Back to the current, a foolish and destructive gambit by Saakashvili, perhaps encouraged by irresponsible rhetoric from US politicians. Civilians in South Ossetia suffered the initial consequences of this reckless act, and then Georgians suffered the consequences of Russia’s disproportionate response. An Americans (after foolishly and irresponsibly inflating Georgian expectations and nationalistic impulses) clucks on the sidelines recognizing that intervention would only escalate matters to a more destructive level. (A bout of realism of which I didn’t think they were capable.)

It appears Russia has restrained itself after capturing Gori and will take her “winnings” and withdraw. Meanwhile, Mr. Saakashvili deserves to join our President in retirement as both have mastered provoking an unjustified, unnecessary and destructive war.

Let me conclude by saying I’m happy Mr. Larison was right and I was wrong about US/NATO intervention. I’d hoped he was and glad he was. Our governing elites for once restrained themselves from war, seeing that (regardless of the capability to do so) it would only have made matters much worse; escalating into a much broader conflict with severe consequences for all parties. And I also apologize from my ill-tempered remark which were the product of frustration with an article on Putin from John Laughland in TAC some time ago. (Mr. Larison being the innocent brunt of that frustration.)

Of course, given that the conflict seems to have resolved by diplomacy and Western restraint on armed response, I am curious by Will’s denunciation today of Obama’s diplomatic approach. Perhaps I’m missing something.

Not every year is 1938. Not every foreign leader is Hitler.

BTW, Chamberlain didn’t get anything from Hitler except a vague promise. I’m talking about a real trade backed up by force. Its more similar to what Kennedy did with trading missiles in Turkey for missiles in Cuba. If a moron like you had been in charge in October 1962 I would have never been born, or had I been, it would have been in a Mad Max radioactive wasteland.

That’s immoral, of course. History shows that it also doesn’t work.

Larison got this wrong and McCain got it right. By now it should be obvious to everyone that this is no more and no less than Russian aggression. And why is Russia behaving aggressively? Because it’s an authoritarian state that has destroyed independent media, fomented nationalism at home, crushed constitutional legality, crippled civil society, and attacked private property. Such nations cannot be trusted to pursue moral or rational courses of action. This is what history teaches. It’s the real realism.

No doubt McCain learned something about communist thugs while he was their prisoner in Hanoi.

Tell Putin he has two options–he can do whatever he wants with Georgia, even annex it, but Ukraine will join NATO in exchange if he does that. Or, he can withdraw from Georgia and get a promise of a neutral, slightly Russian friendly Ukraine (similar to the arrangement with Finland) and a freeze on NATO expansion.

Sound reasonable? Ukraine is more important anyway since its on the road to western Europe and Georgia isn’t.

I am likewise unsure why you hark back to the Suez incidents to demonstrate a sphere of influence situation. Perhaps we could explain that to Tibet, to Lebanon, or to Ireland, to say nothing of Chechnya. The bottom line is that a “sphere of influence” exists when a given country has the power and proximity to exert it’s will cheaply, quickly, and with comparative impunity. Though I think WRW disagrees with Mr. Larison and myself respecting the impunity part, it is all too clear to all of us that Russia has eliminated Georgia’s army fast and on the cheap. Frankly, I’m thrilled that Georgia performed as well as it did.

Discussing “legitimate v illegitimate” use of power sounds swell, but I can’t see that it has any bearing on the “pseudo-realistic” interpretation of the problem on the ground.

This is a good example of paleocon pseudo-realism. One could, I suppose, note that the US in the Caribbean and Latin America, or western European countries in their former empires, or any country in its immediate neighbors, takes a special interest that leads to a higher-than-normal degree of influence, and call this a “sphere of influence.” As long as this involves the consent of the governments concerned this is compatible with sovereignty.

But since the Suez crisis of 1956, it has been atypical if not unheard-of for western European countries to use anything like a “sphere-of-influence” concept to justify armed intervention against the will of sovereign governments and without some kind of broader international legitimation. Since 1991 it has also been rare for the US to do so. Russia’s strange, vague claims over its former territories are not an instance of any universal and inevitable pattern. They are decidedly exceptional. This is simply proven by the lived experience of the rest of the world.

As I think I made clear, my disagreement with Mr. Larison is his apparent confidence that armed conflict between Russia and the US/NATO will not happen even if Russia invade Georgia (and by that I mean more than an armed intrusion to the periphery of Georgia’s undisputed territory.) I think that simply isn’t true based on prior US conduct and the opinion of Russia held by our establishment. Conflict will only be avoided if Russia pursues steps to permit a disengagement and withdrawal to the disputed territories. (Which its posturing appears to indicate it has allowed itself to do.)

If Russia had the political, legal and constitutional infrastructure to behave rationally, it would have stopped already– or, better yet, never gotten involved at all. But Putin has smashed the free press, assaulted private property, and trampled on the Constitution by decreeing the central appointment of governors. Without a free press, the populace’s ability to form public opinion with a sensible center of gravity is crippled. Now they’re ruining Russia’s reputation by playing to the worst of their image in the eyes of the world. These are sad, sad, sad days for lovers of Russia.