home > by publication type > daily analysis > In Russia-Georgia Conflict, Balkan Shadows
Email
| Author: |
|---|
Russian soldiers sit aboard an armored vehicle on the road to the border of South Ossetia on August 10, 2008. (AP/Mikhail Metzel)
Circumstances in two separatist Georgian border regions—South Ossetia in the north and Abkhazia in the northwest—brought Russia and Georgia into open conflict (RFE/RL) this month. Though Russian President Dmitry Medvedev announced an end to military attacks (WSJ) against Georgian forces on August 12, there remained reports (Reuters) of ongoing Russian military operations in Georgia. Yet beyond the immediate triggers, some analysts see two international developments in the past six months as major catalysts for Russia's biggest military campaign outside its borders since the fall of the Soviet Union. The conflict could have consequences far beyond Georgia's borders for the West and Russia.
The first catalyst was recognition of Kosovo's February declaration of independence (NYT) by the United States and European powers. Vladimir Putin, then Russia's president and now its powerful prime minister, had warned for years of the danger of recognizing Kosovo without Serbia's agreement. After it occurred, James Traub writes in the New York Times, "Mr. Putin responded by leveling a blow at America's Caucasus darling." Putin set in motion moves to recognize South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and stepped up patrols of Russian forces—ostensibly peacekeepers—in those regions. Russia expert Dmitri Simes of the Nixon Center told a CFR meeting late last year that Western recognition of Kosovo would have to be followed by a "quid pro quo in the Caucasus or where we are [is] a new era in international relations" between Russia and the West.
Now, just days into Russia's offensive, writes the Financial Times' Quentin Peel, the events in Georgia have become "Russia's Kosovo," including Russian portrayals of President Mikheil Saakashvili as a dangerous rogue in the mold of Serb leader Slobodan Milosevic. An analysis from the Russian news agency RIA Novosti described Saakashvili as unstable but a master propagandist. Soon after fighting broke out in South Ossetia, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was voicing concern over Georgian "ethnic cleansing (Reuters)" of the region, conjuring a term from 1990s Bosnia and Kosovo.
A second international catalyst for Russia's offensive in Georgia was a decision at NATO's Bucharest summit in April. The alliance, in a bow to Russia, declined to consider Georgia and Ukraine right away for a Membership Action Plan, or MAP. But a NATO statement pledging to reconsider the two countries' bids in December infuriated the Kremlin (FT). Russia followed that decision by stepping up moves to upgrade its relations with the two breakaway Georgian regions, which it already provided with crucial economic support. Analysts have linked the strong Russian reaction with a growing feeling of isolation as countries on its periphery join Western institutions. That is now coupled with newfound Russian "prosperity and self-confidence and geopolitical entitlement" that give it an opportunity to reverse this trend, says CFR Senior Fellow Stephen Sestanovich in a new interview.
The challenge for Washington and European capitals, which have gradually boosted their ties with Saakashvili's democratically elected government, is what tack to take to restrain Russia. President Bush on Aug. 13 made his strongest show yet of support for Georgians by announcing a humanitarian relief effort spearheaded by U.S. military aircraft and naval forces.
On the diplomatic side, there looks to be a need to revamp the international approach to brokering the region's "frozen conflicts." Before this month's fighting, the main tools of Western engagement in Georgia's frozen separatist conflicts—a UN observer mission in Abkhazia, and an OSCE mission in South Ossetia —had produced little enduring results in the past fifteen years.
Much depends on whether the August military campaign represents a turning point for Russian foreign policy. Former top Clinton administration officials Ronald D. Asmus and Richard Holbrooke write that this moment could be the end of an era (WashPost) in Europe when "spheres of influence were supposed to be replaced by new cooperative norms." CFR Adjunct Fellow Jeffrey Mankoff's recent profile of Russia's foreign policy elite notes that the "neo-imperialist" camp, keen for Russia to challenge the West for leadership, appears well positioned to grow in influence.
Weigh in on this issue by emailing CFR.org.
Explore international efforts to curb nuclear proliferation with a new interactive from CFR's program on International Institutions and Global Governance.
To order Task Force reports, Council Special Reports, and Critical Policy Choices, please call, fax, or order online from our distributor, the Brookings Institution Press: phone +1.800.537.5487, fax +1.410.516.6998.
For information on other reports that are not for sale, or for general publications information, please call +1.212.434.9516 or email publications@cfr.org.
In War of Necessity, War of Choice, Richard N. Haass contrasts the decisions that shaped the conduct of two wars between the United States and Iraq involving the two presidents Bush and Saddam Hussein, and writes an authoritative, personal account of how U.S. foreign policy is made, what it should seek, and how it should be pursued.
In Cuba: What Everyone Needs to Know, Julia E. Sweig presents a remarkably accessible portrait of Cuba’s unique place on the world stage over the past fifty years, including its internal politics, its often fraught relationship with the United States, and its shifting relationship with the global community.
As Ray Takeyh shows in Guardians of the Revolution, behind the famous personalities and extremist slogans of Iran is a nation that is far more pragmatic—and complex—than many in the West have been led to believe.
Complete list of CFR Books
This report finds that nuclear weapons will remain a fundamental element of U.S. national security in the near term, and makes recommendations on how to ensure the safety, security, and reliability of the U.S. deterrent nuclear force, prevent nuclear terrorism, and strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime.
About Independent Task Forces at CFR
Complete list of Task Force reports
The Canadian oil sands present an important challenge to policymakers: they promise energy security benefits but present climate change problems. Michael A. Levi assesses the energy security and climate change effects of the oil sands and makes recommendations for U.S. policymakers within the context of broader bilateral relations with Canada.
This report explores an important element of the maritime policy regime: the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Author Scott G. Borgerson examines the international negotiations that led to the convention, the history of debates in the United States over whether to join it, and the strategic importance of the oceans for U.S. foreign policy today.
Complete list of Council Special Reports
To request permission to reprint or reuse CFR material, please fill out this permissions request form (PDF), referring to the instructions on page 1.
Copyright 2009 by the Council on Foreign Relations. All Rights Reserved.