TPM Reader WM responds to my post below …
There is no question in my mind that this is about OIL (as is so much else that happens in this world). There is at least TWO major pipelines in Georgia control of which would give Russia much more control over caspian sea oil.
Russia recognizes (as do the hawks in our admin – all oil people) that at least for now OIL = POWER. Russia has clearly taken over state control of its natural gas and oil resources, is earning major bank from them and is now doing exactly what we did in Iraq; using aggression to secure more. It is not a major leap to think Russia will move further against other neighboring states if this isn’t stopped now, but this alone may accomplish their goals. My recollection was the BTC pipeline’s purpose was to bypass Russia altogether. If Russia takes Georgia over or more likely institutes a regime change then they will have accomplished something detrimental to the rest of the world and will be encouraged to do it again.
I don’t agree with the hawks on going to war with Russia, but there has to be a painful consequence for Russia’s actions, especially when it becomes clear their interest is in taking oil resources over by force. Bush & Cheney being against this is the surest sign is about oil since they haven’t given a crap about Russia for the last 8 years. I also have major suspicions about how this all got starte — and given Russia’s history (as well as our own) in starting wars of agression on false pretenses — and so should you.
There is a lot I agree with in this email. And I don’t really see anything that contradicts my earlier point. First, the energy resources issue is hugely significant, perhaps even the primary issue in play here. (As I side matter, I actually think that Russia’s massive and not unsuccessful reliance on resource extraction is a long term weakness. And those who see controlling Caucasian natural resources as critical to American power in this century are shortsighted. But that’s another question for another post.) I also agree that what now appears to be an invasion of Georgia will undoubtedly cast a big shadow over the other post-Soviet successor states in the region. Nor do I have any illusions that the Russians are fair-dealing players in this matter.
The people around Putin — and many others in Russia — believe that the immediate post-Soviet leadership (mainly Yeltsin) impotently and unwisely allowed recalcitrant border regions of their former country (Czarist Russia > USSR, etc) to break away when they never should have. They may not feel the need to forcibly reabsorb these countries. But they certainly want to reassert effective hegemony over them. I’m sure a localized war that confirms that hegemony would be far from unwelcome to them.
Among many other things, what the Iraq war reminds us is the need to distinguish between critical national security interests and wish-lists that may be nice to fill if they come at little or no cost and all the grey areas in between. My concern here is that we’re getting ginned up into signing on for things we don’t fully understand or fully grasp the price of.
To paraphrase the old saw, those who learn their history from Sean Hannity are condemned to repeat it (and/or do a long list of other stupid things.)
