EDITORIAL
What about those Passports, Mr. Putin?
Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner of France said Tuesday that Moscow had been issuing Russian passports in Crimea, a region in southern Ukraine where Russia’s Black Sea fleet is based. “We all know that they are handing out Russian passports over there,” Mr. Kouchner said in an interview with Kommersant, a Russian online newspaper. The government of Ukraine has said it wants the fleet to leave the Crimean base in Sevastopol when its lease runs out in 2017. But the Russian naval authorities have indicated that they want to retain the base. Mr. Kouchner said Russia might try to make advances in Crimea after the success of its military operations in Georgia in August.
— Agence France-Presse, October 28th
Once again, we learn that Vladimir Putin’s rogue KGB regime in the Kremlin is doling out passports in a foreign country. By this logic, America is free to begin handing out U.S. passports in Ingushetia — or for that matter in Ossetia and Abkhazia. But what do you think Russians would say if America began doing just that?
Let’s be clear: This type of behavior by Russia, totally disregarding the soveriegnty of Georgia, is the reason that war broke out in Ossetia and Abkhazia a few months ago. Russia told the world it had to adopt a “hands off” policy in breakaway Chechnya, and then it turned around and demanded a “hands on” policy in Ossetia, to the extent of distributing Russian passports and ultimately annexing the territory.
It’s sad — and tragic — that Russians don’t see how their nation’s reputation and economy have been soiled by their government’s actions in Ossetia. But what’s even worse is that Russians can’t perceive the shocking double standard their government is following — or that they do and simply don’t care to live under the rule of law. Russians vociferously condemned U.S. military action against Yugoslavia, yet they just as boisterously exalted in their own government’s military action in Ossetia. No country can long endure in such a hypocritical environment, so detached from reality.
The world must stand up to the Putin regime and demand that it immediately cease its efforts to destabilize Ukraine’s Crimea region. Even a bunch of KGB thugs should be able to understand that it doesn’t want NATO going into Ingushetia and distributing European passports among the separatists. NATO must reach out to Ukraine and immediately guarantee it protection from Russian invasion — or else next October we may see Russian tanks on the move once again.
La Russophobe 
You wrote: “What do you think Russians would say if America began [handing out passports in the Russian North Caucuses region]?”
A: Russia would say “bring it on.” After two Chechnyan wars, which were CIA sponsored, Russia is no longer basing the defense of its territorial integrity on the “goodwill” of the U.S. or other western powers (which “goodwill” never existed in the first place).
Russia has the strength to defend its territorial integrity against any and all comers. Russia’s defense of its territorial integrity is based on faith in Russian strength, not on faith in the goodwill of foreign partners. If you doubt that then I can only say, “bring it on.”
Your wrote: “Let’s be clear: This type of behavior by Russia, totally disregarding the sovereignty of Georgia, is the reason that war broke out in Ossetia and Abkhazia a few months ago.”
A: No. The reason war broke out in the South Caucuses is because Georgia (backed by the U.S., Israel, Ukraine and others) attacked South Ossetia, in a truly cynical and unprovoked way, killing Russian peacekeepers, operating under a UN mandate, and scores of innocent Ossetian civilians in the process. In the weeks before Georgia started the war Russia was urging the Georgian leadership to enter into a binding “non use of force” agreement as a prelude for negotiations to settle all the outstanding issues with the breakaway republics. Now we know why Georgia rejected these Russian overtures. The Georgian leadership thought they could accomplish more through military violence, and they were encouraged in that belief by their partners. They were wrong, as history now shows plainly. Hindsight is always 20/20. Now they have lost the breakaway republics forever, since Russia has now been provoked just enough to recognize their independence (and Russia has declared this recognition is “irreversible.”) This was NOT something Russia was inclined to do before Georgia attacked, notwithstanding the Kosovo precedent.
Georgia was trained and equipped (and given encouragement) by the United States. This this gave Mikheil Saakashvili, Georgia’s mad megalomaniac of a president, the idea that he could actually attack Mother Russia, head on, and win. It was an absurd idea from the start, and it will remain so in the future. Georgia is a nation with less than 3 million people. The idea that you could train or arm Georgia enough to “win” a war with Russia is frankly absurd. You can kill a larger or smaller number of people (as you like) but you can not procure the outcome where Georgia “wins” a war with Russia, no matter what you do. And, mister, you can take that to the bank!
Sending new war materials to Georgia will not alter this reality, but it will merely make a future Georgian war with Russia far more bloody and costly (for both Russia and for Georgia, but especially for Georgia, and I guaranty you that). The outcome will still be the same. You can send $1 billion, $10 billion, or $100 billion of your arms to the madman in charge of Georgia. At the end of the day Russia still wins. Doubt that? What can I say, other than bring it on?
You wrote, “Russia told the world it had to adopt a ‘hands off’ policy in breakaway Chechnya, and then it turned around and demanded a “hands on” policy in Ossetia, to the extent of distributing Russian passports and ultimately annexing the territory.”
A: Russia did not “annex” the territory of South Ossetia, any more than the US “annexed” the territory of Kosovo. Russia (rather belatedly, given the “Kosovo Precedent”) recognized the independence of South Ossetia, which had already become de facto independent some 15 years earlier, after the second Georgian-S. Ossetian war. The first Georgian-S.Ossetian war was actually fought in the 1920’s, and the then-USSR had to intervene to stop that war as well. (Then the USSR granted S.Ossetia the special status of “independent oblast” within the border of the Georgian SSR, which it has had ever since, until Georgia tried to invade it once again, right after the demise of the USSR.)
You wrote, “It’s sad — and tragic — that Russians don’t see how their nation’s reputation and economy have been soiled by their government’s actions in Ossetia. But what’s even worse is that Russians can’t perceive the shocking double standard their government is following — or that they do and simply don’t care to live under the rule of law. Russians vociferously condemned U.S. military action against Yugoslavia, yet they just as boisterously exalted in their own government’s military action in Ossetia. No country can long endure in such a hypocritical environment, so detached from reality.”
A: Oh really. And the U.S. knows all about this hypocrisy and these “double standards,” since they are the world leaders and masters of it. The US has told Russia that “respecting international borders” is the prime principle, or at least only when it comes to the case of Georgia. But still the U.S. has shown that this is NOT the case again and again and again, through its actions, which speak louder than mere words. We’ve seen “unilateral” American attacks–without any UN mandate–against the “sovereign territory” of many, many countries.
Just to give a few examples which come very readily to mind: (1) Grenada; (2) Panama; (3) Bombing Libya (4) Invading and occupying Iraq; (5) Invading and occupying Afghanistan. Much more recently we see that it still goes on with (6) Attacks into Pakistan, over the strong protests of the Pakistani government; and (7) Attacks into Syria, again over the strong protests of the lawful state there, a UN member state by the way. This is not to mention the non-UN sanctioned bombing of Serbia in 1999, for 89 days, by the combined air forces of all 13 NATO powers, the objective of which was to sever Kosovo from its mother country of some 600 years, and the “Cradle of Serb Civilization.”
You wrote, “The world must stand up to the Putin regime and demand that it immediately cease its efforts to destabilize Ukraine’s Crimea region. Even a bunch of KGB thugs should be able to understand that it doesn’t want NATO going into Ingushetia and distributing European passports among the separatists. NATO must reach out to Ukraine and immediately guarantee it protection from Russian invasion — or else next October we may see Russian tanks on the move once again.”
A: Yeah, whatever. Russia has declared on many occasion, that it has no need or desire to enlarge its own territory at the expense of its neighbors. You can believe that, or not, as you like. But Russian behavior has been exemplary in this regard, in fact.
Russia is the largest country in the world, in terms of landmass, and blessed with rich natural resources, oil, gas, metals, which countries such as Ukraine do not possess but which they instead rely on Russia to provide for them, often at below-market prices.
But even if Russia does not covet its neighbor’s land, Russia still thinks these countries ought to adapt policies which are friendly to their bigger and stronger northern neighbor, not just because they are economically dependent upon Russia–though they in fact are very dependent–but because Russia truly wants good relations with all its neighbors. In fact it is the Americans who are the “news boys” in the neighborhood, and they are the ones stirring all the shit and causing problems between formerly friendly nations. Does any honest observer even doubt this for a minute?
Russia has never said that it objects to the efforts of its neighbors to pursue stronger trade and economic relations with the West (especially with the EU). Russia fully understands this desire, as Russia herself also shares the same desire. But this cannot be a “zero sum” game, where every improvement of relations between the former-soviet states with the West must come at the direct expense of Russia. Why should that be so?
Only “one country” tries to use these countries to “provoke” Russia and undermine Russian security. In Russia’s view these countries can pursue better relations West, while at the same time maintaining good relations with Russia, their traditional partner.
But Russia does object to the plan of some of the newly hatched elites in the post-Soviet space (mostly at U.S. urging) to enter into new military alliances which pose a direct threat to Russia’s own vital national security interests (specifically NATO).
Russia quite correctly sees such an expansion of NATO–which expansion directly violates strong American assurances given to Russia at the end of the Cold War–into the post-Soviet space as a direct mortal threat to Russia’s own vital national security interests (Especially given such recent actions as the installation of new US missile systems and radars in Poland and the Czech Republic, perched as they are directly on Russia’s own western borders.)
Russia wants to avoid the expansion of what is for all appearance an aggressive anti-Russian alliance (along with their new weapons) right up to Russia’s own borders, on the north, south, east and west. Russia has stated in no uncertain terms that Russia can and will act (using whatever means it possess) to prevent such an outcome. Those in the West who haven’t heard this Russian message just haven’t been listening hard enough.
Russia doesn’t want or need a new war (or a new conflict at any level). Russia has said this loudly and often. But yes, it is still possible to provoke Russia into a position (to back Russia into a corner) where it cannot avoid taking actions to defend its interests, whether certain countries in the West like that or not.
I write a lot more about these issues on my own blog, which can be found here: http://mishasrussiablog.blogspot.com/
Misha, Russia is a failed society, deal with it. Take away the recent oil and commodity revenues and Russia is like the Congo, a big corrupted land mass with commodity stuff, that’s it. Oh, and, with a military that is second rate too. In spite of Russia’s recent economic gains it still has only 25% of the standard of living that the US has. It is mired in poverty and ignorance when you leave the big cities. Russia offers its neighbors nothing but the same old brutish and arrogant Russian imperialism. There is no model of a civil society, innovative ideas, consumer goods or technology that anyone wants from Russia. I guess you haven’t noticed that one big essential truth. Decent democratic people here in the US, in Europe and especially Russia’s bordering neighbors don’t like them.
Russia still hasn’t learned that one can live next to one’s neighbors without designs on them. That Putin is creating alliances with Iran, Venezuela, Libya and Cuba – all of the world’s notorious third rate thugs – speaks volumes.
You and your pathetic fact challenged blog are ignorable.
Misha, with all due respect, these new ruski passports in S.O., will they stand in Moscow, or is the DPNI going to have a fit, screaming their heads off about “black asses” from the Caucasus?
I’d like to hear some more about Ukraine ‘backing Georgia against Russia’. Is it about one C.I.S. country selling outdated weapons to another C.I.S. country?
Hey, misha, as a big defender of Putin’s Russia, correct me if I’m wrong, but, I see no evidence looking at your blog that you live in Putin’s paradise. A bio would be helpful in determining how you arrived at your world view. Could it be possible that you are one of those hypocritical lefty syncophants that spew pro-Putin stuff from the comfort of a free society with none of the Putin pathology? If so, that’s cheap and easy if you never have or it’s optional to live in Russia. But, then, that’s always been the hypocrisy of western Marxist and cheerleaders for totalitarian thuggery
So, you live in Russia, misha, with the media muzzled, opposition parties denied media access and courts that defer to the state for verdicts? Or you have a non-Russian address with none of the above to contend with in your daily life? Inquiring minds want to know.
“NATO must reach out to Ukraine and immediately guarantee it protection from Russian invasion”
Miliband and Obama will discover what Bill Clinton did 10 years ago…that the Russian military figures to play for real…and Putin likes the the idea of grossly disproportionate use of force including nuclear force. I hope that Miliband and Obama are ready for a real enemy that intends to fight with real weapons. Actually I think that America will be the nation that loses it’s soverign identity first.
” Russia told the world it had to adopt a “hands off” policy in breakaway Chechnya, and then it turned around and demanded a “hands on” policy in Ossetia, to the extent of distributing Russian passports and ultimately annexing the territory.”
Crimea and East Ukraine yes. Don’t forget, they want Alaska back too!
Don Swanson, I wholeheartedly agree, Ukraine would be better off suffering temporarily as opposed to permenently.
Nato has consistently disapointed me, but maybe someday they will do something right.
One day, maybe they will be accountable. Hopefully sooner rather than later.
Russia has the strength to defend its territorial integrity against any and all comers. Russia’s defense of its territorial integrity is based on faith in Russian strength, not on faith in the goodwill of foreign partners. If you doubt that then I can only say, “bring it on.”
I’ll bring it, do you want it?