Russia and Georgia - Squashing the Narrative

I've been struck more than once by the utter hypocrisy of the US, and leaders around the world in their response to the Russia-Georgia war.

George W Bush was quoted as saying that invading a sovereign nation in the 21st century was 'unacceptable' (Blogger's note : Was the Iraq War in the 21st century? Someone remind me when that started). Former UN Ambassador and certified nut John Bolten said Russia was trying to re-create the Soviet Empire. John McCain jumped into this narrative as well, accusing Putin and Medvedev of wanting to reform not the Soviet, but the Russian Empire.

Wow.

That is some serious and heavy rhetoric.

I wonder why then that these kind of words were not tossed around say, back in the summer of 2006, when Israel launched their own little 'destroy the thorn in our side' war with Lebanon?

Or maybe in 2002, when the US was prepping for their 'thorn in the side' war with Iraq?

Squashing long-standing enemies seems to be so en vogue in this century of ours, that Russia's war in Georgia is fairly in-line with the example world powers have set over the last eight years.

To say that this is Russia's war, that Russia started, also seems to be the most popular way to frame the conflict in the West.

The basic timeline is this : South Ossetia is a breakaway province that wants independence, Georgia attacked South Ossetia to try and regain its grip over them, after a small terrorist attack by South Oseetia rebels, and Russia rolled in in an attempt to stabilize.

Now, from there, Russia has certainly been opportunistic, looking to squash the country, and a leader, that has been opposed to them for a while now, and who is very pro-US. They have bombed airports, bridges and civilian housing complexes. These are tragedies of course, but were they viewed as tragedies when those airports, bridges and bodies were Lebanese, or Iraqi? Of course not.

I want to make special note of the Lebanon conflict, because it mirrors this one in many ways. A small group, Hezbollah, kidnapped a few Israeli soldiers on a cross-border raid. While Hezbollah is headquartered in a small tract in Lebanon, a strip along the Israeli border, the entire country was razed with missiles, gunships and a ground invasion. It was collective punishment for allowing Hezbollah to exist in their nation. We all knew this at the time, and yet, there was nothing but support for Israel, that they were defending themselves, and were only fighting defensively, etc.

Now, in the very same sense, Russia is protecting it's territorial integrity by warring with a party on its border that has instigated a conflict. And yet, Russia is seen as the aggressor in this case, and Israel the victim in theirs.

It's all PR, it's all spin, and it's all about the false narrative that Russia is the new threat to everything that is holy and good. The Cold War worked brilliantly for those who use the politics of fear, and with under 90 days until the US elects Mr. Bush's successor, this feels like a rehash of that, with a dash of terrorist ties and a pinch of misplaced self-righteousness.

Think of a situation like this : In Mexico, along the US border, there is a group that wants independence, and they are prepared to fight for it. They run border raids across into the US, they attack Mexican interests. Mexico tries to stamp them out, but the US feels they need to protect their security as well, and of course, they feel they can do it better than any Mexican ever could, so they roll in to put out the rebellion, and then see the opportunity to shape the country in their image.

I know this isn't the perfect example, but it is an elected government, on the border of a world power, whose internal machinations have spilled over their own borders, and have sparked an international incident.

Vladimir Putin has been steadfast in his rejection of the disingenuous criticism from around the globe. He called out George as well, questioning why it was okay for the US to execute Saddam Hussein for gassing a few villages tens of thousands of miles from the US borders, but a war of aggression on Russia's border was not cause for a response.

I don't agree with Russia's actions here, so please, don't get my point confused. I am against any conflict like this, like Iraq, like Lebanon, like any smaller nation that gets stomped by a larger power for doing something that power saw as 'unacceptable'. What I am attacking in this piece is the hypocritical narrative laid out.

The US seems to also be stoking the flames of the war a bit by airlifting Georgian troops out of Iraq, where Georgia has the largest military contingent apart from the US and Britain, right into the conflict zone back home.

Understandably, Putin was a tad incredulous as to why a supposed ally would hamper another major allied power's efforts so directly, but, the main handbook on US foreign policy seems to still be 'do as I say, not as I do'.

There are also now whispers here and there of WWIII (Rush Limbaugh), and the fact that Russia has provided plans and built reactors for Iran seems to be at the top of the news again.

I'm not really sure just how WWIII would start, seeing how the US doesn't have the forces outside of Iraq to be able to even perform peacekeeping in Georgia, let alone fight Russia in an all-out war. That would likely require a draft, which is a different theme for a different article.

Funny thing is, the timing on these stories, and the expansion of the anti-Russian narrative is just immaculate, almost like state media, trumpeting the President's message for all the people to hear.

The bottom line is this, Russia's actions, while not desirable, are within the boundaries that have been set for international conflict of this kind. The US set the precedent of a world power having the justification to invade another sovereign nation based on their own suppositions, and nothing else. Israel continued this line in 2006 with Lebanon, and now Russia has its turn at the plate.

No one is in the right, or no one is in the wrong, the US doesn't get to play both ways on this one, they've gone too far to have that right any longer.