As you suggest, this appears to be a conflict rooted in ethnicity and strategic considerations – spiced perhaps by Russian resentment that the Chinese are proving much better at capitalism than they are.

None of which are subjects on which the left has anything distinctive to say.

Well, Mike nobody really can have anything meaningful to say. Considering that nearly all of the former soviet union’s borders are artificial and ignore ethnography almost completely, I would have thought another frontier dispute was pretty overdue. The west promised Russia after the cold war that she would not move NATO up to her borders and here we are trying to assert western control in Russia’s traditional sphere of influence. Really, what do we expect would happen?

In any case, it’s got nothing to do with us. If we don’t want “Gazprom” to have us all by the balls in 30 years time, we should stop worrying about Russo-Georgian relations and start building lots of new nuclear power stations.

David is right, we don’t have to take sides. And he’s right that supporting the Russians out of reflex anti-Amrericanism would bechildish.

However I believe it is our interests to take sides. (By “us” I mean Britain and by extension Europe; I also mean on terms of the success of liberal-left ideas). We should support Georgia because:

1. for all its faults, Georgia is a more liberal and democratic society than Russia

2. if by left we include ideas such as egalitarian, then Russia is one of the least elagitarian (and therfore most right-wing) societies on earth.

3. who controls Georgia matters economically for Europe because of oil and gas pipelines. if Russia controls these pipelines, it can force Europe to pay more for gas, and also threasten Europe by withholding supplies. It goes without saying that Europe is a more liberal and egalitarian society than Russia, so liberal-left ideas will prosper more if Europe does than if Russia does.

If Abkhazia and South Ossetia choose Russia over Georgia in a free and fair referendum, then that decision should be respected, even though (in my opinion) anyone who prefers Russian levels of wealth and freedom to European ones is barmy.

If we don’t want “Gazprom” to have us all by the balls in 30 years time, we should stop worrying about Russo-Georgian relations and start building lots of new nuclear power stations.

That’s true too. Though we don’t want countries with uranium deposits to have us by the balls either, so we should also build wind and wave power. And solar in southern Europe.

We do need to take sides. The side is peace and prosperity . The EU has won a great peace deal. It shows the importance of the EU is stopping the geopolitical war games. The while point in the EU is to ensure big nations cannot got to war with small nations in geopolitical games. Europe is at it’s most vulnerable to tyranny when it is weak and divided. This shows the right wing euri skeptics are geoplitcal pygmies.
The Union accounts for 60% if russians exports this is why they listen to us.

“If by left we include ideas such as egalitarian, then Russia is one of the least elagitarian.”

So … you’re saying that Russia’s one of the MOST egalitarian? I take it ‘elagitarianism’ is a ‘right-wing’ idea.

No Mike building nuclear power stations means any terrorist has us by the balls. Plus russia needs our money. Everyone says how russia has us by the balls because we buy their oil what they forget is we in the eu account for 60% of their exports they are also are dependent on our food exports and the clever thing to do would be to invite russian democarcies into the eu not to build nuclear energy plants which a na real tough leader would just blow up.

There’s no need to take sides…because there’s no obvious ’side’ to take:

People’s right to self-determination? Go, South Ossetia!

Territorial integrity? Up, Georgia!

‘Humanitarian intervention’ (allegedly)? Go, Russia!

Nato/EU ally? Er… we’ll get back to you on that one. (Next time, get the treaty signed first)

The EU has won a great peace deal. It shows the importance of the EU is stopping the geopolitical war games. The while point in the EU is to ensure big nations cannot got to war with small nations in geopolitical games. Europe is at it’s most vulnerable to tyranny when it is weak and divided. This shows the right wing euri skeptics are geoplitcal pygmies.
The Union accounts for 60% if russians exports this is why they listen to us.”

Clearly the euro-fanatics are running out of excuses for why them and their beloved project should continue to exist. Stop talking b****ks all your life.

Well it’s settled now, Georgia beat the Russians in the beach volleyball and proved that ultimately mind games are a cheap trick in trying to assure victory in the prestigious sport.

Saakashvili should have seen the heavy-handed Russian response coming.

In fact I’m sure he did, which is why he provoked it in the fistr place.

He is not the victim or plucky underdog he attempts to portray himself as – he is a self-interested agitator.

Saakashvili counted on the Russians making greater incursions and strikes beyond the boundaries of the enclaves so that he could gain practical evidence of his legal justification for use of force and show the Russian constitutional requirement to respond to be no restraint on their ability to exert their power.

The EU has won some breathing space, nothing more. The EU must be proactive in solving the incompatibility on all sides before it erupts again and louder, so don’t say you haven’t been warned.

If democracies only respond to danger when in crisis, is this crisis big enough to unify opinion around structural change? I have serious doubts.

I have never understood this leftist obsession with “taking sides”. I mean who the fuck actually cares what the British left think. It is not as if they are ever going to do anything about it. . . .

If you want to help the people of Georgia or South Ossetia, send them some money, make a donation to one of the humanitarian agencies or go out and volunteer yourself.

I have virtually never seen a conflict close up (including the one in Georgia where I have worked) where one side had a monopoly of good and the other a monopoly of evil. Generally it is one set of gunmen against another set of gunmen with a bunch of civilians stuck in between. There might be cases where, in the face of an ongoing humanitarian catastrophe, the intervention of international peace-keepers can make a difference (Rwanda, for example in April 1994 and East Timor in September 2000), but there are also plenty of examples where il-thought out interventions have made things worse.

The thing I hate most about reading these various Trot/Stal pontificators about the “right line” to adopt about places they have never been and know very little about is that it reduces real human suffering to the status of a spectator sport.

People like this should be punched hard and frequently to give them a better insight into what is really at stake.

“The thing I hate most about reading these various Trot/Stal pontificators about the “right line” to adopt about places they have never been and know very little about is that it reduces real human suffering to the status of a spectator sport. ”

“People like this should be punched hard and frequently to give them a better insight into what is really at stake.”

Incitement to violence aside, very well said.

Ben

“People like this should be punched hard and frequently to give them a better insight into what is really at stake.”

Metaphorically-speaking only, please!

From my point of view Putin looks increasingly like a political genius and the defining figure of his age. Not that I wouldn’t find plenty of points to disagree with him over, obviously.

“Metaphorically-speaking only, please!”

Well, with just a couple of exceptions perhaps ; -)

The thing I hate most about reading these various Trot/Stal pontificators about the “right line” to adopt about places they have never been and know very little about is that it reduces real human suffering to the status of a spectator sport.

People like this should be punched hard and frequently to give them a better insight into what is really at stake.

haha! Pure class.

But let’s do a thought experiment here. Say in 2018 there are enough people participating in blogs for them to have regular impact on the national media discourse. There is a chance that in certain cases we could make enough of a noise that the govt is forced to doing something to help resolve the conflict.

In certain cases citizens can also get organised to force the govt into a more overt stance… for example as they tried with Burma. There have to be other ways than just donating or volunteering? Other than that, a good point Conor.

Though we don’t want countries with uranium deposits to have us by the balls either, so we should also build wind and wave power. And solar in southern Europe.

Agree with this too.

Bootyboomboom you are a moronic idiot it is cear to anyone with half a brain cell that the EU won the peace you are just short sighted bigot who cannot see that peace was won by the very ideals that your evil right wing values hate. Grow up.

Ignore the troll guys. If he carries on he’ll be disemvoweled.

“There is a chance that in certain cases we could make enough of a noise that the govt is forced to doing something to help resolve the conflict.”

I’m not sure.

MSM reportage has been erratic at best* throughout the conflict, and commentators rely upon the validity of it to make such informed judgements. Anyway, whichever ’side’ is more responsible for initiating conflict is rather irrelevant until Russia withdraws it’s troops.

* And there are even allegations of deliberate fallacies being propogated. Russia Today is alleging that footage of Tskhinvali was used in in a CNN report on Gori. The nature of the source does demand that one takes the story with a real artery-clogger of a pinch of salt, though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVNblG9PJMk&eurl=http://news.google.com/

But let’s do a thought experiment here. Say in 2018 there are enough people participating in blogs for them to have regular impact on the national media discourse. There is a chance that in certain cases we could make enough of a noise that the govt is forced to doing something to help resolve the conflict.

Experimental Thought Experiment Flashback Sequence

Scene: Whitehall. March 2003

Sir Humphrey: Prime Minister, the citizens have organised a Facebook group to demand you don’t go to war in Iraq. It has twenty million members.

Prime Minister: Ignore them. I know I’m doing the right thing.

A cyber-petition is still a petition, Sunny, even if blogging might be more fun than ringing up radio phone-ins.

Wow, I’ve just read the parallel discussion of this article at Dave’s own blog. I had forgotten how difficult it is to parody the British ultra-left.

“Hard and frequently. Hard and frequently.” It seems to be the only way.

Equally:

Sir Humphrey: Prime Minister, the citizens have organised a Facebook group to demand you go to war against USA/Russia/China/France/Germany/Scotland/Jersey//Kiribati [delete as applicable]. It has one-hundred-and-twenty million members.

Prime Minister: Wow, that’s amazing. It’s more than the total population of the country. The people must care so much that some of them have voted twice! I’m convinced – let’s launch the nukes!

A cyber-petition is still a petition, Sunny, even if blogging might be more fun than ringing up radio phone-ins.

Well, yes and no. A PM could ignore it – but if you don’t register your protest at all then they’re not even aware that there is significant anger out there. In some cases the govt has been known to backtrack – remember 10p?

We do not have to take sides. We just do nothing while Putin and the FSB recreate the Russian Empire of the 19Century. Russia has never enjoyed a true democracy. Prior to Lenin, the Tsar ruled with the help of the Okrana – Secret Police. No doubt all the former members of the Soviet Union are looking forward to it’s de-facto recreation. From Moldavia to Kirgistan, all the various countries will now know that they can now do anything they like, provided it is agreeable with Putin. I always find it amazing how the left wing middle class can perform the most incredible mental gymnastics and come to justify dictatorship, if it can some way be portrayed as anti American. Chamberlain’s ignoring of the Nazi invasion of the Sudentland appears almost noble in comparison.

Charlie: From Moldavia to Kirgistan, all the various countries will now know that they can now do anything they like, provided it is agreeable with Putin.

…and you know what, Charlie, all those heroic right-wing leaders stood by during the Cold War as the tanks rolled into Budapest and Prague. As I explained in my original post, you can arrive at a very different ’side’ depending on what principle you want to uphold above all others, or indeed which dodgy historical analogy you want to use (I’m currently favouring an analogy to the Turkish annexation of northern Cyprus in 1974: it’s not as though the international community sent in the bombers to oust the Turkish forces when that happened either)

Who are you calling a troll me or him? :

So it was only in my imagination that Putin has gone around signing treaties to fix the borders of the Russian Federation (including China this year), is it? You’ll notice this flared up while he was on holiday, primarily because he was out of the country: he may not be a vision of the Jed Bartlett liberal democratic wet dream, but neither is he Brezhnev.