How little South Ossetia changed the world

When Georgia invaded South Ossetia on 7 August 2008, very few people had even heard of the place. A month on and the crisis in the breakaway republic is causing a monumental shift in the power play of the worlds greatest nations. It may not be apparent yet but South Ossetia could dramatically change our world.

The war in Georgia marked the reawakening of Russia as a world super-power after almost two decades of slumber. It is the world’s largest country; it has a booming economy, sits on a bundle of oil and is neatly geographically positioned as a bridge between Europe, Asia and the Middle East. Add to that Russia’s highly educated population, its progressive and driven, if somewhat hard line, leadership, its proximity to exploding markets like India and China and you start to get an idea why ignoring Russia is simply a bad idea.

Since the fall of the Soviet Union, the US has been industriously courting as many ex-Soviet republics as they can, spreading their influence in a giant circle around Russia, promoting and sometimes militarily enforcing regime change where they deem it necessary. From proposed missile shields in Poland and the Czech Republic, to developing strong and close ties with governments in Georgia (a convenient night time bomber hop away from Iran) and the Ukraine (gateway to the world’s largest oil pipeline), bombing Russia’s nearby European ally Serbia into submission and masterminding the split of Kosovo from that country, to fighting wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and threatening one in Iran, the US has certainly been putting an enormous amount of its energy into a part of the world very far from their own.

During all of this, Russia has been presumed broken, beaten and powerless; a shadow of its former self and no longer deserving of international respect. The US has repeatedly ignored Russian protestations in the UN Security council, favouring action backed by Nato while studiously ignoring one UN resolution after the next. They have blocked Russia at every turn and ignored Russia’s protests pertaining to issues right in their back yard. Russia’s assumed impotence has led the US to ever more brazen action against her wishes and Georgia was the final straw.

A very real opportunity existed to stretch out a hand to Russia, to help her rebuild and forge a harmonious relationship with the old foe. Russia’s embrace of the capitalist system and its slowly opening markets and borders were signs that they were on the right track. Just as Serbia was rewarded, days after electing a progressive EU-oriented leadership over a nationalist hard-line option, by having its disputed territory unilaterally removed by Nato, so Russia’s progressive action was jealously thwarted at every turn by a US-lead hyper-power. Intent on claiming the top spot with no opposition or counter balance to their power, the US chose a strategy of containment and restriction. It could prove to be a vital error for US interests and influence.

Under Putin, Russia has rebuilt itself into a major power. His rebuilding of Russia has not always been democratic or focused on the rights of the individual but it has been highly effective. He has restored Russian pride in the average citizen. Russia boasts a booming global market economy. It has been a remarkable turn around from bread queues to McDonald’s, Lada to Bentley and defections to tourism. To assess for yourself just how open Russia has become in two short decades, apply for a US visa and a Russian visa with your South African passport. You might be surprised to find it is way easier to get the Russian one; no interview required.

The Russian military has also been rebuilt. The FSB, morphed from the old KGB, is operational and that is about where the Cold War parallels end. Of course, Western propaganda will have you believe that the red hammer-and-sickle flags are about to pop up all over Russia and the Cold War is about to start all over again. The US are trying desperately to ignite anti-Russian sentiment and in so doing to isolate Russia in an attempt to hamper its growth and preserve their world dominance. Swinging people’s minds back to the Cold War is a cheap shot they are quite happy to take.

The Nato inspired, Georgian lead, invasion of South Ossetia was Russia’s chance to finally draw a line in the sand and demand an end to the geopolitical games that Nato, driven largely by the US, has been playing in it’s back yard for the last two decades. Nobody expected Russia to act, least of all the Georgians who had been pumped full of US and Israeli advice. Considering the rebuilt Russian military coupled with the incessant meddling on its borders by the US, in hindsight it was inevitable.

Russians love chess. They play it on the street and in the parks. The game now unfolding in South Ossetia and beyond closely resembles an intense game of chess where the roles and allegiances of each piece must be assessed and the right moves need to be made.

In essence, Russia has the US in check. Like all great empires before them, the US has picked too many fights on too many fronts believing blindly in their own ability to win them all. When it comes to Russia, great empires have fallen making this very simple mistake. Napoleon was chased back to Paris when he tried to take Russia and his cannons still decorate the Kremlin grounds today. Hitler took most of Europe but never even made it next door to Moscow. Even Genghis Khan’s Mongols and their great empire could not hold Russia in the end.

The US is already exposed on two increasingly problematic fronts in Afghanistan and Iraq with a growing domestic apathy and distaste for both wars. Russia calculated that retaliation against close US ally Georgia would not draw a US response. They were correct and exposed a gaping US weakness that would be registered by the watching world as the unwillingness or inability to act on behalf of a close ally. Indeed, US rhetoric and what can only now be called blatant, somewhat immature propaganda against the Russian retaliation has reached a high level of desperation and severity without any threat of action. In so doing, they basically proved Russia’s assumption correct and the louder they shout, the more obvious it seems.

Having called Nato’s bluff, Russia then marched brazenly and provocatively into the undisputed territory of Georgia, apparently to ensure that the conflict was removed far from the border regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia but probably to gauge international reaction and make a strong statement. They made a point of imposing a lingering troop presence; daring a response from Nato. It became abundantly clear that all the condemnations from the US and EU would amount to nothing more than a wet verbal rebuke.

Most informed observers now realise that Georgia, awash with US military arms and advisors in the months leading up to the invasion, was the clear aggressor in this fight. Had the Western media tried just a little harder to be objective in their reporting of the war, it would have been abundantly clear for all that the moral high ground lay squarely with the Russians. Russian peacekeepers were shot by the Georgian military and Russia, whether they anticipated this war or not, were more than justified to counter the Georgian offensive in a region they were mandated to protect. Western support for Georgia in this crisis is an indefensible ethical position. Strategic needs have therefore trumped ethics once again in the tricky game of geopolitics.

The US is now faced with a serious problem. They are extended, far from home, fighting a war on two fronts. They are now actively disliked by a large chunk of the planet for their aggressive policies. Based on their response to the Russian crisis they are trying hard to make a very powerful enemy out of Russia. In short the US is quite rapidly working itself into a corner. They can’t take any overt action against Russia and their strategy of propping up sympathetic governments along Russia’s borders has been called and stopped by Russia in Georgia.

Russia on the other hand has a wealth of options. If the US continue with the current line of aggressive propaganda, expect Russia to consider forging relations and selling weapons and technology to Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba and almost anyone else that could potentially become a problem for the US. Russia has nothing to lose by arming Iran. The US has everything to lose. If the US can arm Georgia, why can’t Russia arm Cuba? A cursory look at a world map will tell you that it is geographically almost a perfectly reciprocal action.

Understanding the avid US interest in Georgia, the little land so far from home, makes a lot more sense when you study the routes of the world’s largest oil pipelines. The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline was built to bypass Russia in the extraction of Caspian oil. Expect Russia to begin to apply massive pressure on countries like Azerbaijan, the only country pivotal to the supply route of that oil to the pro-Western Georgian ports in the Black sea. Expect them to soften relations with Iran to ensure that the West does not invade and reroute through Iran. Expect Russia to start countering the chess moves made by the US across the globe and to add a few attacking moves of its own.

It is, therefore, no coincidence that Russian long-range bombers are presently on exercise in Venezuela, run by another strongly anti-US regime. Rich in oil, Venezuela would love Russian input to strengthen their position against US interference or military action in their country and in their region. In fact, while the US is playing in Russia’s back yard, expect Russia to start making offers and flexing her muscles in the US’s back yard. Expect to see them in Mexico, Cuba and any Central American country that will have them. Due to aggressive US foreign policy over the last two decades, there is no shortage of angry nations, tired of being unilaterally bullied.

And what of the EU? Any follower of the South Ossetian crisis may have noted the very muted response from the EU compared to the outrage from the US. It would seem that the arm of Nato lying closest to Russia’s influence has been rather quiet. That’s because 40% of EU energy is supplied by Russia at present, largely through the only oil pipeline bigger than the one through Georgia, the Druzhba pipeline, largest in the world running straight out of Russia into the Ukraine, through Poland to Western Europe. Is it therefore a coincidence that the Ukrainian Parliament is in shambles and Poland has been selected as a site for US missile shields? The game is raging behind the scenes.

Europe’s dependence on Russian energy is set to rise dramatically over the next decade. Europe can, therefore, ill afford to slap sanctions on Russia in case Russia reciprocates by switching off the Druzhba taps. With invasion of Russia simply out of the question, the only way forward for the EU would be diplomatic. Expect lots of missions, commissions of inquiry and monitors to troubled areas. Don’t, however, expect any strong rebuke by the EU or any aggressive action against Russia unless their energy dependence on the bear can be broken. That won’t happen soon.

Also expect this issue to potentially weaken US and EU relations over the next decade and put stress on the EU itself with some member states keen to pursue a constructive relationship with the new Russia rather than with the US so far away. Fracturing the EU would suit Russia perfectly in its stated goals of reducing Nato’s overwhelming power and unilateral way of doing business. Expect Mr Putin to pay friendlier EU nations a visit soon.

Expect China, India, Brazil and the rest of the developing powerhouses in the global economy to stay as neutral and open for business as they can. They will be under pressure to choose sides but are big enough to resist. It’s the small countries like South Ossetia that will be the pawns of the game. Not able to engage each other directly, the new powers will engage by proxy.

It’s a big pity for global relations that the US did not extend a hand of friendship to Russia when it could have. They have kicked her while she was down and she is not likely to forget that treatment in a hurry. Russia will now hamper US efforts at expansion and consolidation where she can until a new equilibrium is reached. Ironically, having a strong but ideologically benign, capitalistic counter to Nato might provide precisely what the US fears most…global stability and the necessity to negotiate and pay your way before you act unilaterally and with aggression.