With all the chatter in the media about which side is responsible for the fighting in Georgia, I thought it might be helpful to examine some of the claims and counterclaims. Whose fault is it? As so often, it depends on who you ask…
It’s the Russians’ fault
Georgia and their allies claim that the Russians reacted with disproportionate force after the Georgians attacked South Ossetia. Russian mechanized infantry and tank units, supported by air power and artillery (including medium range tactical bombers from Russia) staged a counter invasion from Ossetia into central Georgia, taking the key city of Gori. Russia also landed troops in Abkhazia (which was not directly involved in this round of fighting) and those troops then invaded Georgia from the west. The Russians are also doing little if anything to stop paramilitary militias from Ossetia and Abkhazia from looting Georgian homes & businesses within the breakaway regions and by some accounts within Georgia itself.
More subtly though, Russia has supported South Ossetia and Abkhazia since the formation of the state of Georgia. The frequent violence that often takes place between pro-Russian militias in those regions and the regular Georgian government forces couldn’t take place without some level of Russian support. The Georgians would say that much of the anti-Georgian violence is directly orchestrated by Russia.
As I mentioned in April, a Russian air force fighter tore through Georgian airspace to kill an unmanned drone patrolling over Abkhazia. So it's clear there's at least some level of communication and support between Russia and the rebels.
Also, Georgia is claiming that the blinding speed of the Russian counterattack indicates that the Russians had been planning some kind of military action all along. Is it possible the initial attacks by South Ossetian militias last week were intended to provoke a larger attack by Georgia, thus opening the door to a Russian invasion?
It’s the Georgians’ fault
The Russians and Ossetians claim that the Georgian attack into South Ossetia was unprovoked and excessive. The South Ossetian capitol of Tskhinvali was severely damaged in the fighting, and the residents claim that the Georgians used heavy artillery and attack airplanes to indiscriminately bomb the city before the Georgian ground forces moved in. Russia claims that the Georgians created a human rights disaster in South Ossetia, which could only be stopped by a massive Russian invasion (some on the Russian side are calling the action a ‘peacekeeping effort’).
The further invasion into Georgia was, Russia claims, necessary to knock out Georgian military targets and neutralize military equipment that could be used against Ossetia. Their position is that just as NATO smashed Serbia from the air to stop Serbian aggression in Kosovo in 1999, Russia needed to smash Georgia to stop Georgian aggression in South Ossetia. (Adding a bit of literary color, Russian President Dimitri Medvedev called Georgian troops “lunatics.”)
While some in the West may say the two situations are very different, the Russian media has been airing reports that Georgian troops indiscriminately killed Ossetian civilians, including crushing them with tanks as they tried to flee. And before we come down too hard on the Russian media for lying about human rights abuses, we should remember that when Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1991, there were similar exaggerated reports of atrocities against civilians that justified American action in the Gulf War. For example, Kuwaitis testified before Congress that Iraqi soldiers looted Kuwaiti hospitals, pillaged the maternity wards, and threw premature babies out of their incubators onto the floor. None of it actually happened.
As to the claim that Russia was able to move so quickly only because the invasion was premeditated, the Russians had a massive amount of hardware just across the Georgian border in Chechnya, which continues to be a hot spot. The Russian mechanized garrisons based in Grozny were just a few hours drive from Tskhinvali, and the air power was already in place and only needed to be re-tasked from bases in the Russian Caucasus.
We should expect Russia to continue equating Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili with Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic, and demanding that he be removed from power and even held for war crimes, the way Milosevic was.
That seems extremely unlikely to happen, and if it doesn’t, the Russians will claim that the West – especially the Americans – are using a double standard in international politics. Russian allies like Milosevic are sent to the Hague to die in captivity, while American allies like Saakashvili are allowed to remain in power. Which brings me to…
It’s the Americans’ fault
Russia has never fully recognized that South Ossetia and Abkhazia belong to Georgia, and have complained bitterly about the American military aid that has helped arm and train Georgian forces. Russia is even more furious about the idea of Georgia (and Ukraine) being considered for NATO membership. And the Russian leadership now says that arming a man like Saakashvili, whom they consider so dangerous, only emboldened him to take the fatal step of invading South Ossetia.
By Russian thinking, pulling the breakaway regions away from Georgia is also payback for the Americans having pulled Kosovo away from Serbia, Russia’s most western ally in Europe.
A statement by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov really gives a window into their mindset. "…A choice will have to be made someday between considerations of prestige related to an illusory project [Georgian independence] and a real partnership [with Russia] in matters which indeed require collective efforts."
In other words, he says America should throw the Georgians under the bus, and choose a partnership with Russia in order to manage the instabilities of the world together.
And the American view? Well, Condi Rice responded, "As to choosing, the United States has made very clear that it is standing by the democratically elected government of Georgia."
So who is to blame for this mess, and where does it leave us now?
Yeah, it’s complicated.