Russia's next step

The Laughing Cavalier

It is too late. The Rubicon was crossed when Germany signalled its conversion from independence to to energy-dependent client state of Moscow by blocking Georgia's entry to Nato.

Nigel Barlow

James,
One thing that I don't understand in all this is why the US is so insistant on wanting Georgia to become part of NATO.Russia has a past history stretching back in the 1800's of wanting a buffer zone between it and the West.Why should we wish to alter the status quo?

TGF UKIP

James, I am extremely suspicious of not only the German attitude on this but the French too.

The Sarkozy supposed ceasefire deal was characterised by John Bolton in the Telegraph as worse than Chamberlain's at Munich and giving Russia virtually all it wanted.

Do we know yet to what extent that characterisation is accurate?

mckenzie

Any future Russian invasion? To the Russians, who have just pacified the place in less than a week, this would be a funny statement.

Augustus

It is not just a question of Georgia leaving the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), it will probably include the Ukraine and other former Soviet republics apart from the Baltic states.

Whether the withdrawal plan holds is really a question of whether Russia again feels called upon to protect the Ossetians from further attacks by Georgia. If stability returns to the region a further flexing of muscles seems unlikely. Russia appears to hanker after respect, both in military as well as political matters.

Nicholas

I think we should send an expeditionary force to the Crimea, to seize Sevastopol and fire a warning shot in front of Ivan's snowy boots. Oh, I forgot, we are too busy in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Pete

I may be wrong but the feeling I get from reading across the board is that Russia is a nation that is desperately trying to get some pride back after the collapse of it's empire.

In order to get that, it needs to meet a strong challenger head to head and at least agree to a draw. As a nation it can take pride from having done that.

After that, things can be calmly discussed and negotiated.

The last thing we need just now are EU wishy washy Liberalists confusing everything and starting a war through unintended consequences as a result.

Pete, Scotland

Another thing I may be getting wrong here is that Russia still has the nuclear capacity to wipe out most of the USA, UK and just about anybody else they want to?

What we need now are old heads with years of experience and contacts to smooth us through this.

Looking at what we've got, God help us!

Nicholas

Pete, Scotland, old heads with years of experience don't cut it in age discriminating Britain. Age and wisdom is not respected, let alone given responsibility except in the case of the private sector's six-figure salaries and bonuses closed shop (although there are now some local council chief executives joining that shop - Ipswich).

C.J. Lucey

The Russian state is a gangster state. Its conduct in Chechnya, its obstruction of murder investigations, its bullying of corporations all attest to that. But it is also a well-armed, well-trained, nuclear power. Does the West gain much by provoking Russia by offering of NATO membership for Georgia and the Ukraine?

Neither Georgia nor the Ulraine is mono-ethnic. Each has ethnic minorities of Russian extraction. For either to join NATO would exacerbate domestic ethnic tensions. If the leadership of these countries was genuninely focussed on nation-building they would therefore eschew NATO membership. But the leadership of these countries, intoxicated by the prospect of triumpahant nationalism and stuffing their former colonial masters, are pushing full-steam ahead.

NATO members need to consider the strategic logic of admitting to membership countries whose leadership is embued with such a gung-ho attitude. For, as NATO members, either Georgia or the Ukraine could trigger war with Russia.

Russia has shown in the past (Finland from 1945 onwards and Austria from 1955 onwards) that it is prepared to allow countries on the edge of its control to be militarily neutral but politically free to choose thier own course i.e. opt for western democracy.

Is the best option for all parties not restraint by NATO (in not further growing its membership on Russia's borders) and restraint by Russia (in allowing countries on its borders choose their own course)?

Any other approach risks war. For what proportionate gain?

David C

Pete: The Soviet Union collapsed because of internal contradictions and its ambition exceeding its capacity.
It was facing a challenger head-to-hesd: - the USA.
If it feels humiliated, it is not because of any Versailles-like punishment imposed by the West.
Russian ambition is still there. It has always been there since the 16th century. A lot of the present difficulties are because Russia has not strengthened its democratic and diplomatic institutions and has instead taken the most rapid route to regaining status and power.
The West's fault lies in its disregard of Russia. It was too big a power to simply ignore. It seems as if the collapse of the USSR was the end of the problem, and the West failed to appreciate the lack of any other political mechanisms to take the place of state socialism.

Cynical Max

Perhaps we should make Russia a member of NATO - conditional on it first going into Afghanistan/Waziristan and pacifying the whole region - by whatever means it chooses.

This time, however, the West will sensibly withhold support from the 'mujahadin' etc.

It won't be fun and it won't be pretty, but it'll keep them all occupied for some time to come.