What REALLY just happened in Georgia.

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Geopolitical Chess: Background to a Mini-war in the Caucasus

Geopolitical Chess: Background to a Mini-war in the Caucasus
by Immanuel Wallerstein Released: 15 Aug 2008
The world has been witness this month to a mini-war in the Caucasus, and the rhetoric has been passionate, if largely irrelevant. Geopolitics is a gigantic series of two-player chess games, in which the players seek positional advantage. In these games, it is crucial to know the current rules that govern the moves. Knights are not allowed to move diagonally.

From 1945 to 1989, the principal chess game was that between the United States and the Soviet Union. It was called the Cold War, and the basic rules were called metaphorically ?Yalta.? The most important rule concerned a line that divided Europe into two zones of influence. It was called by Winston Churchill the ?Iron Curtain? and ran from Stettin to Trieste. The rule was that, no matter how much turmoil was instigated in Europe by the pawns, there was to be no actual warfare between the United States and the Soviet Union. And at the end of each instance of turmoil, the pieces were to be returned to where they were at the outset. This rule was observed meticulously right up to the collapse of the Communisms in 1989, which was most notably marked by the destruction of the Berlin wall.

It is perfectly true, as everyone observed at the time, that the Yalta rules were abrogated in 1989 and that the game between the United States and (as of 1991) Russia had changed radically. The major problem since then is that the United States misunderstood the new rules of the game. It proclaimed itself, and was proclaimed by many others, the lone superpower. In terms of chess rules, this was interpreted to mean that the United States was free to move about the chessboard as it saw fit, and in particular to transfer former Soviet pawns to its sphere of influence. Under Clinton, and even more spectacularly under George W. Bush, the United States proceeded to play the game this way.

There was only one problem with this: The United States was not the lone superpower; it was no longer even a superpower at all. The end of the Cold War meant that the United States had been demoted from being one of two superpowers to being one strong state in a truly multilateral distribution of real power in the interstate system. Many large countries were now able to play their own chess games without clearing their moves with one of the two erstwhile superpowers. And they began to do so.

Two major geopolitical decisions were made in the Clinton years. First, the United States pushed hard, and more or less successfully, for the incorporation of erstwhile Soviet satellites into NATO membership. These countries were themselves anxious to join, even though the key western European countries -- Germany and France --were somewhat reluctant to go down this path. They saw the U.S. maneuver as one aimed in part at them, seeking to limit their newly-acquired freedom of geopolitical action.

The second key U.S. decision was to become an active player in the boundary realignments within the former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. This culminated in a decision to sanction, and enforce with their troops, the de facto secession of Kosovo from Serbia.

Russia, even under Yeltsin, was quite unhappy about both these U.S. actions. However, the political and economic disarray of Russia during the Yeltsin years was such that the most it could do was complain, somewhat feebly it should be added.

The coming to power of George W. Bush and Vladimir Putin was more or less simultaneous. Bush decided to push the lone superpower tactics (the United States can move its pieces as it alone decides) much further than had Clinton. First, Bush in 2001 withdrew from the 1972 U.S.-Soviet Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Then he announced that the United States would not move to ratify two new treaties signed in the Clinton years: the 1996 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and the agreed changes in the SALT II nuclear disarmament treaty. Then Bush announced that the United States would move forward with its National Missile Defense system.

And of course, Bush invaded Iraq in 2003. As part of this engagement, the United States sought and obtained rights to military bases and overflight rights in the Central Asian republics that formerly were part of the Soviet Union. In addition, the United States promoted the construction of pipelines for Central Asian and Caucasian oil and natural gas that would bypass Russia. And finally, the United States entered into an agreement with Poland and the Czech Republic to establish missile defense sites, ostensibly to guard against Iranian missiles. Russia, however, regarded them as aimed at her.

Putin decided to push back much more effectually than Yeltsin. As a prudent player, however, he moved first to strengthen his home base -- restoring effective central authority and reinvigorating the Russian military. At this point, the tides in the world-economy changed, and Russia suddenly became a wealthy and powerful controller not only of oil production but of the natural gas so needed by western European countries.

Putin thereupon began to act. He entered into treaty relationships with China. He maintained close relations with Iran. He began to push the United States out of its Central Asian bases. And he took a very firm stand on the further extension of NATO to two key zones -- Ukraine and Georgia.

The breakup of the Soviet Union had led to ethnic secessionist movements in many former republics, including Georgia. When Georgia in 1990 sought to end the autonomous status of its non-Georgian ethnic zones, they promptly proclaimed themselves independent states. They were recognized by no one but Russia guaranteed their de facto autonomy.

The immediate spurs to the current mini-war were twofold. In February, Kosovo formally transformed its de facto autonomy to de jure independence. Its move was supported by and recognized by the United States and many western European countries. Russia warned at the time that the logic of this move applied equally to the de facto secessions in the former Soviet republics. In Georgia, Russia moved immediately, for the first time, to recognize South Ossetian de jure independence in direct response to that of Kosovo.

And in April this year, the United States proposed at the NATO meeting that Georgia and Ukraine be welcomed into a so-called Membership Action Plan. Germany, France, and the United Kingdom all opposed this action, saying it would provoke Russia.

Georgia's neoliberal and strongly pro-American president, Mikhail Saakashvili, was now desperate. He saw the reassertion of Georgian authority in South Ossetia (and Abkhazia) receding forever. So, he chose a moment of Russian inattention (Putin at the Olympics, Medvedev on vacation) to invade South Ossetia. Of course, the puny South Ossetian military collapsed completely. Saakashvili expected that he would be forcing the hand of the United States (and indeed of Germany and France as well).

Instead, he got an immediate Russian military response, overwhelming the small Georgian army. What he got from George W. Bush was rhetoric. What, after all, could Bush do? The United States was not a superpower. Its armed forces were tied down in two losing wars in the Middle East. And, most important of all, the United States needed Russia far more than Russia needed the United States. Russia's foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, pointedly noted in an op-ed in the Financial Times that Russia was a "partner with the west on...the Middle East, Iran and North Korea."

As for western Europe, Russia essentially controls its gas supplies. It is no accident that it was President Sarkozy of France, not Condoleezza Rice, who negotiated the truce between Georgia and Russia. The truce contained two essential concessions by Georgia. Georgia committed itself to no further use of force in South Ossetia, and the agreement contained no reference to Georgian territorial integrity.

So, Russia emerged far stronger than before. Saakashvili had bet everything he has and was now geopolitically bankrupt. And, as an ironic footnote, Georgia, one of the last U.S. allies in the coalition in Iraq, withdrew all its 2000 troops from Iraq. These troops had been playing a crucial role in Shi'a areas, and would now have to be replaced by U.S. troops, which will have to be withdrawn from other areas.

If one plays geopolitical chess, it is best to know the rules, or one gets out-maneuvered.


Immanuel Wallerstein, Senior Research Scholar at Yale University, is the author of The Decline of American Power: The U.S. in a Chaotic World (New Press).

Copyright ©2008 Immanuel Wallerstein -- distributed by Agence Global

My comments will be short. When one plays by the old rules, expecting that they never change, one will find that they have changed.
McCain just made his first pretend play at foreign policy. And got pwned... hard.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Text

I'm truly enjoying this small moment in time, BTW. Nothing is more refreshing than George and Sidney getting neutered on the world stage.

George speaks, but nobody listens.



You sir, scare me. Yay for the possiblitly of nuclear winter and WWIII! Just to prove a president I dont agree with wrong!

You know if Russia and the US fire thier arsenal at each other, it doesnt matter if you are Repub, Dem, Liberal, Conservative. We are all dead. Get with it.
 

evolvedbullet

Senior member
Mar 11, 2006
543
0
0
The moment is exciting, the excessive bad news from Iraq and the Iranian threat has done nothing but put the American citizen in a bad mood. A war, a conflict, excites us because we either just love a new kind of violence in the world (perhaps we find it amusing but I am not the judge of that) or we just needed to see another country get hit hard that doesn't have the American Flag on it. I've never experienced the Cold War..... was it bad (for the sack of conversation)?
 

Colt45

Lifer
Apr 18, 2001
19,720
1
0
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Text

I'm truly enjoying this small moment in time, BTW. Nothing is more refreshing than George and Sidney getting neutered on the world stage.

George speaks, but nobody listens.



You sir, scare me. Yay for the possiblitly of nuclear winter and WWIII! Just to prove a president I dont agree with wrong!

You know if Russia and the US fire thier arsenal at each other, it doesnt matter if you are Repub, Dem, Liberal, Conservative. We are all dead. Get with it.

Not gonna happen buddy. especially not over georgia.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
The Bushistas have set up their own friends before- it's not like this is something new. They did it with Cuban dissidents, for example. Tell 'em you'll back 'em up if they stand up, then step out of the way, wring your hands in mock horror, point at the boogeyman when the hammer comes down...

Palestinian moderates and the roadmap to peace? same-same...
 

jman19

Lifer
Nov 3, 2000
11,225
664
126
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Text

I'm truly enjoying this small moment in time, BTW. Nothing is more refreshing than George and Sidney getting neutered on the world stage.

George speaks, but nobody listens.



You sir, scare me. Yay for the possiblitly of nuclear winter and WWIII! Just to prove a president I dont agree with wrong!

You know if Russia and the US fire thier arsenal at each other, it doesnt matter if you are Repub, Dem, Liberal, Conservative. We are all dead. Get with it.

Pathetic scare tactics... we're not going to nuclear war over Georgia :roll:
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Text

I'm truly enjoying this small moment in time, BTW. Nothing is more refreshing than George and Sidney getting neutered on the world stage.

George speaks, but nobody listens.
Yea!!!! Georgia is killing innocent women and children!!!! WOOOHOOO!!!!


BTW I thought you were anti-war??
Fixed.

I am anti-war. The Georgian's started a US-backed military push into two breakaway regions, Russia completely dominated the Georgian military and shut the conflict down in record time. If Russia had not responded, the Ossetians would still be fighting the Georgian troops.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Russia completely dominated the Georgian military and shut the conflict down in record time.
Interesting. May I ask what the previous record was?
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Russia completely dominated the Georgian military and shut the conflict down in record time.
Interesting. May I ask what the previous record was?
Actually this war ranks 2nd shortest of all time using my calculations.

The shortest war on record is the Anglo-Zanzibar war in 1896, which lasted 45 minutes. Next is the 6-Day War of 1967.

Russia sent troops into Georgia on August 8th, and Medvedev declared military operations over on August 12th (when he also approved the French-brokered cease-fire), giving the South Ossetia war of 2008 a duration of roughly 4 days.
 

Auric

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 1999
9,591
2
71
It is no accident that it was President Sarkozy of France, not Condoleezza Rice, who negotiated the truce between Georgia and Russia.

Err, yes it was Sarkozy but not as President of France, but rather as President-in-Office of the European Council. Which makes more sense than the US Secretary of State acting as mediator since that country has directly supported Georgia militarily (in opposition to Russia).

 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Originally posted by: jman19
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Text

I'm truly enjoying this small moment in time, BTW. Nothing is more refreshing than George and Sidney getting neutered on the world stage.

George speaks, but nobody listens.



You sir, scare me. Yay for the possiblitly of nuclear winter and WWIII! Just to prove a president I dont agree with wrong!

You know if Russia and the US fire thier arsenal at each other, it doesnt matter if you are Repub, Dem, Liberal, Conservative. We are all dead. Get with it.

Pathetic scare tactics... we're not going to nuclear war over Georgia :roll:


Well, Im glad you have a crystal ball. How much will you sell it for?


All it takes is Russia accidentally shooting down one of our "aid" planes, and then we are sucked in. Or maybe now that we have said we will "Come to the aid" of Poland, Russia decides they want to take them down too.

Things can spiral out of control extremely quickly. I suggest you do some reading on WWI.

 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Text

I'm truly enjoying this small moment in time, BTW. Nothing is more refreshing than George and Sidney getting neutered on the world stage.

George speaks, but nobody listens.



You sir, scare me. Yay for the possiblitly of nuclear winter and WWIII! Just to prove a president I dont agree with wrong!

You know if Russia and the US fire thier arsenal at each other, it doesnt matter if you are Repub, Dem, Liberal, Conservative. We are all dead. Get with it.
I guess we should stop provoking them.

You don't see Russia building military installations in Mexico or Canada.
 

jman19

Lifer
Nov 3, 2000
11,225
664
126
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: jman19
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Text

I'm truly enjoying this small moment in time, BTW. Nothing is more refreshing than George and Sidney getting neutered on the world stage.

George speaks, but nobody listens.



You sir, scare me. Yay for the possiblitly of nuclear winter and WWIII! Just to prove a president I dont agree with wrong!

You know if Russia and the US fire thier arsenal at each other, it doesnt matter if you are Repub, Dem, Liberal, Conservative. We are all dead. Get with it.

Pathetic scare tactics... we're not going to nuclear war over Georgia :roll:


Well, Im glad you have a crystal ball. How much will you sell it for?


All it takes is Russia accidentally shooting down one of our "aid" planes, and then we are sucked in. Or maybe now that we have said we will "Come to the aid" of Poland, Russia decides they want to take them down too.

Things can spiral out of control extremely quickly. I suggest you do some reading on WWI.

Keep playing the scare card. It didn't happen during any of the conflicts of the Cold War, what makes you think it will happen over Georgia? Do you have any reason other than "well you don't know for sure?"
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
I don't find this article all that illuminating.

IMO, the important question to be answered is why Georgia felt the need to move now? I are we to believe that they were merely by the "convenience" of the Olympics? I find that hard to believe.

This is what we get from the article:

Georgia's neoliberal and strongly pro-American president, Mikhail Saakashvili, was now desperate. He saw the reassertion of Georgian authority in South Ossetia (and Abkhazia) receding forever. So, he chose a moment of Russian inattention (Putin at the Olympics, Medvedev on vacation) to invade South Ossetia

Why was the Georgian authority receding forever? Forever? D@mn, that's a very strong statement. It implies unstated events of major consequence were developing in South Ossetia. But what?

Did attacks by SO seperatists precipitate the Georigian attack?

What kind of attacks were they? We hear Russia claim atrocities, but we also hear from other sources that is false.

I think it will take some time to weed the propaganda from the facts.

Fern
 

RichardE

Banned
Dec 31, 2005
10,246
2
0
Originally posted by: jman19
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: jman19
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Text

I'm truly enjoying this small moment in time, BTW. Nothing is more refreshing than George and Sidney getting neutered on the world stage.

George speaks, but nobody listens.



You sir, scare me. Yay for the possiblitly of nuclear winter and WWIII! Just to prove a president I dont agree with wrong!

You know if Russia and the US fire thier arsenal at each other, it doesnt matter if you are Repub, Dem, Liberal, Conservative. We are all dead. Get with it.

Pathetic scare tactics... we're not going to nuclear war over Georgia :roll:


Well, Im glad you have a crystal ball. How much will you sell it for?


All it takes is Russia accidentally shooting down one of our "aid" planes, and then we are sucked in. Or maybe now that we have said we will "Come to the aid" of Poland, Russia decides they want to take them down too.

Things can spiral out of control extremely quickly. I suggest you do some reading on WWI.

Keep playing the scare card. It didn't happen during any of the conflicts of the Cold War, what makes you think it will happen over Georgia? Do you have any reason other than "well you don't know for sure?"

For most of the board, this is our first Russia/US skirmish.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,133
38
91
Originally posted by: Fern
I don't find this article all that illuminating.

IMO, the important question to be answered is why Georgia felt the need to move now? I are we to believe that they were merely by the "convenience" of the Olympics? I find that hard to believe.

This is what we get from the article:

Georgia's neoliberal and strongly pro-American president, Mikhail Saakashvili, was now desperate. He saw the reassertion of Georgian authority in South Ossetia (and Abkhazia) receding forever. So, he chose a moment of Russian inattention (Putin at the Olympics, Medvedev on vacation) to invade South Ossetia

Why was the Georgian authority receding forever? Forever? D@mn, that's a very strong statement. It implies unstated events of major consequence were developing in South Ossetia. But what?

Did attacks by SO seperatists precipitate the Georigian attack?

What kind of attacks were they? We hear Russia claim atrocities, but we also hear from other sources that is false.

I think it will take some time to weed the propaganda from the facts.

Fern

I thought you wouldn't be the typical American who just woke up one day and heard about this conflict. Putin and the Georgian guy hate each other. Last year Putin kicked all Georgians out of Moscow and sanctioned Georgian goods. Saakofshitvili won reelection last year but has become far more authoritarian in Georgia. The rhetoric heated up this year when Russia started giving those in the breakaway region Russian passports. It got quite nasty a couple of months ago as well.

If I was the Georgian president, I wouldn't have tried Russia's patience considering they're neighbors and America is so fucking far away.
 

vhx

Golden Member
Jul 19, 2006
1,151
0
0
The entire situation is being blown out of porportion.

Zomg thousands dead... oh wait our mistake only 44 dead.

CNN: RUSSIA IS TAKING OVER THIS CITY! Oh wait... wrong footage, nm.

Propaganda at its worst, reminds me of the war on terror campaign.

Fear fear fear fear!
 

seemingly random

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2007
5,277
0
0
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Text

I'm truly enjoying this small moment in time, BTW. Nothing is more refreshing than George and Sidney getting neutered on the world stage.

George speaks, but nobody listens.



You sir, scare me. Yay for the possiblitly of nuclear winter and WWIII! Just to prove a president I dont agree with wrong!

You know if Russia and the US fire thier arsenal at each other, it doesnt matter if you are Repub, Dem, Liberal, Conservative. We are all dead. Get with it.
It's known as MAD (mutually assured destruction). This is not a secret.

FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) is not a secret either. The art seems to have been mastered quite effectively by the repugs.
 

TechAZ

Golden Member
Sep 8, 2007
1,188
0
71
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Text

I'm truly enjoying this small moment in time, BTW. Nothing is more refreshing than George and Sidney getting neutered on the world stage.

George speaks, but nobody listens.



You sir, scare me. Yay for the possiblitly of nuclear winter and WWIII! Just to prove a president I dont agree with wrong!

You know if Russia and the US fire thier arsenal at each other, it doesnt matter if you are Repub, Dem, Liberal, Conservative. We are all dead. Get with it.
It's known as MAD (mutually assured destruction). This is not a secret.

FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) is not a secret either. The art seems to have been mastered quite effectively by the repugs.

You're right, I never see FUD from the Dims. (see how I changed Dems to Dims? I'm so witty)
 

seemingly random

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2007
5,277
0
0
Originally posted by: TechAZ
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Text

I'm truly enjoying this small moment in time, BTW. Nothing is more refreshing than George and Sidney getting neutered on the world stage.

George speaks, but nobody listens.



You sir, scare me. Yay for the possiblitly of nuclear winter and WWIII! Just to prove a president I dont agree with wrong!

You know if Russia and the US fire thier arsenal at each other, it doesnt matter if you are Repub, Dem, Liberal, Conservative. We are all dead. Get with it.
It's known as MAD (mutually assured destruction). This is not a secret.

FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) is not a secret either. The art seems to have been mastered quite effectively by the repugs.

You're right, I never see FUD from the Dims. (see how I changed Dems to Dims? I'm so twitty)
:laugh:
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Russia wouldn't attack us. They would just pump more oil and natural gas and buy us out.
Putin is scary. That whole youth group of his is very similar to the hitler youth.


The 120,000-odd Putin Youth members are perhaps the most creepy demonstration of Putin?s ?Back to the Future? cult of personality - youth groups created, supported, and used by the Kremlin to harass, bully and intimidate opponents and critics. ?The idea was to create an ideology based on a total devotion to the president and his course,? says a Kremlin adviser, Sergei Markov. Obsessed by the color revolutions in Ukraine and Georgia, the Kremlin decided to create their own loyal youth brigades.

During the campaign against Estonia in the most recent enemy-of-the-month club (Lithuania, Georgia, Poland, et al) for the heinous crime of moving a statue and some Soviet graves, the Nashi ?kids? (who are 17 to 25 years old) so terrorized the Estonian Embassy that the ambassador and some istaff members fled the country. In Estonia itself, Russia-endorsed protests killed one and injured 99. While mild peaceful protests were brutally crushed by riot police, the violent Nashi youth were invited into the Kremlin to talk to Putin?s anointed successor, First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov, about their methods, an indication of the firm government backing they receive. ?They have their kitchens, toilets, electricity, buses. . . . It is clear that their actions are very well organized, financed and orchestrated,? said the Estonian ambassador, Marina Kaljurand.

A nationwide cellphone campaign - ?call President Putin with a message of support? - was estimated to cost many millions of dollars. . . .

While their methods are still mostly street theater, it?s probably only a matter of time before they graduate to more serious violence. Indeed, their recruiting boot camps feature paramilitary training to fight against fascists (which includes Estonia, Yabloko or anyone that has ever criticized Putin).

Another deeply disturbing government initiative is labeling critics ?extremists? and criminals, another tactic of all serious totalitarian states. When you can criminalize criticism of the government, there is nothing you can?t get away with, and all remaining freedoms are hanging by a thread.
 

BMW540I6speed

Golden Member
Aug 26, 2005
1,055
0
0
Oh good, McCain has sent Joe "flak jacket" Lieberman & Lindsey "Americans are whiners" Graham to Georgia. Good Greif, what do they think they will accomplish. What John McCain hopes to accomplish by sending his proxies to the war zone is to "look presidential". What presidential candidate has ever sent a peace convoy to a foreign country during an armed conflict? And he did this before Bush even sent Rice?

Maybe Lieberman & Graham will hook up with their buddy George Soros And his revolution he's got going on over there.


Georgia on His Mind - George Soros's Potemkin Revolution.

By Amb. Richard Carlson
The Weekly Standard
May 24, 2004

At the Voice of America during the Cold War some of the most troublesome employees were those who broadcast daily to the Soviet Union and its satellite states, in Russian, Azeri, Georgian, Ukrainian, Serbo-Croatian, and so on. These staffers were often émigrés--well-educated, sometimes understandably bitter men and women whose attitudes had been formed by a Communist political system in which errors in judgment or action brought disproportional punishment, while rewards could derive from deep, back-channel manipulation of appearances and an avoidance of responsibility. ("Deny everything, make counter-allegations" seemed the guideline in discussions with senior managers. "I didn't do it. He did!" the standard retort.)

Of the more than 50 VOA language services at that time, the most blustering and contentious, emanating a continuing, colorful, and aggressive hostility to management (accompanied by an ironic, bizarre willingness to grovel to tough, uncompromising leadership) was that which broadcast to the Soviet Republic of Georgia.

I was in Georgia last month, and it is still colorful and still difficult, a poor country, poorer even than Haiti, with a new president but the same culture--one that cultivates a swaggering, prideful masculinity in its leaders who, since the fall of the Soviet Union, have been lionized by the U.S. foreign policy establishment and the Western press but who just as quickly seem to morph from lion to demon.

A case in point is Eduard Shevardnadze, once the Soviet foreign minister, who was for more than a dozen years invariably described in the West as a stalwart friend of democracy and a liberal, honest fellow. Six months ago, he was ousted as the president of Georgia in a coup led by his young protégé, Mikhail Saakashvili, who is glorying in the same lavish treatment from the State Department and the media. They now paint him as honest, liberal, and democratic, while Shevardnadze is Bronx-cheered as corrupt and murderous, a brute who was forced from office by what Saakashvili (with an unerring eye for the sixties-sentimentality of the Western media) dubs "The Rose Revolution."

Late last fall, Saakashvili led thousands of "spontaneous" demonstrators, bused in from around Tbilisi, brandishing flowers as they invaded the president's palace. This was during the freezing Georgian winter when any roses not black and brittle had to be flown or trucked in, courtesy of the same bankroll that funded the fleet of rented buses for demonstrators: that of George Soros, the Hungarian-born billionaire and egotist. A former member of the Georgian Parliament said that in the three months before the "Rose Revolution," "from August through October, Soros spent $42 million ramping-up for the overthrow of Shevardnadze."

Soros has publicly committed himself to funding the "democratic" presidency of Mikhail Saakashvili, just as he has publicly committed himself and his money to the destruction of the presidency of George W. Bush, whom he has compared to Yasser Arafat and Hitler. Soros and the United Nations are paying the wages of all of Saakashvili's top government officials--ministers, deputies, the road police, and others--on the grounds that this will keep them from stealing. As if bribery and corruption were simply a problem of immediate financial need, not greed.

Shevardnadze's attempt to rig the November 2003 parliamentary elections was a handy catalyst for the coup, but it was already in the works. The previous summer Soros had flown Saakashvili and his followers to a seminar he sponsored in Belgrade on how to stage your own "Velvet Revolution." And perhaps Soros would deserve some credit--except for the undeniable fact that, ever since his anointing in a crooked election in January, Saakashvili has sounded more like a raging nationalist and authoritarian thug than a democrat strewing rose petals.

"It is democracy in a china shop," the New York Times reported on March 28. "A growing number of critics, though, say that the new president is exploiting his popularity to cut legal corners, violate human rights and silence opposition views." "Saakashvili's all-powerful party is getting into the habit of ignoring the law, or changing it, when it does not suit their purpose," reported Agence France-Presse.

Saakashvili, now 36, was an only child with an absent father. He was raised by a divorced, domineering, and ambitious mother, and his tough-talking Dutch-born wife, Sandra Roelof, appears to follow in that tradition. (Saakashvili married her in lower Manhattan in 1993 while he was attending Columbia for a year on a U.S. taxpayer-funded scholarship.) In February, Roelof gave an interview to a Dutch magazine for a breathless Vanity Fair-like profile headlined "Sandra Roelof's Fairy Tale: From a Zeeuws Girl to First Lady of Georgia." Roelof seems to have taken to Georgian politics:

Georgia has produced strong leaders. Stalin, Beria, Gamsakhurdia. Even Shevardnadze, before he got addicted to power. They looked beyond Georgia. My husband does the same; he fits in the tradition. This country needs a strong hand. It is incredibly important that respect for authority returns. That laws are less frequently broken, that people simply pay their bills for once. There is hardly a sense of responsibility here. . . . I think my husband is the right person to frighten people. That is not to say it is immediately fascism or something. Should he develop extremist traits he will be alerted to that. All eyes are looking at us now.

What a roll call! Stalin's birthplace in Gori, Georgia, close to the Saakashvilis' home in Tbilisi, is still maintained as a public museum, though the crimes of the man against his own people, particularly native Georgians, are beyond repeating, and Sandra Roelof's citation appears demented. One would think Stalin's house would have been burned down long ago, the ashes scattered to the cold Caucasus winds--and I'm not speaking just metaphorically. If Saakashvili wants to really make some democratic bones, he might drive to Gori and light the ceremonial match.

The second man to whom Sandra Roelof compares her husband is Lavrenty Beria, Stalin's secret police czar and the Georgian-born father of the Soviet Gulag. Beria, a notorious pedophile, was responsible for the deaths of millions of Soviet citizens. He was executed on Khrushchev's order after Stalin's death in 1953.

Next on Roelof's list is Zviad Gamsakhurdia, the first elected president of Georgia, a rabid nationalist completely intolerant of any opposition. He was deposed in a coup in the early '90s and later shot himself in the head (or was murdered). Two weeks ago Saakashvili announced that 2004 would be "the year of Gamsakhurdia," whatever that is intended to mean.

The last of Roelof's major players is Shevardnadze, the mentoring father figure Saakashvili never had, who brought him into parliament, appointed him to his cabinet, and guided him along until Saakashvili turned and stabbed him. Despite the relentless encomiums from the last three U.S. administrations, Shevardnadze was brutal and corrupt. (Saakashvili, who lives around the corner from Shevardnadze in Tbilisi, has never had him arrested.)

The British Helsinki Human Rights Group recently compared Saakashvili's regime to that of Shevardnadze, noting that "Saakashvili has unleashed a wave of arrests against real and imagined opponents, and, like Shevardnadze when he first came to power, his new regime has targeted any media outlet which steps out of line." The report said, "Since Saakashvili won the grotesque presidential election in January 2004, when he was awarded an even higher percentage of the vote than Shevardnadze granted himself in 1992, waves of arrests and media closures have hit Georgia."

The report quotes Saakashvili engaging in neo-Stalinist bluster. "I want to tell the criminal bosses and their defenders that they will get it in the teeth," adding that "anyone who disturbs the sleep of an ordinary citizen will be ruthlessly punished and exterminated." They added what almost goes without saying: "This is hardly the language of a civil society, yet none of the Soros-funded Open Society or anti-death penalty NGOs have piped up to express concern."

It was no surprise to the British Helsinki Human Rights Group when Saakashvili, upon taking office, replaced the Georgian national flag with the flag of his own National Movement party. As a result of Saakashvili's electioneering and his dominance of the Georgian media, particularly the powerful Soros-funded TV station Rustavi 2, which acts as Saakashvili's own bichon frisé, his party swept the recent legislative elections by a wide margin. This has left Georgia--and George Soros--with a one-leader, one-party government, a far cry from a noble experiment in democracy.

It's clear that Saakashvili means to enmesh the US in his country's fight with Russia, one that was foolishly initiated and which appears based on certain unsupportable propositions concerning South Ossetia.

Thanks to them, the US lacks both the international standing and military flexibility to do squat about it. When members of the Bush administration and the McCain campaign trot out spokespersons to remind Russia that "invading sovereign nations is bad", their words ought to be accompanied by a laughtrack.

From where I sit, Bush, McCain, Saakashvili are simply acting recklessly - once again - and certainly not in the United States' interest. Of course, the Administration owe Georgia for being the "3rd largest remaining member of the coalition of the willing", the McCain's campaign is run by a Georgian lobbyist, and the Bush White House has actively cheerleaded Georgian strikes against Russian regional hegemenony.

As for myself (and I suspect many other voters), we can damn Russian overreaction, but still fall well short of proclaiming ourselves Georgian. I suggest that in addition to Lieberman, we send the freaking RNC and the staff over at Worldnetdaily to fight this one.