Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

EU Takes the Diplomatic Lead on Georgia

(Inter Press Service) The Russia-Georgia peace deal indicates that the European Union (EU) is acting as an independent power and plans to maintain dialogue with Moscow in spite...

Print Friendly

(Inter Press Service)

The Russia-Georgia peace deal indicates that the European Union (EU) is acting as an independent power and plans to maintain dialogue with Moscow in spite of pressure by some of its own members and the United States to switch to sanctions.

Last week French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev met in Moscow to agree on the gradual withdrawal of Russian troops to positions held before the outbreak of the Georgia-Russia war in August.

On August 8 Georgian troops tried to seize control of the Georgian breakaway region of South Ossetia. Russia launched a military offensive, saying it had to protect Russian citizens living there.

Soon after, Sarkozy negotiated with both sides to end hostilities amid escalating Cold War-type rhetoric between Moscow and Washington. But Russia failed to keep its promises to completely withdraw from Georgian territory outside South Ossetia and Abkhazia, another separatist region, prompting Sarkozy’s return to Moscow.

Now Russia has nodded to the arrival of 200 EU observers to the borders of the irredentist regions, recently recognized as independent entities by Russia.

But there are complaints that "EU observers will not be allowed into the region—which is the part of the conflict that should actually be internationalised," as Michal Thim, South Caucasus analyst at the Prague-based Association for International Affairs, told the Inter Press Service (IPS).

In a compromise whose ultimate goal was to maintain an impression of European unity, the EU has called the Russian occupation a "reaction" but added it was "disproportionate." The EU also condemned Moscow’s recognition of the regions’ independence.

This was far from satisfactory for a block of mostly Eastern European countries that, led by Polish President Lech Kaczynski and encouraged by the United States, called for tough economic sanctions against Russia.

The EU will only maintain a temporary suspension of the Russia-EU partnership agreement, which should be lifted once Moscow abides with the peace plan. The fact that Russia supplies the EU with almost half of its gas and one-third of its oil makes a policy of isolating Russia impractical.

With most EU members striving not to get caught in the crossfire of a new Cold War, more idealistic politicians, especially in Eastern Europe, seemed ready to bear the cost of mutual economic sanctions.

"It is a long-term tendency that those who want to keep a pragmatic policy in relations with Russia have the upper hand within the EU’s decision-making. Decisions have to be taken unanimously, and with the lowest common denominator it is unlikely to get a tougher stance towards Russia," Thim told IPS.

The absence of Washington from the EU-Russia negotiating table has been seen as an encouraging sign for those looking for a more autonomous international role for the EU.

Russian officials had warm words for Europe’s "balanced" position, and there was visible satisfaction among Russian analysts over Moscow’s ability to dictate many terms of the agreement.

"Both the EU and the U.S. realized they have no power to change the status quo or future of these regions," Thim told IPS.

Russia will maintain its military presence in the separatist regions, prolonging a situation that began in 1992 with a U.N. sanctioned peacekeeping mission.

Russian-Georgian relations significantly worsened after Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili took power in 2004 and began pushing for his country’s membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

The United States has been the main sponsor of the NATO aspirations of Georgia and Ukraine, and Russian officials are openly blaming the United States for having blessed Georgia’s attempt to take the separatist regions by force.

Moreover, Russian officials have accused the United States of arming Georgia before and after the conflict. "The rearming of the Georgian regime is continuing, including under the guise of humanitarian assistance," Medvedev said last week after the United States brought Georgia aid on one of its most sophisticated warships, the Mount Whitney.

Washington says the war was provoked by Russia, and already last week U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney was visiting Ukraine and Georgia, where he called on "the free world to rally to the side of Georgia" and support its NATO membership.

In Ukraine, where Cheney tried to prevent the pro-Western ruling coalition’s collapse due to disagreements over the Georgian conflict, most politicians and media saw the visit by the lame duck vice president as fruitless and ill-timed.

An international meeting that will include representatives of the separatist regions will be held in Geneva in mid-October to discuss the conflict and assess progress in the peace plan. Moscow says its recognition of the regions’ independence is non-negotiable, while the EU’s position on their independence is softer than that of the United States.

Thim says the United States was far away when the fate of the South Caucasus was being decided.

"Washington won’t be happy, but it’s too busy with Afghanistan and Iraq. There has been only political support for Georgia but no action; they can simply keep threatening with Georgian NATO membership and try to persuade others about it."

Washington might try additional sanctions, such as refusing Russia’s membership in the World Trade Organization. It has already considerably upset Russia by signing a deal with Poland on a missile defense infrastructure to be built there.

The United States has sought to increase its stakes in the oil and gas rich Central Asian and Caucasus region ever since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. It is promoting the construction of pipelines that will bypass Russia and Iran, with Georgia being the only remaining corridor fully independent of Russia.

Zoltán Dujisin writes for the Inter Press Service.

Citations

Analysis by Zoltán Dujisin, "EU Takes the Diplomatic Lead on Georgia” in Somalia" Right Web with permission from Inter Press Service (Somerville, MA: PRA, 2008). Web location:
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/rw/4953.html Production Information:
Author(s): Right Web
Editor(s): Right Web
Production: Political Research Associates   IRC logo 1310 Broadway, #201, Somerville, MA   02144 | pra@publiceye.org

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Although sometimes characterized as a Republican “maverick” for his bipartisan forays into domestic policy, Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is one of the Senate’s more vocal hawks.


Former CIA director Michael Hayden, a stalwart advocate of the Bush-era policies on torture and warrantless wiretapping, has been a vocal critic of Donald Trump


The former GOP presidential candidate and Speaker of the House has been a vociferous proponent of the idea that the America faces an existential threat from “Islamofascists.”


David Albright is the founder of the Institute for Science and International Security, a non-proliferation think tank whose influential analyses of nuclear proliferation issues in the Middle East have been the source of intense disagreement and debate.


A right-wing Christian and governor of Kansas, Brownback previously served in the U.S. Senate, where he gained a reputation as a leading social conservative as well as an outspoken “pro-Israel” hawk on U.S. Middle East policy.


Steve Forbes, head of the Forbes magazine empire, is an active supporter of a number of militarist policy organizations that have pushed for aggressive U.S. foreign policies.


Stephen Hadley, an Iraq War hawk and former national security adviser to President George W. Bush, now chairs the U.S. Institute for Peace.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Print Friendly

The Trump administration appears to have been surprised by this breach among its friends in the critical Gulf strategic area. But it is difficult to envision an effective U.S. role in rebuilding this Humpty-Dumpty.


Print Friendly

A recent vote in the European Parliament shows how President Trump’s relentless hostility to Iran is likely to isolate Washington more than Tehran.


Print Friendly

The head of the Institute for Science and International Security—aka “the Good ISIS”—recently demonstrated again his penchant for using sloppy analysis as a basis for politically explosive charges about Iran, in this case using a faulty translation from Persian to misleadingly question whether Tehran is “mass producing advanced gas centrifuges.”


Print Friendly

Trump has exhibited a general preference for authoritarians over democrats, and that preference already has had impact on his foreign policy. Such an inclination has no more to do with realism than does a general preference for democrats over authoritarians.


Print Friendly

The President went to the region as a deal maker and a salesman for American weapon manufacturing. He talked about Islam, terrorism, Iran, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict without the benefit of expert advice in any of these areas. After great showmanship in Riyadh, Jerusalem, and Bethlehem, he and his family left the region without much to show for or to benefit the people of that war-torn region.


Print Friendly

Although the Comey memo scandal may well turn out to be what brings Trump down, this breach of trust may have had more lasting effect than any of Trump’s other numerous misadventures. It was an unprecedented betrayal of Israel’s confidence. Ironically, Trump has now done what even Barack Obama’s biggest detractors never accused him of: seriously compromised Israel’s security relationship with the United States.


Print Friendly

Congress and the public acquiesce in another military intervention or a sharp escalation of one of the U.S. wars already under way, perhaps it’s time to finally consider the true costs of war, American-style — in lives lost, dollars spent, and opportunities squandered. It’s a reasonable bet that never in history has a society spent more on war and gotten less bang for its copious bucks.


RightWeb
share