A number of months ago at Desicritics, the daughter site to Blogcritics Magazine, I wrote an analysis of why no country should trust the United States. It was to be a series, and I was going to use Israel as the example. But we have a far better example to see unfolding in front of us today—Gruzia, known in the west as Georgia.
Americans generally do not care about what is going on outside their borders; they can afford to involve their minds with such nonsense as American Idol and the like, or scream themselves hoarse over their favorite Olympians in China. Or they can retreat behind that ever familiar mantra, "That's politics, and I don't believe in politics". However, those of us who live outside of the United States cannot afford to ignore how the American regime routinely betrays nations that would be its allies.
Nevertheless, the evidence of American betrayal is at hand, and those who ignore this, as Americans have routinely ignored the base betrayals of their government for decades, do so at their own peril. As we say in Hebrew, damám 'al roshám - their blood is on their own heads.
So, let's have a brief recap of events. Before we do, though, let's make clear one single point. While the United States can be looked at as a provocateur here, the aggressive intent of Russia against Gruzia predates any involvement by the United States. Indeed, Russian aggression against Gruzia predates the independence of the United States altogether and is as old, perhaps, as the Romanov dynasty itself.
There are two provinces of Gruzia that are effectively breaking away from the central government in T'bilsi, and are doing so with the active backing of the successor state to the Soviet Union and Russian Empire, the Russian Federation. The dispute over these provinces extends at least 15 years, back to the early 1990's. There has been a long history of bullying of Gruzia by Russia, even when the less than sober Yeltzin was drinking his way through the Russian presidency and Russia was a weak state with no real leader. After having to deal with aggressive Russian moves against it in the 1700's, Gruzia was annexed to the Russian Empire nearly two hundred years ago, and suffered Russian rule until the breakup of the Russian Empire in 1917.
Ivan Simich, writing from Belgrade for Matangi Tonga On-line wrote an excellent summary of events that have lead up to today's situation. From his article:
We may recall the genesis of the current situation which has been precipitated by the 1918-1920 Georgian-Ossetian conflict. Later, in 1922 the South Ossetian Autonomous Oblast was created after Soviet occupation of Georgia. In the eighties, the conflict was followed by rising nationalism in the former Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic, the South Ossetian desire for greater autonomy, Ossetian demands for unification with Russia's North Ossetia, and persistent Ossetian declarations of independence.According to Global Politician, the present crisis, simmering for years, was provoked in early May of this year, when long-standing tensions between Russia and Gruzia over the breakaway Abkhazia and South Ossetia regions in Gruzia flared dangerously as each country accused the other of provocative actions that might bring about war. Russia moved troops and armor into Abkhazia during the first week of May responding to a Gruzian military buildup along the unofficial border with the breakaway region of the Caucasus republic. Gruzia had warned of military action if Russian forces were to interfere. According to the article, written 14 May:
The Kremlin said the deployment was allowed under a 1994 cease-fire that stationed Russian troops in the region to prevent the kind of fighting that broke out between Georgia and “separatists” after the fall of the Soviet Union. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said any Georgian military action would lead to "retaliatory actions," but stressed at a meeting with European Union ministers that Russia "isn't planning to go to war."That was then.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Joanne Huspek
You're right, Ruvy. We Americans are a complacent people. Some of us don't notice what is in our own back yards, much less overseas. This isn't a recent development; I noticed it when living in Germany in 1975. Sadly, human nature is such that not much changes.
The layers of our "foreign" policy are so complex, I doubt that many could understand what is going on even with detailed descriptions. And the rest? Well, they probably don't want to believe.
2 - Ruvy
Joanne,
Thank you for your kind words.... Baronius complains elsewhere that I complain of the very same trait you admit to, asking "what can we do". What you can do is to at least be aware. As you've said elsewhere commenting on my articles, it takes a big girl to admit she is wrong.
You've done that. And reading this, painful as it is, gets you to be more aware.
The big thing I ask you to be aware of is this. Events occurring here, from the Caucasus down to the Gulf of Hormuz west to Tripoli on the Lebanese coast, are all of a piece. However you view them from your own perspective is your own business. But view them as one of a piece. They are all tightly related.
3 - Ruvy
UPDATE...UPDATE...UPDATE...UPDATE...UPDATE
Russian aggression in the Caucasus continues unabated as the Americans "plan" aid.
As we see from this AP report filed at 08:45 Israel Summer Time, the Russian army is on its way to T'bilsi, violating the cease-fire they agreed to. From the article:
So, as predicted here, the United States government is making noise - from the article:or her part, Rice said: With the Russian army one hours drive from T'bilsi, it appears hard to believe that any aid will arrive in time without the danger of a military confrontation of some kind.
As I pointed out in comment #2 above, the events in the region must be considered as all of a piece.
As I pointed out in my first article on this invasion, this conflagration in the Caucasus may just be the flame that sets off the explosive powder laid all over the Middle East over the last three years
4 - Dave Nalle
Frankly, this is far more of a substantial response than I expected from the US much less the Europeans. It may be too late, but at least it looks like they're taking the situation seriously and aren't choosing to delude themselves about what Russia's long term intentions are. Georgia may not be salvagable, but I suspect that Russia is going to lose a lot of credibility over this if the MSM doesn't manage to whitewash it all.
Dave
5 - Ruvy
But Dave,
You and everyone else writing on this only considers Gruzia, Russia and oil - you all fail to consider the larger issues at stake in addition to the locus of the immediate fighting and the locus of the immediate money lost (or gained, if you are looking at it from the Russian POV).
The refusal of the United States to countenance an Israeli attack on Iran only makes the Russian threat to further arm Iran more credible, forcing (considering the gutlessness of a regime that has no faith in the mission of Israel) Israel to leave Georgia hanging to twist in the wind along with us - as we have no real choice but to wait for the next missile attack from the Arabs - and the promise of late "humanitarian aid" from the States.
In THIS light, consider the even worse fate of Lebanese under the thumb of HizbAllah and this article in the Daily Star. From the article:
Remember the St. Bernard pup bringing aid to Gruzia - Israel? It's all of a piece, Dave, all of a piece.
6 - Ruvy
Also Dave, looking at all this in a light that is broader than the Caucasus mountains - consider this Debkafiles exclusive reportJumblatt deserts Lebanon’s pro-Western camp, signs pact with pro-Iranian Hizballah.
HizbAllah is the creature of Iran, which is increasingly the creature of Russia. Which is extending its power openly in Gruzia, and covertly in Syria-Lebanon.From the article:
In addition, we can expect to see, in the not too distant future, the defection of Israeli Druze from the IDF.
All of a piece.
7 - wahoo
#1
"The layers of our "foreign" policy are so complex, I doubt that many could understand what is going on even with detailed descriptions."
Complex?
Hardly...
It's simple imperialism.
The neocons want to emulate the Roman Empire.
8 - Polemicscat
Of all the instances of ingratitude I can think of, Ruvy's takes the prize. There wouldn't be an Israel if the US had not supported it since its beginning in the 1950's. Everybody expects the United States to save them when they get in trouble.
Sure, the US has made bad decisions at times--what country hasn't?---and it has cozied up to some unsavory characters like Stalin, but in doing so, the US saved Western Civilization.
It wouldn't be out of line to hear a "thank you" from beggars who are always hanging around with their hands held out.
9 - Dave Nalle
It certainly doesn't help when so many people are simpleminded politicized reactionaries like Wahoo. Foreign policy works a lot better when people actually think about situations and don't just spout talking points and catch phrases.
Dave
10 - Ruvy
Of all the instances of ingratitude I can think of, Ruvy's takes the prize. There wouldn't be an Israel if the US had not supported it since its beginning in the 1950's. Everybody expects the United States to save them when they get in trouble.
BULLSHIT!!
Polemicscat, you don't want to get into a pissing match over history with me. It'll wind up being my realities and backed up facts versus the delusions you can drag forth.
I was born in America and lived a number of decades there. I understand well the attitude of self-indulgent belly button gazing Americans tend to practice - particularly in the Mid-west, where I lived for two decades. In addition to that, I studied the history of the Jewish people in detail, including the nature of the culture, and the way Jewish society developed in various parts of the world.
For the moment, I'll eschew beating you over the head with the realities of American "support" of Israel - I have other things to deal with right now. But feel free to look up my author profiles here at Blogcritics Magazine - both under Ruvy and Ruvy in Jerusalem. In reading the 108 articles there, I'm sure you'll find at least a few of the items I'm talking about.
We'll leave aside my religious bent and biases for just a moment and put it this way for you. America has a decades long record of betraying and abandoning allies that rely on them. Israel is just one of many countries, and I happen to live here; and I'm not afraid of calling bullshit on American policy. That's nothing new to me. Heck, I've been doing that since the American regime decided to waste thousands of lives in the swamps of 'Nam.
Later!
11 - Condor
"Heck, I've been doing that since the American regime decided to waste thousands of lives in the swamps of 'Nam." Ruvy
Ruvy,
You mean JFK and LBJ, right? The darlings of the left? Oh my, that's two hands off subjects you have mentioned in one sitting.
1. Israel (Can't discredit them here, or face being labels anti-semitic...)
2. JFK, (Can't discredit him either, without facing the wrath of the JFK cult).
But I will say this. Ameicans are anti-semitic, after all... if you look to the quarry from which the semites were dug... and the rock from which they were cleft it will reveal that
1. Semites are decendants of Shem
2. Abraham had off spring... those from Hagar (Ishmael), and those from Sarah (the 12 tribes of Israel. Ishamel being the forefather of the Arabs.
Which leads to the conclusion that since the Arabs and the Israelists are half brothers. Attacks, both oral and physical are anti-semitic. Where's the love?
My, my, the world is a strange place.
12 - Ruvy
Condor,
Come on, when have I used the term anti-Semitic? There are a few thousand of my comments littering the comment thread under my two monikers here, and when I've used the term anti-Semitic, I've used it to explain why I don't use it - I prefer Jew-hatred. It gets right down to the point. None of this garbage about Arabs also being Semites to cornfuse matters for the yahoos.
Also, aside from getting Heloise's panties in a knot, what's wrong with going after a conservative Democrat like JFK (who, like so many other politicians, also slept around) or a populist Democrat like LBJ?
13 - dadas
Russia forverer. RUSSIA! THE GREATEST!
14 - Sam Johnson
Dave:
"It certainly doesn't help when so many people are simpleminded politicized reactionaries like Wahoo. Foreign policy works a lot better when people actually think about situations and don't just spout talking points and catch phrases."
Foreign policy works BEST when people actually think about situations and don't just spout talking points and catch phrases -- as Dave does -- spouting talking points and catch phrases.
How about addressing the point made...
"It's simple imperialism.
The neocons want to emulate the Roman Empire."
15 - Dave Nalle
Sam, the 'point' is silly and not worthy of addressing. It's become a conspiracy theory and a joke. It's not my job to refute the ridiculous, the burden rests on you to prove that the US is engaged in imperialism in any meaningful way.
Dave
16 - Sam Johnson
"prove that the US is engaged in imperialism in any meaningful way."?
So the issue is what is meaningful?
17 - Dave Nalle
No, the issue is what is the US doing that is imperialistic.
I'll help you by defining imperialism. It is the process of conquering or taking control of other countries to increase the wealth and power of your own country.
Where is the US doing this?
Dave
18 - Ruvy
[Ruvy raps his quarter meter stick on the desk, calling for order in the class]
Everyone gets tainted by the corrupt methods for accomplishing things considered so "in" in modern Israel's secular culture - the culture of the "fixer". Secrets are lost by the careless mentality of lo m'shané "it doesn't make a difference", the governing standard of quality control in much of the IDF. And the other governing standard, na'asé et ze chíkchok "lets get it done, chop chop!!" manages to cost lives as well...Boys and girls, it is not a matter of American imperialism. Imperial authority can be asserted in many different ways, a fact that the resident history "professor" here, Davey Nalle, tends to ignore. We have three lessons for our Sunday school class, today.
The first comes from Ynetnews.com, in Israel, from an article a day or two old. Source: Secret IDF material went unguarded in Georgia
Lead Paragraph: Former Israeli soldier returns disillusioned from training Georgian soldiers for company owned by Brig. Gen. Hirsch in preparation for war with Russia; says confidential army material such as charts, officers' names was revealed to foreign troops
The Israeli aid was carried on by a private corporation with the assent and cooperation of the IDF. The employees were former soldiers. But companies in it for the money aren't always careful about other considerations. From the article:
The second lesson is longer, and nastier. A fellow at Desicritics related this in one of his comments there.
regarding so-called "allies", who are used, abused and then discarded by the imperial powers, there's an interesting anectdote recounted in a piece somewhere by Tariq Ali.
After Pakistan was used as an "ally" during the Russian invasion of occupation of Afghanistan, and when the whole thing was over (precipitating the birth of the Taliban, supported to the hilt by the US administration) the Pakistanis expected some "rewards" for being loyal "allies". As is well known, the US administration had better diversions after this one. Apparently a Pakistani general complained bitterly to a high ranking US administration official about his country being ignored after they had served their role as "allies" (useful idiots??). According to Tariq Ali, the response of the US official was: (paraphrase)
"Allies? Allies? You were never our "allies"". Pakistan was simply a condom we used to enter Afghanistan. We all know what happens to used condoms, don't we".
Not sure if this incident really ever happened or not, but even if it did not, this is usually the pattern and the result for all those who willingly line up to serve as allies for one imperial project or the other
That quote is a most appropriate comment which summarizes the entire situation that Israel, and now Gruzia find themselves in. Don't you think we should send it off to "crime minister" Ehud Olmert and the hottie panting after his seat in the cabinet, the lovely Tzipora Livni? Perhaps, amending condom to sanitary napkin would bring the point closer to home for the lovely Ms. Livni.
The final lesson comes from a press conference. The same source at Desicritics relates,
But he (Saakashvili) did tell off Condoleeza Rice in the press conference yesterday. He did not mince words against those who had egged him on (the US, France, NATO), even though of course he criticized Russia too. Did anyone notice the sullen, ashen expression on Rice's face last night?
Saakashvili didn't get the State Deptartment memo that when the US government shoves a stick up your
assholeanus, you are supposed to smile in gratitude, and tell everyone what great friends the Americans are. I hope that Rice had one in her "purse" to give to the man. And hope that Rice had some Woolite with her to clean off the pee pee stains Saakashvili left on her skirt....The assignment for today is to draft a telegram/e-mail to the Israeli "crime minister" and to those who would succeed him on the dangers of entanglement with the United States, using the quote above. You have half an hour. Afterwards, Mrs. Birnbaum [Ruvy nods at Mrs. Birnbaum's son, Teddy] was nice enough to donate a three whole kosher pizza pies for the class to enjoy. Let's all remember to wash our hands and to say the appropriate blessing before eating the pizza, "boré miné mezonót".
You may begin.
[Ruvy gets up and goes to the teacher's room to prepare himself a cup of coffee]
19 - Ruvy
Driving home the connectedness of the way regional strategy is planned by the Russians, Debkafiles reports that Russia is considering nuclear missiles for Syria, Mediterranean, Baltic. From the article:
The Russians are only adding to the explosive powder and to the power of the explosion of war when this keg is ignited for real20 - Jingo
Dave:
"I'll help you by defining imperialism. It is the process of conquering or taking control of other countries to increase the wealth and power of your own country.
Where is the US doing this?"
How about IRAQ... for starters.
21 - Ruvy
Jingo,
I'm not defending American policy by any means, but using Iraq as an example of imperialism is, well just not appropriate. Imperialism is supposed to gain you control over something to your profit.
America's adventure in Iraq has nearly destroyed the American economy, forcing the American government to sink billions into the swamps of the Fertile Crescent. If Americans (other than some oil companies and banks) are benefiting, how do you explain the situation where America is so stretched out that she cannot respond forcefully to the Russians?
My suggesting to you and others is that you not waste time in arguments over labels. Imperialism is a mere label, and it is not so evil a label as to waste effort attempting to plaster to someone. I know Americans who would be proud to be called imperialists and who bemoan American inefficiency at this effort....
Once upon a time, I was one of them.
22 - Jingo
"Imperialism is supposed to gain you control over something to your profit."
The fact that it didn't work in Iraq to any significant degee doesn't change the original intent.
Recall -- "Mission Accomplished"?
23 - Dave Nalle
Jingo, I usually refrain from calling people morons, but you're making it difficult.
The US has done nothing but spend money and lives in Iraq. We have not gained any profit or any territory, nor was that ever our intention, nor is there any possibility of that being the ultimate outcome.
So either your grip on the facts of the Iraq war is flawed or you don't quite understand the definition of imperialism.
Dave
24 - Jordan Richardson
We have not gained any profit or any territory, nor was that ever our intention, nor is there any possibility of that being the ultimate outcome.
Are you purposely ignoring the numerous private contractors? I'm really not sure who you mean by "we," but the notion of war profiteers isn't exactly secretive.
Most people with even the most cursory knowledge of the subject are aware of Bechtel's enormous no-bid contract worth $2.4 billion (and Bechtel's failure to actually reconstruct anything decent), Custer Battles (representing the most significant of at least 70 cases of fraud against Iraq-related American war profiteers), General Dynamics, Nour USA Ltd. (a company created just after the war began with the purpose of providing security along the oil pipeline with the help of Ahmed Chalabi, another charming opportunist), Chevron, and ExxonMobil.
All of the above companies have profited immensely from the occupation and from the war in Iraq. Notice I haven't even brought up Halliburton or Blackwater, but I figured those would be so obvious that even you'd know that they're carving up Iraq for profit, Dave.
So unless you meant something entirely different by "we," I'm curious to know how you stand behind the notion that the US isn't profiting from Iraq.
As for the intention to invade in the first place, any concrete explanation of that is so convoluted and muddled by rhetoric and changing positions and empty theories that it's hard to navigate any of it anymore.
25 - Ruvy
Jordan,
You did read my response to the poorly named Jingo. Perhaps I ought to have said, "If Americans (other than some oil companies, banks and war profiteers) are benefiting, how do you explain the situation where America is so stretched out that she cannot respond forcefully to the Russians?"
His insistence on trying to pin the imperialist label on America for its intervention in Iraq is not moronic because the intent of the States was not imperialistic. The States went into Iraq to unhorse a dictator and they did so. I frankly do not see how "building democracy" differs significantly from "defending the rights of self-determination of South Ossertians and Abhazians" that the Russians claim to be doing now. Both were and are lies.
Jingo's insistence on pinning the "imperialist" label on the States is moronic because aside from the oil companies, banks and war profiteers, the war has not benefited the people of the United States at all. Indeed the opposite has happened.
But all this canoodling over Iraq is something of a waste of time, in my humble opinion. The danger to you, me and Dave is the fact that Putin was trained in the elite Spetznaz unit of the Soviet military, is a blackbelt and the former head of the KGB. He won't fight a cold war, but a hot war - a war designed to gain mastery over Europe and the United States. There are many ways to do this, and two have already been demonstrated. One was force majeure against an alleged ally, Gruzia.
This AP article posted at AOL News about an hour ago talks of how "NATO foreign ministers suspended their formal contacts with Russia as punishment. Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said "there can be no business as usual with Russia under present circumstances." But the NATO allies, bowing to pressure from European nations that depend heavily on Russia for energy, stopped short of more severe penalties being pushed by the United States. The Russian Ambassador to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, dismissed the impact of the emergency meeting in Brussels, Belgium: "The mountain gave birth to a mouse."
The headline described how the Russians seized American Humvees scheduled to be shipped out. The Russians are making the Americans look like nitwits and fools and everyone can see it. And we see the Russian mastery over Europe already being demonstrated.
Putin is no drunk stumbling through the halls of power with two buddies sharing a three ruble bottle of vodka.
He is the most dangerous man on the planet.