On some level, this is entirely to be expected, but it’s interesting how on some level America’s hawks seem to have a deep admiration for the kind of global bad actors they nominally despise. Thus John Bolton:
Fear was one reaction Russia wanted to provoke, and fear it has achieved, not just in the “Near Abroad” but in the capitals of Western Europe as well. But its main objective was hegemony, a hegemony it demonstrated by pledging to reconstruct Tskhinvali, the capital of its once and no-longer-future possession, South Ossetia. The contrast is stark: a real demonstration of using sticks and carrots, the kind that American and European diplomats only talk about.
I think this is really wrong. Throughout this conflict, Vladimir Putin has appeared to be at his most impressive when he’s been most restrained. He didn’t launch a preemptive attack on Georgia. Instead, he waited until Georgia launched a preemptive attack on South Ossetia, then seized the opportunity to teach the Georgians a lesson. And for a while, it looked like he had a glorious little war on his hands that would result in a clear Russian victory with few negative consequences. But in recent days, he seems to be overreaching in a variety of respects — squeezing Georgia harder even though there are few valuable prizes to be won there and prompting counter-pressures from a variety of states. There are no real signs of anyone being intimidating into bandwagoning with Russia, and lots of evidence of hardening anti-Russian sentiment in various quarters.
What we’ve seen play out here is a tragedy of aggression nationalism, with Georgia shooting itself in the foot and then with Russia going too far in response and to some extent squandering its opportunity. The same patterns of thought that failed in Washington, DC in 2003-2005 don’t work in Tbilisi or Moscow either.
August 15th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
So, Bolton has no idea what started this and he cannot write his way out of a wet paper bag.
Was he Bush’s college roommate, or something? How the hell did this idiot advance above the level of janitor?
.
August 15th, 2008 at 12:27 pm
I recently came accross your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I dont know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog.
Tim Ramsey
August 15th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Good point about a particular strain of the American right. These people can only conceive of a world in which preternatural threat is a fact of life and in which belligerence presented as resolve is the only proper course of action. Look at Fred Thompson’s article today:
So let’s recap: international terrorism; powerful nation states on a quest for hegemony, whether close to home or further afield and with a willingness to squelch freedom anytime the opportunity arises; less stable and no less dangerous countries with nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities; an alliance of democratic nations of questionable resolve and a debate at home over our future role in the world with a political party happy to create the impression of diminished resolve with little concern for the long term damage such an impression may cause.
The Republicans win when, as John Judis has written, thanatos trumps all other concerns, so they welcome the condition and present international events to fit that frame. In this scenario, prudence is weakness, caution is cowardice, and diplomacy is a waste of time. This formulation has to be fought publicly and repeatedly. But, sadly, it’s a hard case to make–it doesn’t compress into soundbites and it forces people to come to grips with the limits on American power.
August 15th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
How happy and successful we would all be if everyone followed John Bolton’s sage advice!
August 15th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
The thought of Bolton for VP gives K-Lo a big, fucking hard-on.
Seriously.
Me, I couldn’t imagine a more terrifying world than one where Bolton replaces Cheney as America’s foreign policy bubba. I’d buy radiation suit futures, that’s for sure.
August 15th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Why do we even care about John Bolton? His only success was the Libya negotiations. And those negotiations succeeded only because the British had Bolton removed from them. So Bolton can only claim that the world is a better place when he isn’t allowed to have any effect on it. So let’s make the world a better place and ignore him.
August 15th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
What I find interesting, Matt, is that many– even here in this comments section– deride people for comparing US actions to Russian actions, saying that such readings lack “nuance”. But of course, these nuanced readings always lead only in one direction: excusing American actions. That’s a really strange definition of nuance or depth, where the supposedly deeper and more precise reading leads towards stark good/bad distinctions instead of away from them.
August 15th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
Actually, Putin has been impressive throughout. He has shown Godfather-like strategic sense in the selective and restrained use of terror to achieve limited but important strategic goals in a very short timeframe and at a relatively small cost. His regime has also gotten a huge boost in domestic popularity.
We could only wish that Bush or any other Republican would show such good strategic finesse.
Putin in his “restrained and effective strongman” guise is reminiscent of the Poppy Bush and Jim Baker duo, or of Reagan in Afghanistan (not Nicaragua), or of JFK in the Cuban missile crisis, Eisenhower in Suez and Iran, Truman in Europe, etc. In other words, real leaders, not feckless puppets.
If you’re going to run an empire, it’s not a job for lightweights and ideologues like Shrub, Cheney, McCain, or Bolton.
We also ought to recognize that even the most effective imperial actions, like Eisenhower’s coup in Iran for example, leave behind ticking timebombs for some future imperial leader to deal with. That’s what happened to Jimmy Carter and what will probably happen to some future Russian leader over the sure-to-remain-festering Georgia sore.
In a utilitarian sense, I think US weakness and overextension resulting directly from the Iraq invasion invited Putin to flex his muscles. Add to this the poor relations with Turkey that now hamstring our ability to do anything to aid Georgia. Plus the excellent example of Shrub and company on how empires are supposed to behave.
To compare Russian and US actions in a moral sense, it appears to me that Putin has about as much legitimacy as we had intervening in Kosovo – and a hell of a lot more legitimacy than our Iraq invasion, which is the most baldfaced war crime imaginable under any interpretation of international law.
August 15th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
See also the Derb, linked by Sully a while back.
August 15th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Fear was one reaction Russia wanted to provoke…
Fear and surprise.
August 15th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
it would be unexpected only if you had not noticed that the neo-cons, and indeed the broader group of reagan-affiliated republicans who worship executive power (start with cheney and rumsfeld in the ford whitehouse; add in the iran-contra principles; blend with the bush mafia; don’t forget the scalia-alito axis of judicial deference to all executive over-reaches)…
sorry–list got too long. anyhow, this would be surprising only if you had not noticed that these people are classic fascists in their fundamental outlook.
they worship force, despise the rule of law, think the intellect is for weaklings, loathe all women and things related to women, constantly yearn after a masculine hero to fellate, have a compensatory need to expel homosexuals from their midst, and so on and so on.
putin himself is showing signs of being a pretty classic dictator of the fascistic stripe. so it’s no wonder that the republicans admire him. and envy him, too–he *really* knows how to stick it to the rule of law!
August 15th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
Putin for US President in 2012!
George Galloway as VP!
Angelina Jolie as Secretary of State!
Paris Hilton as Secretary of the Treasury! (Oh, wait…Hell, can’t do worse than the morons we have there now.)
August 16th, 2008 at 5:02 am
For a guy who has spent a lifetime trying to act and look tough, he seems to be spending a lot of money on Just For Men while forgetting to use it on his mustache. What a poser.
August 17th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Russia probably should just withdraw at this point, but lets just war-game the situation a little. Suppose Cuba decided that the US presence at Guantanamo was just too much oif an affront to national sovereignty to tolerate any longer, and attacked Guantanamo. Do you think the US response would be just to take back Guantanamo? Wouldn’t US conservatives (and even some liberals) push the US to go all the way to regime change? My bet is that the US military would in fact roll around the Cuban countryside for a while and f**k up the Cuban military as much as possible, in the hope that a local revolt or something would develop. Heck, they might even go right up to the outskirts of Havana.
This is pretty much what the Russian military seems to be doing. However, it doesn’t seem to be provoking much opposition to Saakasvili and is arousing much international opposition, so its pretty much ion Russian interests to pull back now. The point has been made.
March 2nd, 2009 at 5:57 am
levitraIt is the coolest site,keep so!
March 11th, 2009 at 5:12 am
Incredible site!
March 21st, 2009 at 2:26 pm
Hallo …..-
check this my [url=http://www.amateur-sexchat.info]hobbynutten[/url]
nice hello from UK
March 21st, 2009 at 11:02 pm
Hi !!
check out this [url=http://www.amateur-sexchat.info]private Amateure[/url]
nice hello from poland
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:34 am
tramadol
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:45 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:29 am
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 14th, 2009 at 9:39 am
I rarely comment on blogs but yours I had to stop and say Great Blog!!
viagra