War between Russia, Georgia didn't have to happen Once again, U.S. officials failed to read the signs correctly or to commit diplomatic resources.

August 31, 2008|By Spencer B. Meredith III

A war between Russia and Georgia could have been prevented.

Last year, I discussed the possibility of such a conflict at the U.S. State Department in reviewing my research in Georgia as a Fulbright scholar. At the meeting were members of the intelligence, policy planning, and international aid bureaucracies. Unfortunately, the prediction that war could soon come to the region was rebuffed. Several people implied that I did not have the skill to conduct meaningful research.

Unknown to many in the United States until recently, the conflict between the Georgian government and separatists in South Ossetia and Abkhazia is not about religion or ideology, as some have contended. All areas in the region are predominantly Orthodox Christian, differing in who they ascribe as the leader of their respective churches. The real problem is historical interpretations and imperial control.

Story continues below.

Abkhazia and South Ossetia share histories with groups in Russia and Georgia, but differ with both on who maintained the rightful power center in the region. Claims of past glory center on the location of the fabled Golden Fleece and the first Christian missionary to the Caucasus.

More recent events complicated matters: The old Soviet Union's divide-and-conquer policies elevated different nationalities for a period of time, only to remove them from power later on. Ethnic cohesions are also confused after decades of Georgian immigration and acculturation.

Georgian elite perceptions of U.S. and Russian foreign-policy directions are also key to understanding the current crisis.

The "Rose Revolution" in 2003 changed Georgia's international orientation from Russia to the United States. The Saakashvilli administration made it clear that Georgia was not simply leaning toward the West, but was willing to commit itself to American-style democracy, capitalism, and military cooperation in areas not vital to Georgia's national security.

Thousands of Georgian soldiers have participated in missions in Iraq, a clear signal that despite Russia's refusal of support, Georgia is part of the "coalition of the willing."

The Georgians gambled that by supporting a globally unpopular war, purchasing vast amounts of U.S. military equipment, pursuing NATO membership, and proclaiming themselves a bastion of democracy surrounded by authoritarian regimes, they would receive the support needed to reclaim their wayward regions from Russian influence and separatist shenanigans.

1 | 2 | Next »
|
|
|
|
|