New Russian Empire Must be Punished with Embargo!
When the Turks invaded Cyprus, did the United States not engage in an embargo against Turkey, even though it was a peace keeping operation as approved by the treaties and the Turkish Cypriots were suffering slaughter by the Greek fascists that had taken over the island? When Iraq invaded Kuwait, did we not enact embargoes and eventually invade Iraq? When the United States invaded Iraq in 2003, did not the whole world frown and show their anger at the United States even though the United States had every right to stop a threat? So what changed? Why is it that the world silently ignores the plight of the Georgians when it is obvious that Russia invaded Georgia as part of a long term plan to assert influence in the region?
Russia wants South Ossetia to be independent, with what right does Russia talk about independence considering what they did in Afghanistan, in Chechnya, in Bulgaria, and many other nations? If you’re Russian and you’re wondering what to think, decide today whether you are a hypocrite or a man/woman of principle. If you’re a man/woman of principle, what kind of principle is it? Should any people have the right to secede and make their own nation? Or should they have an ultimate reason to declare independence, such as oppression/genocide or similar reasons?
So are you going to support Russia in acting against Afghanistan, Bulgaria, Chechnya, and other nations and then at the same time in order not to be hypocrite support Georgia for trying to control South Ossetia because South Ossetia is a part of Georgia, and even though they have their own language they are still a small minority that isn’t oppressed?
Or, are you going to criticize Russia (or self-critique), for those actions in the past, and also criticize Georgia. You cannot have it both ways.
Russia must be punished, embargoes should be enacted immediately, boycotts should be organized by bloggers and everyone else. The audacity of Russia to invade Georgia during the olympics shows just how evil Putin really is. Yes, it’s ok to call someone who has shown that he HAS to stay in power an evil person, someone who decides to invade Georgia and still have the audacity to watch the Olympics himself.
Bush should be criticized for watching the Olympics, he should have been on the job solving this crisis. If there ever was a more important time to be doing politics as a president, it is now.
Russia must be given an ultimatum by the United States and NATO. They have committed a clear wrong. They invaded a sovreign nation, in order to promote their independence and protect “Russian Citizens” even though the South Ossetians were distributed Russian citizenship for a long time in order to assert Russian influence in the area. It is clear that, though the Soviet Empire is gone, the Russian Empire is making a comeback.
Russian Influence in Central Asian nations has never been stronger and even in the Caucasus. Don’t believe me? Ask someone who works in Uzbekistan or Kazakhstan, they will tell you how if you don’t learn Russian, you are basically a nobody and won’t have many opportunities. This is imperialism, the best example of it. Just like the British Empire, this new Russian Empire is asserting “spheres of influence” and the politics of governments.
At least when the United States invaded Iraq it asserted Democracy and Iraqi nationalism and unity. It did not insert an “American ideology”. The US is the only non-imperialist superpower (although they use to be very imperialist in the past, especially versus the Native Indians and during Cold War), they don’t force their ideological education on nations they invade or influence. They don’t force their way of life. Even in nations like Saudi Arabia where the United States has total influence, the way of life of Saudis are completely their own and the exact opposite of American life (though with the same luxuries). The Russians and British (well the British in the past) however, are quite different, they force their flag, their education, their ideology onto others.
Let us take a stand against Russia for once and stand up for the principles of Democracy. We must protect Georgia that has been under attack by an imperialist and hypocritical empire. I am for any invasion in which democracy is upheld and violence is stopped, but Russia’s invasion is the complete opposite of peacekeeping, it is pure aggression. Even anti-war ideologists would support an intervention against Russia.
To be familiar with the invasion of Georgia by Russia:
http://digg.com/world_news/PoliGazette_New_Russian_Empire_Must_be_Punished
Digg this if you like it, I think this article may spark a great debate. Login to Digg takes only a minute.
Use Stumble Upon toolbar (install is easy; login too), and then press "I like it" if you really like it.
What right does the west have to criticise Russia’s actions after what the west did in Kosovo, against international law? Do you seriously not see the hypocrisy?
In Kosovo, the people were suffering under the administration of other nations.
Not to mention the fact that the Balkans are a volatile place, filled with ethnic, racial, and nationalist hatred and this was all created by — once again… Russia and Britain, the two imperialist empires of World War One. It was not America or Germany.
The Russians promoted nationalism, and pan-slavic ethnic and racial propaganda, and declared the Serbs as a separate people, a Christian orthodox Slavic people. They did the same for Bulgaria, and the same for a number of other nations. This was all done to force the collapse of the Ottoman Empire or at least give territories to Russia or new nations that would be friendly to Russia (unlike the Ottomans).
In other words, most of the Balkans are filled with pretty much the same people, all of them are human. The problem was they did not get along, and they were in full scale hatred with each other for centuries. You don’t even know the hatred these Balkan people have against each other, that is why they are continuously separated. This is not the same in other nations.
Even with Israel and Palestine. I would support their separation if they both hated each other. This is simply not true, because Israel doesn’t hate Palestine. It is Palestine that hates Israel. Hence Israel should rule Palestine as well, and since they protected that land with their army, they have earned it.
So each situation is different from another. Though the case right now can be compared to past Russian actions, and it shows that Russia, who has promoted autonomy and independence for people of other nations has done the direct opposite for freedom fighters in their own nations or spheres of influence. They even denied the Armenians their own nation and land in World War One’s Paris Peace Conference because they said it was THEIR land.
The West is not a monolithic organization controlled by a central government, like Russia is. What would be the "Castle" of the West? The closest thing would be Washington, but as you may have noticed, Washington does not have all western nations at it’s beck and call.
It is not in our best interests to take Georgia’s side on this unconditionally. The South Ossietians declared independence at virtually the same time that Georgia was declaring independence from Russia, and the actual territorial sovereignty issue here is somewhat muddled. Saber rattling at this juncture is playing into Russia’s hands. It is in Russia’s best interests not to annex Georgia, as such an adventure would sully its reputation with the rest of the world, and cost it dearly in regions of greater importance (the Ukraine and the Balkans for one, although they may have given those areas up for lost). The Russians will either have to go back to the status quo (since a full scale presence in South Ossieta is totally unacceptable) or face enormous consequences in being labeled the world over as a rogue nation.
The most effective long term solution to neutralizing Russia’s power is fossil fuel conservation (and to a small extent, exploration). Russia is a very large exporter of oil, and it’s economy and government is heavily dependent on it. With the global economy in slowdown and the price of oil falling with it, the Russians may be trying to create uncertainty in the oil markets to keep its economic growth intact, and the government popular. Yet another reason to be "wise as serpents and gentle as doves" on foreign policy, the energy crisis, and the rest of it.
So this is about democracy?
I thought it was about a Russian response to a massive artillery bombardment of South Ossetia by Georgia, which recently lost a chance at becoming a NATO member after using military force to stop peaceful protests. Russia’s was certainly looking for a chance to invade, and certainly is not altruistic in its desires, but to argue that this is a case of despotism vs. democracy is a gross oversimplification.
It is a matter of Democracy versus Despotism.
What does the fight between South Ossetia and Georgia have anything to do with Russia? Nothing. The reason it has something to do with it now, is because Russia wants it that way, it wanted to absorb South Ossetia, and South Ossetia was accepting that. Then Georgia and Russia made a deal so that South Ossetia would be granted greater autonomy as long as Russia did not annex or support its independence– South Ossetia later rejected this deal, because it wants independence. That’s why the fighting started again, it was because of South Ossetia period.
It’s the same strategy that Russia used with the Armenians in World War One, they pretended to give them independence and forced the Ottoman Empire to give more rights, reforms, and autonomy to the Armenians, and then when World War One broke out and the Ottomans sided with the Germans, the Russians invaded, annexing Armenian lands as part of Russia. They established an Armenian governor, but they did not establish an Armenian nation, because the Russian Empire wanted the land for itself, it was a strategic position to stop Britain from gaining land in Iran and Iraq. After all the information and weapons smuggling Russia did for the Armenians, who later were forced to relocate by the Ottomans after constant rebellions and ethnic cleansing, the Russians withdrew, because of the Bolsheviks, and Armenia was forced to retreat back across the mountains to Erivan province (which is present-day Armenia), many Armenians died in such back-and-forth retreats with almost no food available during those harsh times and disease rampant. As you can see, the strategy is to promote independence, promote rebellion, and then finally to annex the land that is now free of the other nations rule. The Armenians finally got their nation years after the Russians retreated and the Communists took over. Oh but they did annex them eventually in the Soviet Union.
Georgia and Ossetia are the same story all over again. Two small nations, fighting each other, and Russia supports the weaker one, to make itself look good. Then Russia smuggles in weapons and even invades as well and finally annexes the region. All they need is a good solid excuse like "Russian citizens" (citizenship which they distributed freely, just like they did to the Armenians) or "These Armenians are being ethnically cleansed and massacred" or "These South Ossetians are being ethnically cleansed and massacred", and it’s over, they can invade without penalties and no one can say anything. This is age-old Russian imperialism. They applied the same strategy to Bulgaria back in the first Balkan Wars in the 1900s, there though, they granted Bulgaria independence (this was their first time, they later learned not to grant independence).
The next time you try to justify Russia’s imperialist actions, please feel free to pick up a book and read about World War One, Balkan, Caucusus, and World War Two history.
"The next time you try to justify Russia’s imperialist actions"
Oh, I forgot I was so busy acting as Vladimir Putin’s US representative that I haven’t been able to read anything, much less history books…
Really, try reading my posts before you make such broad and inaccurate statements.
Your post was absurd, and I corrected it. You were arguing that Russia’s invasion was not despotic but democratic, I pointed out the absurdity with a little history lesson, which you wouldn’t have needed if you had read books about history, and you wouldn’t have made that statement then as well.
Try reading my article before you make absurd comments.
To Jonathan Wilson:
As you speak about 1900 and accuse Russia in misdoings there: how long ago US has gave up slavery? How long ago the black people and US women got vote rights? What US was doing in Kosovo and Iraq? Fighting for democracy, I suppose?
You are so well informed about Russia and its bad moves back to 1900’s: could you please share with some information about US’ help to Grenada; or your democratic help in Vietnam? Do you want me to continue the list? Probably not…
The problem most of American folks that they honestly believe in what their hypocrites leaders stencil into your brain’s lobe. Wake up! Think if you still can. World do now care about your opinion. It hasn’t been asked.
“It is not in our best interests to take Georgia’s side on this unconditionally.”
Well yeah, that pretty much summarizes the whole thing.
Jonathan, I don’t think anyone sincerely believes that Russia is doing this to protect its “citizens”. Nobody thinks that Russia is democratic. Not even Russians. I’ll be damned if I meet a Russian who honestly believes that.
On the other hand, the hypocrisy of Western “democracy” must be duly noted. But I choose take a leap of faith and choose to “believe” that America sincerely tries to do the right thing. Whatever that means…
I argued that this was that this wasn’t a simple situation of democracy vs. despotism, I wasn’t arguing that Russia was somehow being democratic. As far as I can tell I wasn’t even implying it.
I’ll even repost my original post:
"So this is about democracy? I thought it was about a Russian response to a massive artillery bombardment of South Ossetia by Georgia, which recently lost a chance at becoming a NATO member after using military force to stop peaceful protests. Russia’s was certainly looking for a chance to invade, and certainly is not altruistic in its desires, but to argue that this is a case of despotism vs. democracy is a gross oversimplification. "I fail to see where I’m arguing in Russia’s favor, unless you think my criticism of Georgia somehow means that Russia is the good guy.
Jonathan Wilson excellent post! 5 stars!
Russia is sinister and they have been that way since the days of Kathie the Great. They lost the cold war, and if they want to start a new one, well, they’ll just lose again! Oil wont save them and neither will arrogant KGB despots. A stake through the heart would be for the Turkic nations to give them the cold shoulder…
Jonathan Wilson excellent post! 5 stars! Russia is sinister and they have been that way since the days of Kathie the Great. They lost the cold war, and if they want to start a new one, well, they’ll just lose again! Oil wont save them and neither will arrogant KGB despots. A stake through the heart would be for the Turkic nations to give them the cold shoulder…
@Cos
Slavery? It was almost universal in many nations, even Russia. There was slavery in almost all nations, most of the nations who abolished slavery were at about the same time. 1863 for United States, 1861 for Russia. So please get rid of that argument. The United States is one of the earliest to grant women rights and African-American rights, sure it wasn’t perfect, and sure it was still a terrible life for African-Americans, but it eventually improved.
In Iraq, the United States is fighting for Democracy whether you want to believe it or believe in conspiracies it doesn’t matter. The result is, Saddam Hussein who was torturing and killing civilians is gone, and nowadays in Iraq you don’t have to fear your children or family members ratting you out to Saddam Hussein.
In Vietnam, United States fought against Communism, it destroyed the Vietnamese nation, and at the time of the decision, it was a Democratic move by the United States. To restore democracy to Vietnam, and stop the Communists from creating Despotic rule, by the way, Communism was being spread by Russia–again we are back to Russia! By the way, did you know that John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson planned the Vietnam War together, the Democratic party that some of you seem to trust so much today?
You may not like America’s opinion because it is usually arrogantly critical of many nations, and at times it can be hypocritical, but it is the only voice actually doing any criticizing in the world, which is a healthy process to cleanse the world. Now you may think, well wars are being started by the United States, well these wars are eventually leading to more good than before. Radical Islamists are dying off, and they are struggling to keep power, ideas are being distributed throughout the world and censorship is struggling to keep up, and new democracies are being established as more people realize that free markets and freedom of speech work better than despotic rulers.
In other words, you may hate the United States for meddling in everyone’s business, just like you hate your parents meddling in how you live your life, but in the end of the day, it’s for your own good.
@Selin
The hypocrisy of Western Democracy is usually resulted from the hypocrisy of Europe, not of America. Notice the wars that the United States starts, and the difference between that and the wars that other nations start. Although in Quantity, the United States may start more wars, in Quality the wars of the United States usually achieve good and positive results, while wars of other nations like Russia, achieve terrible results.
Look at the nations United States has fought or invaded…. Japan, Germany, South Korea, Vietnam, and NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, though they have suffered and their country laid in ruins for a while, they are now productive, democratic, and successful nations.
Now let’s look at the nations that are in war with each other, the African nations, still are filled with corrupted leaders and failed systems. India and Pakistan, Russia and Afghanistan, Egypt and Britain, France and Rwanda, Algiers and France, Russia and Bulgaria, Russia and Central Asian and Caucusus nations. It seems that most of those nations are struggling. Is that America’s fault?
What I always say about the US is that; every country in the world and in history does what is in its own interest. ‘Right’ and ‘wrong’ have nothing to do with foreign policy. The US is no different in this regard, albeit for one thing; compared to most other countries, America cares more about ‘just’ and ‘unjust.’ It’s hypocritical, of course, but not more than other countries, perhaps even less. Expecting it to behave completely different from every other country in the world, however, is ludicrous.
Always keep in mind; in the end, America is just another powerful country which tends to look at its own interests first, second and third, and at ‘right and wrong’ fourth.
America’s priorities are closer to right and wrong, than any other nations priorities and interests.
America’s priorities are closer to right and wrong, than any other nations priorities and interests.
Exactly. But one should keep in mind that:
1. That’s purely relatively
2. ‘More’ doesn’t mean ‘entirely.’
As always with politics, direct interests are served first and foremost. Then indirect interests and, what makes the US different, then ‘right and wrong.’ With most countries it’s one and two, and step three is never taken (look at Europe, for instance).
Jonathan, I agree with that. America DOES have the kind of mindset that looks to bring positive things and growth to the nations it once fought with. This is very different from what the British Empire or the Russian Empire have historically done with the places they’ve conquered. (Or France, Belgium, etc.) This is why ultimately I believe that America, unlike others, at least tries to do the right thing.
Look, I know you are not a cynical person, (that’s probably an understatement given the nature of your posts), but “America bringing freedom to all” idea sounds really lame to a lot of ears, including many Americans, even if that’s what we would all ultimately prefer… Get with the times, it’s NOT 2003 anymore, “we’re fighting for freedom” is no longer the fashionable thing to say. Maybe you should learn to take polls and form focus groups before you write your articles?
No see, people got sick of the "freedom" excuse. They thought "well there has to be more to it".
People don’t like it simple. People invent conspiracies about everything because they cannot accept simple answers to complex events. But if you studied Einstein’s life, sometimes the most simple answer is the best answer.
Read ‘What Went Wrong’ by Bernard Lewis, he states the problems of the Middle East very clearly. This is why they made the Greater Middle Eastern Initiative. However, some conspiracy theorists again created a conspiracy where the GMEI is not a plan to reform the Middle East, but a plan to divide it further–this turned out to be a lie invented by bloggers who mistranslated Condaleezza Rice’s statements (whether purposefully to make ad money or because they don’t know English, is personal opinion).
Sometimes there is no conspiracy. Sometimes people are not lying and secretly plotting something bigger.
John F. Kennedy was killed by a crazy murderer, a conspiracy was born. This answer is just not good enough. A crazy person killing a president is just too simple, too obvious, and too pathetic… There HAS to be a bigger plot, so they invented the theories of Kennedy’s assassination which apparently involved the CIA even though the CIA has nothing to do with internal affairs of the United States.
9/11 happened, and the answer of "crazy radical terrorists" was just not good enough, so some kids of 17 years old, made a video "Loose Change" and they invented the false flag theory. Like as if the United States ever needed excuses to invade nations (consider Somalia).
Conspiracies prosper in places where education is not good enough. Where people don’t question faith (not religion but a belief).
The idea of "freedom" and "WMD threat" being real in CIA reports, as well as MI5 reports, as well as Russian reports, and many others, seems just too simple. It seems like there needs to be more. So a newer conspiracy spread by effective propaganda film director Michael Moore took hold (fahrenheit 9/11). "Big Oil" theory, like as if the oil in Iraq is being used for America, it’s actually being used for Iraq. It’s the theory that we only invaded there with excuses because of oil.
I would think it would be less dangerous and less media-attracting if we invaded a tiny oil-rich country instead, such as Kuwait. I mean they have no defenses–in fact, we could have even threatened them to deliver us free oil, or "pay the price!". We could have demanded Saudi Arabia to give us free oil, it’s not like they could object, and human rights activists already hate them. So that oil theory was also debunked after people saw that the oil has never even been used for the United States, and oil prices are only rising…
Conspiracies can happen because explaining two different things and then loosely connecting the connection between these two things, can cause many people to not question it and believe in it. You don’t have to make sure it’s a solid case, you just have to flood someone with information with half-truths.
Here is the best example of explaining conspiracy theories:
Dihydrogen Monoxide in everyone’s water, causing cancer in America.
I told you all this to explain to you, that perhaps it’s not crazy for me to say that Bush is an idealist who believes he can change the Middle East so that they are more like the West. Hell, he’s done more than any European has done for 100 years.
Yes Mr Wilson.. You hit the nail on the head! We are near perfect with a few blemishes which gives us the right to do as we please in the middle east and else where.. Oh yeah we definitely need to secure the BTC pipeline going through Georgia and why not get Azerbaijan involved as well! As for Ukraine the birthplace of Russia lets just keep that to ourselves.. Weather you invade a country with the promise of freedom or the promise of doom you are still invading that country.. Have a good day :-)
Thank you.
I think people are quick to assume that it’s always America at fault, America is to blame for everything, but they forget that some of the worst empires in the world were European not American. This is not to say Americans are angels, but it should be noted that Russia has its own self-interests and national ambitions as well.
As does every major nation in the world.. Russia does not want anyone in their back yard.. We didn’t like missles in cuba however we had missiles in turkey which borders the former Soviet Union long before they conceived the idea of having missiles 90 miles south of Key west…The Caspian oil is at stake here. Hitler wanted it… now the rest of the world wants it..