The Bush Administration's position on the Russo-Georgian War is indicative of a foreign policy that is inflexible, archaic, and downright stupid. It is based on contradictions and an alliance that is not worth preserving. by Kenn Jacobine
(libertarian)
Sunday, August 10, 2008
Several years ago, President Bush told other countries that as far as he was concerned there were two sides to the war on terrorism. You were either with us in fighting the terrorists or against us. The president's parameters were black and white. After all, how could any civilized nation refuse an opportunity to rid the world of the scourge of terrorism? Well, Russia was one such country, choosing not to directly support U.S. military action in Afghanistan and U.S. military imperialism in Iraq with troops of her own. According to Bush, Russia's noninterventionist stand meant that she was against the U.S. in its war on terror. This delusional mindset toward Russia is currently responsible for the administration's posture on the war between Russia and Georgia – a posture that is hypocritical and based on one of those entangling alliances that both Washington and Jefferson warned us about.
From comments made by senior administration officials, the U.S. has clearly taken the side of Georgia in the conflict. Specifically, the U.S. has been critical of Russia's use of "overwhelming" military force against Georgia which has included strategic bombers and ballistic missiles. U.S. officials have also voiced displeasure that Russia has attacked strategic territory near the Georgian capital Tbilisi which is far away from the concentration of the fighting in South Ossetia. These comments coming from this administration are hypocritical to say the least.
To begin with, Georgia started this conflict by invading its breakaway republic South Ossetia. Russia's main justification for getting involved militarily was the killing of 10 Russian peacekeepers as a result of Georgian aggression. Additionally, many Russian citizens live in South Ossetia and the Russia military intervened to protect their lives and property. Would the U.S. military not get involved in a place abroad where American citizens and property were threatened? The invasion of Grenada in the early 1980s comes to mind. Secondly, when Iraq invaded Kuwait didn't the United States and its allies use overwhelming military force including strategic bombers and ballistic missiles against Iraq to extricate it from the Gulf nation? Lastly, wasn't the initial U.S. military strategy in the first Gulf War to cut off the Iraqi army in Kuwait from command control facilities in Baghdad by …attacking strategic locations in Baghdad which was far from Kuwait? The Administration's criticism of Russia's handling of this conflict is hypocritical given how our government has handled previous conflicts in our history.
Besides hypocrisy, the U.S.'s posture on the war is based upon our country's entangling alliance with Georgia. One problem with alliances of course is that sometimes your ally does bad things. Georgia has done a bad thing. It has walked away from the negotiating table and preemptively invaded a disputed territory killing foreign soldiers and civilians. However, because Georgia is at odds with our foe, Russia, and wants to join NATO, the Bush Administration is willing to overlook her aggression. Further, and here is the crux of the matter, because Georgia is a partner in the war on terror (she has the third largest contingent of troops in Iraq behind the U.S. and Britain) and Russia is not, it is easy for the Administration to pick sides. Georgia is for us and Russia is not.
The Bush Administration's position on the Russo-Georgian War is indicative of a foreign policy that is inflexible, archaic, and downright stupid. It is based on contradictions and an alliance that is not worth preserving. Hopefully, the U.S. will not assist in transporting Georgian troops in Iraq to the front in South Ossetia as has been suggested by one administration official. That move would be provocative and threatening to Russia. But then again what do we expect from a president that has perpetrated an illegal war against a sovereign nation under false pretenses? What do we expect from a leader that calls other nations the Axis of Evil? What do we expect from an individual that sees the world in black and white – you are for us or against us?
Kenn Jacobine teaches History and English for the American International School of Lusaka, Zambia. Send him email at lovesliberty@gmail.com.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 5
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Kenn Jacobine only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Kenn Jacobine is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Want to comment on
this article? Leave your comment
here. Your email address is required to track your
comment. However, we will neither publish your email
address nor distribute it to other organizations or
persons. The only reason we might use it would be if
we needed to contact you regarding your comment. All
comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
