See other (s)Elections Articles
Title: ‘Invasion of Georgia’ a ‘3 a.m. moment’
Source:
Yahoo - Politico
URL Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080809/pl_politico/12409
Published: Aug 9, 2008
Author: Ben Smith
Post Date: 2008-08-09 16:08:44 by Rotara
Keywords: None
Views: 440
Comments: 13
Sat Aug 9, 8:52 AM ET When the North Caucasus slid into war Thursday night, it presented John McCain and Barack Obama with a true “3 a.m. moment,” and their responses to the crisis suggested dramatic differences in how each candidate, as president, would lead America in moments of international crisis. While Obama offered a response largely in line with statements issued by democratically elected world leaders, including President Bush, first calling on both sides to negotiate, John McCain took a remarkably — and uniquely — more aggressive stance, siding clearly with Georgia’s pro-Western leaders and placing the blame for the conflict entirely on Russia. The abrupt crisis in an obscure hotspot had the features of the real foreign policy situations presidents face — not the clean hypotheticals of candidates’ white papers and debating points. Russia has long attempted to reclaim now-sovereign parts of the former Soviet Union, stoking conflicts in the enclaves of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, which are universally recognized to be Georgian soil. Russia has also used the ensuing military tensions to set back Georgia’s bid to enter NATO. But Georgia appears to have sparked the conflict by marching on the South Ossetian capital as Russia’s powerful Prime Minister Vladimir Putin headed to Beijing for the Olympic Games. Russia, in turn, welcomed the conflict, launching a large-scale attack on its smaller neighbor and sending tanks across its border. Both American candidates back Georgia’s sovereignty and its turn toward the West. But their first statements on the crisis revealed differences of substance and style. Obama’s statement put him in line with the White House, the European Union, NATO and a series of European powers, while McCain’s initial statement — which he delivered in Iowa and ran on a blog on his Web site under the title “McCain Statement on Russian Invasion of Georgia” — put him more closely in line with the moral clarity and American exceptionalism projected by President Bush’s first term. A McCain adviser suggested that Obama’s statement constituted appeasement, while Obama’s camp suggested that McCain was being needlessly belligerent and dangerously quick to judge a complicated situation. “I strongly condemn the outbreak of violence in Georgia, and urge an immediate end to armed conflict,” Obama said in a written statement. “Now is the time for Georgia and Russia to show restraint and to avoid an escalation to full-scale war. Georgia’s territorial integrity must be respected.” Obama added briefly that the international community should get involved. More than an hour later, as more details of Russia’s incursion into Georgia emerged, he cited Russia more directly: “What is clear is that Russia has invaded Georgia’s sovereign — has encroached on Georgia’s sovereignty,” he told reporters in Sacramento. McCain’s statement was longer, more detailed and more confrontational. "[T]he news reports indicate that Russian military forces crossed an internationally recognized border into the sovereign territory of Georgia. Russia should immediately and unconditionally cease its military operations and withdraw all forces from sovereign Georgian territory. “The government of Georgia has called for a ceasefire and for a resumption of direct talks on South Ossetia with international mediators. The U.S. should immediately work with the EU and the OSCE to put diplomatic pressure on Russia to reverse this perilous course that it has chosen.” John McCain’s top foreign policy adviser, Randy Scheunemann, defended McCain’s direct criticism of Russia in the early hours of the crisis. "Sen. McCain is clearly willing to note who he thinks is the aggressor here,” he said, dismissing the notion that Georgia’s move into its renegade province had precipitated the crisis. "I don't think you can excuse, defend, explain or make allowance for Russian behavior because of what is going on in Georgia.” He also criticized Obama for calling on both sides to show “restraint,” and suggested the Democrat was putting too much blame on the conflict’s clear victim. “That's kind of like saying after Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, that Kuwait and Iraq need to show restraint, or like saying in 1968 [when the Soviet Union invaded Czechoslovakia] ... that the Czechoslovaks should show restraint,” he said. A foreign policy adviser for Obama, Ben Rhodes, said Obama was deliberately measured in response to the conflict, balancing his disapproval of Russia’s “troubling behavior in its near-abroad region” with “the fact that we have to deal with Russia to deal with our most important national security challenges.” Rhodes declined to discuss McCain’s statement directly, but did indirectly criticize it. "The temperature of your rhetoric isn't a measure of your commitment to Georgian sovereignty,” he said, noting that the two candidates’ statements shared a substantive commitment to Georgia’s borders. “You don't want to get so far in front of a situation that you're feeding the momentum of an escalation.” Critics of McCain’s stance said he’d imposed ideology on a complicated situation in which both sides bear some blame. “McCain took an inflexible approach to addressing this issue by focusing heavily on one side, without a pragmatic assessment of the situation,” said Mark Brzezinski, a former Clinton White House official and an informal adviser to Obama. “It’s both sides’ fault — both have been somewhat provocative with each other,” he said. A fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, Ariel Cohen, praised McCain’s statement as “robust and tough.” The candidates’ stances also reflected their broader goals in the region. Obama, Rhodes noted, has argued that the American interest in controlling nuclear material in the former Soviet Union and in other national security concerns means that the country should maintain a constructive relationship with Russia, even when Russia mistreats its population and threatens its neighbors. McCain, meanwhile, has offered more sticks than carrots, and suggested that Russia will respond primarily to American toughness and resolve. He’s also called for Russia to be expelled from the Group of Eight industrial nations, a move unlikely to be supported by its other members, but one that makes his disapproval of Russia’s conduct very clear. Friday, as the crisis unfolded, he reiterated that stance. The conflict in Georgia also brought attention to another complicating feature of McCain’s campaign: His ties to Republican operatives with extensive lobbying practices. Scheunemann was, until earlier this year, registered to lobby for the government of Georgia. A public relations firm working for the Russian Federation pointed out Scheunemann’s lobbying past to reporters — a sign that McCain’s stance is not, for better or worse, being welcomed in Moscow — as did Obama’s campaign. “John McCain’s top foreign policy adviser lobbied for, and has a vested interest in, the Republic of Georgia and McCain has mirrored the position advocated by the government,” said Obama spokesman Hari Sevugan, noting that the “appearance of a conflict of interest” was a consequence of McCain’s too-close ties to lobbyists. Scheunemann dismissed the criticism, saying he severed his ties to his firm and to his client on March 1 and noting that McCain has been a firm supporter of Georgia’s move toward the West, and away from Russia, since the Arizona senator’s first visit there in 1997.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Rotara (#0)
Good article.
Both American candidates back Georgia’s sovereignty and its turn toward the West. But their first statements on the crisis revealed differences of substance and style. Obama’s statement put him in line with the White House, the European Union, NATO and a series of European powers, while McCain’s initial statement — which he delivered in Iowa and ran on a blog on his Web site under the title “McCain Statement on Russian Invasion of Georgia” — put him more closely in line with the moral clarity and American exceptionalism projected by President Bush’s first term. IOW, neoscrewjob on the way. BOHICA ;-)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
Again.
Video: Casualties and damage in the S Ossetian conflict - 09 Aug 08 AlJazeeraEnglish
Fighting for world peace and future world order... With socialist EU flag in the background. (Georgian president.)
This does not bode well.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
I guess that's their plea for NATO to come to the rescue with air and guns blazing. ;-)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
www.gorenfeld.net/book/cinema/ www.jesus-is-savior.com/F...ns/Moonies/moon-video.htm www.rense.com/general20/unholy.htm www.retakingamerica.com/sun_myung_moon_001.html www.unification.org/rev_mrs_moon.html www.dissidentvoice.org/June04/Berkowitz0605.htm
Soul strippers.
I do not think it is quite correct to say Russia "welcomed" the conflict but they reacted quickly and with force. We have a very large naval armada headed over by Iran. Putin was in Beijing and Russia is now involved with fighting Georgia. Georgia started military operations with no hope whatever of besting Russia at war. China has just started the olympics and does not want a military engagement while that is ongoing. Has some neocon got the bright idea that there will never be a better time to move against Iran? ~ ~ ~ www.liveleak.com/view?i=704_1218207188 Massive US Naval Armada Heads for Iran Timothy Alexander – August 8, 2008 Operation Brimstone ended only one week ago. This was the joint US/UK/French naval war games in the Atlantic Ocean preparing for a naval blockade of Iran and the likely resulting war in the Persian Gulf area. The massive war games included a US Navy supercarrier battle group, an US Navy expeditionary carrier battle group, a Royal Navy carrier battle group, a More.. French nuclear hunter-killer submarine plus a large number of US Navy cruisers, destroyers and frigates playing the "enemy force". The lead American ship in these war games, the USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN71) and its Carrier Strike Group Two (CCSG-2) are now headed towards Iran along with the USS Ronald Reagon (CVN76) and its Carrier Strike Group Seven (CCSG-7) coming from Japan. [snip] www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9775 Rep. Ron Paul: The US is heading into an illegal attack on Iran by Attorney Harold H. Burbank II Global Research, August 9, 2008 Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) has warned millions of radio listeners that the United States is heading into an illegal attack on Iran, stating his amazement at members of Congress who have openly voiced support for a criminal nuclear strike. "If we do (attack) it is going to be a disaster," the congressman told the Alex Jones radio show. "I was astounded to see on one of the networks the other day that the debate was not are we going to attack, but are we going to attack before or after the election?" Paul continued. Paul recently voiced concern over House Congressional Resolution 362 which he has dubbed a "virtual Iran war resolution." "If that comes up it is demanding that the president [put in place] an absolute blockade of the entire country of Iran, and punish any country or any business group around the world if they trade with Iran," Paul told listeners. Experts have predicted gas will rise to $6 per gallon if the resolution passes. Paul believes that may happen anyway, just by anticipation. "The frightening thing is they say they are taking no options off the table, even nuclear first strike," Paul said. Paul believes from talking with his contacts in and around Congress that a strike on Iran has already been green-lighted. ~ ~ ~
What's been very interesting has been Russia's public utterances about what they're doing. Since their peacekeepers were attacked, they've often talked about restoring peace as the reason for all that armor entering the region. One could ask what our response would have been with a similar act happening in Bosnia? Why, we would have escalated the violence, of course. I've also noticed that the only thing the Georgians have said the Russians have bombed in Georgia is military installations. If it was us, power plants, water treatment plants, hospitals and other things would be on the target list. I do recall that the Russians are said to have bombed at least one hospital, though. Overall, it has been a relatively controlled response from the Russians. CNN two evenings ago had the execrable William Cohen on, and he, predictably, took the Georgian side, calling for the Russians to stop (but not the Georgians, especially when the part the US and the Georgians had issue with in the Security Council resolution was the denouncing of the use of force), and then he said that the Russians were being hypocritical, since they refused to allow Chechnya to be independent, yet they were trying to dismantle Georgia. He failed to mention anything about Kosovo, which is the event that both South Ossetia(which just wants to relink with North Ossetia-Stalin broke the two parts in half) and Abkhazia have referenced.
Rivers of blood were spilled out over land that, in normal times, not even the poorest Arab would have worried his head over." Field Marshal Erwin Rommel
#2. To: TwentyTwelve (#1)
But Georgia appears to have sparked the conflict by marching on the South Ossetian capital as Russia’s powerful Prime Minister Vladimir Putin headed to Beijing for the Olympic Games. Russia, in turn, welcomed the conflict, launching a large-scale attack on its smaller neighbor and sending tanks across its border.
#3. To: Rotara (#2)
...neoscrewjob on the way.
#4. To: Rotara (#0)
#5. To: TwentyTwelve (#4)
(Edited)
#6. To: TwentyTwelve (#4)
"..we are also fighting for world peace and we are also fighting for future world order.."
#7. To: TwentyTwelve (#4)
"It's time to move from words to acts"
#8. To: TwentyTwelve (#4)
#9. To: Rotara, bush_is_a_moonie (#6)
#10. To: buckeye (#9)
(Edited)
#11. To: bush_is_a_moonie (#10)
#12. To: Rotara, TwentyTwelve (#2)
But Georgia appears to have sparked the conflict by marching on the South Ossetian capital as Russia’s powerful Prime Minister Vladimir Putin headed to Beijing for the Olympic Games. Russia, in turn, welcomed the conflict, launching a large-scale attack on its smaller neighbor and sending tanks across its border.
#13. To: Rotara (#0)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest