:: Govind Talwalkar

US tangled in rings it drew around Russia

Govind Talwalkar

There is now a ceasefire agreement in Georgia, but it is vague. Hence, a period of uncertainty is bound to follow. Whatever is in store for the future, as matters stand today, it is clear that both, George W. Bush and Georgia are the losers in the game.

The US media and administration officials have put all the blame on the Russian leadership. They accuse the Russians of mounting aggression against a small but thriving democracy. But they avoid admitting that the tragedy came about because of the policy of aggression initiated by the President of Georgia, Mikheil Saakashvili, who was correctly assessed as "headstrong and erratic" by the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel.

In the last few days, Mr Saakashvili has received a lot of exposure in the US media. He enjoys giving long press interviews everyday, where, instead of making statements, he rants and harangues.

In the US, he is seen as an ideal Democrat. But it is a fact that he shut down a TV outlet belonging to a member of one of the Opposition parties. He promised his people to regain the lost territory and wants to emulate the medieval king "David the Builder". For a long time, American commentators have been coming down on Prime Minister Putin for reviving the intense nationalism of Russians. But the fact is that Mr Saakashvili is doing the same in Georgia.

While it is true that he won two elections, he is no defender of democracy of which he talks so much. It was he who ordered a missile attack on the breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abakhazia on the night of August 7. Georgia never controlled these regions and people here have always opposed to be governed by Georgia. Between Russia and Georgia, they prefer Russia. In fact, most are Russians. In the last few years hundreds of insurgents have been granted Russian citizenship.

Michael Dobbs, a journalist, objecting to the bellicose language of several armchair Generals, gives his own experience of Georgian rule in South Ossetia. He was in Tskhinvali in March 1991, shortly after the city was occupied by Georgian militia units loyal to Zviad Gamsakhurdina, the first freely elected leader of Georgia. One of his first acts as Georgian President was to terminate the political autonomy that had been granted to the Republic’s 90,000-strong Ossetian minority under the Stalinist Constitution. Afterwards, several Ossetian monuments were demolished and towns ransacked. Even the Ossetian national theatre was trashed.

The last President of the Soviet Union, Mr Mikhail Gorbachev, in an article in the Wall Street Journal reminded readers that Georgia’s separatist leaders tried to abolish the autonomy of these disputed regions and whenever Georgian leaders tried to impose their rule, the situation worsened.

This time, however, the Georgian President went further and his military attacked the capital city of South Ossetia and Tskhinvali leading to the deaths of about 2,000 people and displacing several thousand. This invited Russian retaliation. They sent tanks and aircraft and shelled and bombarded several cities, in the process destroying the port of Poti. Russians even went to Gori, Stalin’s birthplace.

This was condemned by several officials of the Bush administration as an "out of proportion reaction" by the Russians. John McCain, the Republican presumptive nominees in the presidential race, admonished the Russians and said that civilised countries do not use military force, they negotiate. Mr McCain is a strong supporter of the Iraq war. He conveniently forgot that the whole world condemned the extraordinary use of force by the US in Iraq, but has the audacity to criticise this Russian version of "shock and awe".

President Bush told the Russians that the US wants the territorial integrity of Georgia to be preserved. Secretary of state Condoleezza Rice and defence secretary Robert Gates, striking an ominous note, said that US-Russia relations would be adversely affected and that it would take a long time to restore them. Dr Rice has reminded the Russians that it is not 1968 when the Soviet tanks rolled into Prague.

It would have been better if Dr Rice and others, including Mr Bush, remember this as well: The US could do nothing to help the Czechs then, and now in Georgia, its options are even fewer. It cannot go to war with Russia as Americans would not like to have another war on their hands, and that too for Georgia. Moreover, Russia is now economically-strong and because of its ample energy resources, it is in a position to dictate terms to Europe. Because of this, Europe would not like to antagonise the Russians.

In 1956, Hungarians rose in revolt against the Soviet-supported regime and the US and the West did not come to their rescue. In a recently published book 1956: The Hungarian Revolution and War for Independence, several Hungarian historians and political scientists have analysed the situation in those days. But it is Dr Kissinger’s lengthy introduction that is very critical of the Eisenhower administration and, more so, of the propaganda unleashed by Radio Free Europe — for giving false hopes to Hungarians and ultimately betraying them.

Nothing better has been done in the present crisis: Successive administrations of Mr Clinton and Mr Bush have all along adopted the attitude of indifference, if not hostility, towards Russia. The Bush administration has forgotten that Russians gave it valuable information about the Taliban and also helped resolve its dispute with Iran.

Instead of cooperating with Russia, the Bush administration actively adopted the policy of encirclement. That is why the three Baltic neighbours of Russia were accepted as members of Nato, and Georgia and Ukraine are to follow suit. Russia is denied admission to the WTO. But it is all right if former Soviet satellites are provided with financial and technical assistance and are armed to the teeth. The Georgian Army is trained by the US and Israel and the country is awash with modern weapons. This has encouraged the impetuous Georgian President to try and grab the breakaway regions.

US followed the same policy with regard to Pakistan. Military aid was given with a view that Pakistan would be a partner in the struggle against the Soviet Union. But Pakistan had no such ability, nor did it have any inclination to fight with the Russians. It used the military aid against India.

The Georgian leader was confident that the US would come to his rescue and get his chestnuts out of the fire. He is now frustrated. Nobody but he himself is to blame for his misadventure.