of war. In the run-up to the Iraq debacle, John McCain was as outrageous as Donald Rumsfeld in denouncing our European allies for not supporting an early invasion. He has not been a consensus-builder in NATO. He has been a fiery defender of the neo-conservative line.
The next President must be someone who can remain calm in a crisis, not jump to conclusions, and build a consensus with our friends and allies. That is how America's interests will be best defended and promoted in the twenty-first century. McCain's record of discord with our European allies and his shoot from the hip approach on Russia demonstrate that if the phone rings at three a.m. he'll be giving the wrong answers.
James P. Rubin is now an adjunct Professor at Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs. He was Assistant Secretary of State and Chief Spokesman of the State Department during the Clinton Administration.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I agree with much that James Rubin writes,however,I take exception to the implication that Russia's aggression towards Georgia could have been prevented had the US pushed through a membership action plan for Georgia.
Russia having lost the cold war resembles to some extent post WW1 Germany resentful of its loss of possessions and attendant humiliatio
The failure as Mr Rubin puts it to push through a membership action plan for Georgia is actually an example of the very realpolitik he espouses.H
I agree, with the proviso that, before Georgia were to be admitted to NATO, the border dispute should also have been pushed through, and expeditiously resolved.
Finally, O'Bama could position himself as tough on Russia, but at the same time cautious on Saakashvili. Anybody who watched Saakashvili's interviews last days can _easily_ make a case against him: the guy makes no sense. Forget about Russian propaganda: just listen to him, he's incoherent. CNN's Blitzer asks him if Georian troops attacked Tshinvali. He doesn't say no and then he says something like there were very few civilians left in the city. If you didn't attack the city, why _defend_ yourself by claiming only few civilians were left there? Interview with BBC - just any interview, a journalist can make a name for himself just putting together Saakashvili's interviews and analyzing them. It's not that he contradicts facts (of course he does), he constantly contradicts himself.
Revealing Saakashvili as new Miloshevic - that's something to be at least looked at.
Looks to me as if that's exactly what Obama is trying to do. From an AP article dated yesterday:
"On Monday, Obama told the Russians 'There is no possible justification for these attacks.' At the same time, however, he said 'Georgia should refrain from using force in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and a political settlement must be reached that addresses the status of these disputed regions.' That was a clear acknowledgment that Georgia, too, needed to change course."
Honestly admitting being biased and being Russian, I still believe that O'Bama can (very cautiosly) use the situation. O'Bama's first statement on the conflict is balanced - he asked both side to cool down. McCain is anti-Russia and pro-Georgia from the very beginning. How does he magically know that Russia's claims of Georgian atrocities is propaganda? Does he watch only American TV and has never seen destroyed Tshinvali? Well, if yes, that's his problem. Would be nice to ask McCain if he contacted any serious sources in Pentagon before dismissing (from day one) allegations of Georgia's misconduct (to put it mildly). My guess: he immediately dismesses everything Russia claims. Not believing Russia is fine, not checking facts before talking is not so much.
Here are excerpts from Obama's statement:
http://www
"No matter how this conflict started, Russia has escalated it well beyond the dispute over South Ossetia and invaded another country. Russia has escalated its military campaign through strategic bombing and the movement of its ground forces into the heart of Georgia. There is no possible justification for these attacks.
I reiterate my call for Russia to stop its bombing campaign, to stop flights of Russian aircraft in Georgian airspace, and to withdraw its ground forces from Georgia. The Georgian government has proposed a cease-fire and the Russian government should accept it...
This is a clear violation of the sovereignty and internationally recognized borders of Georgia - the UN must stand up for the sovereignty of its members, and peace in the world..."
McCain speaks about "hundred of thousands of lives being taken". First, the count is at worst in 2-3 thousand. Not hundred of them. Second, most of them (estimate 1,600) are Osetians killed by Georgians, at least that's what Russia claims. Georgia's official data suggest 174 soldiers died, Georgian civilian population loss should be less because Russians never directly targeted the population or civilian objects.
O'Bama has a huge opening in view of the current Georgia situation. Example: On the first day of conflict Russia reports about huge number of Osetian civilians killed.
If you read McCain's first statement he calls for _immediate_ withdrawal of Russian troops and establishing "truly independent" peacekeeping force. Even if the reports were false (and they weren't) how does immediate withdrawing of the only peacekeeping force make sense? Who would possibly give any protection to civilians meanwhile? How did he magically know the reports were false (again: they weren't)
Obama will call for talks and trying to be friends . . . Russia doesn't care so what is the next move?
Here is a better question: What is blustering sabre rattling McCain's idea? Attack Russia?? With what? Russia knows exactly what a poor position that Bush has put the US in with a virtually completely tied down military in Iraq. They know we got nothing and they are right.
They are laughing in our face right now and there is nothing we can do about it. If you are going to demand that the Russians do something, you better have something to back it up. We don't.
So I ask again. Calling Russians names and making empty threats is your idea of effective leadership?
I listened to McCains fire-and-brimstone anti-Russian interview yesterday. This man is DANGEROUS. I was shocked to hear his expressions of deep-seated hatred again Russia. Such a person in the White House will sail us right into World War III. He is NOT George Bush who tried to get along with Putin, he is much worse.
Ahh, FYI . . . Russia doesn't like us either and they are just giving us a good test right now. This is only the beginning and talking to them . . . I don't think they care.
You are very wrong Unbias on this in my humble opinion.
I worked in Russia and know for a fact on can get along with them .
You need smart people that know how to listen and study Russian politics.
When we went into Iraq and Russia lost there oil contracts they understood what the Bush Cheny agabda was and did not like it.
We could of changed everything by making sure there oil contracts were kept but instead we were lowlifes that allowed our country to be led into hello for personal reasons and oil. Everyone already know this , and if you think is so bad you are WRONG big time....
The next president must actually be the president. Neither candidate is president , so their rhetoric is useless at best and potentially destabilizing at worst. The responsible thing would be for both to be quiet and let those who have the actual authority and power to handle the situation act. Americans should ponder NATO expansion and that Georgia in NATO w ould obligate America to defend Georgia under attack. Those who blame Georgia forget that Ossetia is part of Georgia so Georgia was maneuvering within its own country. Russia has invaded another, sovereign country.
The psychologizing which assigns attitudes to Russia such as "desperately wanting to be treated as an important power" is nonsense and unworthy of a professor. Russia has a history of imperial aspiration and domination in central Europe and central Asia. Chechnya was not the work of a bully whose problems can be solved by inflating its fragile self-esteem. Try a longer historical view.
John McC and his neo-con rhetoric is equally annoying. The neo-cons inflate their rhetoric and the danger is that they believe their own nonsense. Russia is a nuclear power so there is nothing that America can do to counter Russian military moves unless we want to risk nuclear confrontation. Check out the Cuban missile crisis, because history has returned! The US is no longer the sole world super-power as the neo-cons and eveyone else really assumed after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Yes, but you know McCain MUST respond because he's so desparate to look "presidential" in matters of foreign policy and if Obama hadn't responded he would have been tarred and feathered for being spineless, inexperienced on foreign policy, etc, etc. He has already been criticized by McCain supporters and McCain himself for not having a "clear and strong statement" earlier than he did. OF course, Obama knows he isn't president yet, is on vacation and - gasp - took a little time to get more information before making a statement.
My point here is that i agree with you, but it isn't realistic to expect the media not to demand foreign policy statements from teh candidates
If there is no man ready to lead in America, let's hire a President abroad! My candidate would be French Presdident Sarcozy. He knows how to outsmart the Russian Bear, poking it in then underbody instead of in the eyes. Let's offer him a job, along with the American passport.
"Those who blame Georgia forget that Ossetia is part of Georgia so Georgia was maneuvering within its own country. Russia has invaded another, sovereign country."
What in your mind defines "part of"?
rmreddicks,
Part of as defined like so, Texas is part of the U.S.A, Georgia is part of the U.S.A., North Carolina is part of the U.S.A., Alabama is part of the U.S.A etc etc. You may see where I am going with this. They may not like it either but yet they are still "Stuck with it". Too Bad for them.
You are so spot on! The words of Georgia's president directed at McCain : "it's time to follow his words with actions", confirm everything you say.
Remember when Bush "unsigned" the ABM Treaty with Russia in 2001? Before the 9/11 attacks? This didn't help matters...
You saw the Russians fighting? I must have missed that. Let me remind you that if it wasn't for the Russian soldier you would be speaking German right now. The Russian soldier is able to do his job with inferior logistics & without regular supplies of hamburgers & ice cream. Unlike some armies I could name.
Kind of reminds me of when Iraq invaded Kuwaitt and all the stories we heard about Iraqi soldiers knocking over incubators with babies in them...whi
Without neutral observers on the ground, we do not know the reality of what is actually happening in Georgia.
The incubator story was false, but thousands of Kuwaitis were killed and tortured, and the country was extensively looted.
Only after the 2003 invasion of Iraq was the fate of 600 missing Kuwaitis revealed--600 Kuwaitis had been taken to Iraq and later executed in cold blood.
Eason Jordan of CNN wrote of what happened to a Kuwaiti woman who spoke to CNN. She was captured and beaten everyday for a month. Then her chopped-up body was delivered to her parents' doorstep in a hefty bag. This was a common occurrence, too. He didn't write about this until after Saddam was deposed in 2003, because he didn't want CNN to lose access to Iraq. So CNN was complicit in covering up atrocities to keep access.
Right on Ivann! I'm LMAO at your astute commentary.
Didn't Georgia INVADE it's neighbor NATION South Ossetia before Russia entered the fray in South Ossetia and they drove the Georgian Troops out of South Ossetia?
What Nation is McCain and his lobbyist for Georgia supporting?? Seems to me George started this mess by invading SOUTH OSSETIA a sovereign nation.
Actually, according to Wikipedia, "The independence has not been diplomatically recognized by any member of the United Nations – which continues to regard South Ossetia as part of Georgia."
Georgia appears to have been trying to curb some of the rampant lawlessness in the region when it got slapped down by the Russians.
McCain's prior meddling would only have made the situation worse if he and his lobbyist cohorts had succeeded. He gets scarier all the time (and it's not just him - if he wins, we get the whole bunch of neocons again).
POG thought he had USA on his payroll, do to McCain's Lobbyist who works for Georgia.. from what i hear
why would POG ask USA for "deeds" ?
South Ossetia's standing is precisely like that of Kosovo before independence. Russia has been pointing to exactly that precedent. And like it or not, agree or not, they are correct.
it seems to me like Russia started a rebellion and used it as a excuse to try to gobble the whole nation of Georgia.
Mr.Rubin,I will not allow this, and try to correct it whenever I read it...GEORG
Are you trying to excuse Georgia because they're on our side?
Did anyone else see this on FOX yesterday?
Fox news was talking about Russia invading Georgia and the devastation it was reeking.
Shepperd Smith came on with an interview of a mother and a little girl "from Georgia" to "their" terrible account. The cute little girl, looked to be around 12 or so, talked about how scared she was etc. and then Smith asked the mom to tell her story. The mom then corrected Smith and said THEY were from Ossentia, not Georgia! She said GEORGIA attacked Ossentia first and killed innocent people, her house was burnt to the ground and they had no place to live. She said Russia saved them by attacking Georgia, and that Saakasvili
How quaint.
Obama is saying the same things Mr Rubin did here. Obama is condemning Russia for its actions.
Georgia started the killing and forgot that they are attacking Russia. This a warning from Russia to all its neighbours expressing DON'T MESS UP WITH RUSSIA. The writer of this article wants to reactivate the COLD WAR.
No. S Ossetia is part of Georgia. It's not a nation.
How do you define "is a part of"?
Treat Russia like China? Does this means borrow zillions from them, and import zillions of trinkets?
The FACT is that Russia has every right to be secure in its borders and to ensure that no foreign countries or potential enemies get to threaten it. It is absurd to think that any country would allow a major power to put bases next door to it. The US claims the Monroe doctrine, so there is no reason why the Russians should not demand similar things.
The FACT also is that Georgia thought is was just fine to invade and occupy Iraq in concert with the US, but they don't much like it when it happens to them. TOUGH! It was their own fault for attacking Russia without warning, and now they want the US GIs to fight for them.
That's not what Obama is saying. He condemns Russia's actions.
I WONDER WHY OBAMA IS NOT CONDEMNING GEORGIA FOR THROW THE FIRST PUNCH!
MAYBE HE IS HAVING TOO MUCH PUNCH ON VACATION TO PROPERLY COMMENT ON THE GEORGIA-RUSSIA HOSTILITIES.
Hopefully Obama knows better, but no doubt his campaign is concerned about his appearing as if he supports the Russians. Obama initially came out with a balanced statement but toughened his rhetoric once McCain attacked him for allegedly supporting Moscow's line. Sad to say, but Obama is just a politician concerned about appearances and not being caught in a sideshow on the road to the White House.
Russia can take on us and beat us right now.
We don't have the resources to protect ourselves much less Georgia.
America has nuclear weapons - Russia is willing to use theirs against us - are we willing to use ours against them???
Everyone best hope it doesn't come down to a shooting war between the US and Russia = American loss.
lol have you seen the russians fighting?? they looked like a bunch of noobs on the battlefield, but the fact that we r in 2 wars is like haveing a chain on a dog, we can get bullied but cant do anything about it.... for we r trapped in our yard ( mainly a bs war in iraq )
Where did you ever see them fighting?
"Russia is willing to use theirs against us": Evidence please?
Nah. They couldn't even hit that pipeline they dropped a bunch of bombs on. They spend less on their military than France does. No one wants to get in a nuke exchange, but as far as conventional forces go, they don't have much.
You think maybe they didn't WANT to hit the pipeline? Just maybe hint?
Having a flashback to the 70's, are we?
America has plenty of arsonals and weaponry. Don't be fooled to think we can't defend ourselves just because our military is stretched. PUSH COME TO SHOVE ....we can pull out some non-deployable units right here at home as well as battalions and brigades from places like South Korean, Japan, Bosnia, etc. Our naval defensive is still Number 1 on the planet. We've got "toys" that can do amazing things that haven't come off the shelves yet! McCain is itching for our soldiers to use! Putin would get his azz handed to him! Believe that!
How is a country that large and full of resources not important as your blurb suggested? Seems pollyanish to a great degree.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
