On February 17 of this year Kosovo, with the urging and support of the United States and many western nations, declared independence from Serbia, a long time ally of Russia. For many, particularly those in the west, the declaration was welcome. But for others, mainly Russia, it was taken as a slap to the face. The United States had humiliated Russia by influencing and controlling events in Eastern Europe, Russia's back yard and an area that is traditionally in their sphere of influence.
Kosovo's independence was the latest in a series of Russian humiliations dealt by the United States and its allies. They had seriously eroded their sphere of influence and had demonstrated that they, not Russia, were now the dominant regional powers. Russia was now forced with a decision; allow the United States, NATO, and the west to continue to destroy their influence, or fight back. Russia's reaction to the South Ossetian crisis demonstrated their decision.
Russia planned the whole war as a set up for Georgia and the United States. Russian actions have been aimed at artificially escalating the tensions between Georgia and the separatist republics of South Ossetia and Abkhazia and giving them a reason to "intervene." They had planned their attack on Georgia long before the war started, which is why they were able to react to Georgia and defeat them so quickly and were able to coordinate their efforts with the separatists.
Russia humiliated NATO and the United States; they attacked a NATO candidate and an ally of the United States and demonstrated how helpless we were to stop them; they have failed to abide by the conditions of the ceasefire and have been unfazed by western threats; they reasserted their dominance over the Caucasus and reasserted their positions as a regional, if not a global, rival to the United States.
All of Russia's actions have been motivated by the past actions of the United States. We also artificially increased the tensions between nations by recognizing Kosovo earlier this year. We proved then to Russia that we could humiliate them in their own back yard. We sent them the message that we, not them, were the dominate power. Unfortunately, we did not anticipate that Russia could play our game, and beat us at it too.
In the big scheme of things, Kosovo, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia do not matter. But how the United States and Russia reacted to them does matter. The United States and its allies have been humiliated, just as we humiliated Russia before. International Relations will change now. The United States and Russia will continue to vie for power in regions that were traditionally under the influence of the other. America must prove that we are still the indomitable world superpower, and Russia must prove that they are once again our equal. Both nations will compete for economic, political and military influence all over the world.
Sound familiar? This is essentially what the Cold War was and Russia wants that world back; a world where they are equal to America, a world where they are feared and respected, a world where they are free to do as they please. It means a much more dangerous world for the United States and all of humanity. Unless the US and its allies are careful and react to the next crisis quickly and responsibly, it will only be a matter of time until we are plunged into the Second Cold War. I hope our next president, whoever he may be, will reflect on the events of the last few weeks and understand exactly what we face and are threatened with.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 18
We do face real danger, and we have focused so much on bluster and not enough on thinking that we have made the world incredibly more dangerous.
However, the cards Russia holds are in the main, weak. Loyalty to Russia itself is thin and largely that of fear or self interest. There is no ideological rallying point and Russia's chief card (oil) does not offset all its weaknesses. This Cold War will be a far cry from the old one and it is not so life threatening for us unless our new leaders go weak kneed.
I think that this is a very well written, and thoughtful article. The sad thing is that is rings oh, so true.
I do not believe that Russia is anywhere near a force to compete with the United States, however, I can understand that they feel bullied and humiliated, and must stand up to us.
We do so live in interesting times, and yes -- the onus falls on the shoulders of the next President.
David, while the world political situation is not completly America's fault, we do shoulder a lot of the blame. Our actions, and the inactions of many other powerful nations, have resulted in a lot that is happening. And I do agree on McCain. He came out too strong and too fast. But Obama came out way too weak. If that is how Obama is going to respond to every crisis, then no leader, especially Putin, will take him seriously.
Charles, loyalty to Russia will increase if the Russian leadership creates the atmosphere that they are under "attack." The United States encroaching on their sphere of influence, or Russian citizens being attacked in other nations, will increase loyalty to the state and the cause. And they can compete with the US on the economic and political level; as you said, they have oil and a lot of it. They are becoming a major economic force.
Lady, good to see you again! Hope all is well. Russia would probably lose to the US in a major war and they know that. But they can compete with the US in small but numerous proxy wars or they can role over small countries without much difficulty. They know the US will not go to war over something like that. Georgia is the perfect case.
Indeed, we live in interesting, tence, and dangerous times. And the next president will have to deal with all the problems of the world. Our actions have resulted in many problems, and they cannot be reversed at this point. The next president will have to be ready for anything at any time. If they fail to do so or fail to be responsible the consequences will be with us for generations to come. I hope America picks the right man.
There is a third force to be reckoned with, and there are listening to NO ONE. They are China. What role do you think they shall play in all of this?
They cannot, and WILL NOT be ignored, nor can they be ruled out. They DEMAND what they consider to be their rightful place as a world power, and would consider it nothing to play the U.S. and Russia against each other to destroy both.
I use the Congo proverb:
"Two birds [The U.S. and Russia] disputed about a kernel, when a third [China] swooped down and carried it off."
Enough said.
Vickey, you say that we will have to 'deal' with China sooner or later. Well, the problem is that we have not dealt with them at all. If we would have stuck to our human rights agenda and been honest, ethical brokers all along, China may have taken us seriously. Now, after letting all of the 'right' things we might have done go by the wayside, it will be much more difficult to pick up the mantle now. Though, we must.
For the most part you are spot on.
I would just question how much was our fault. Russia (Putin, the Russian people have absolutely no say in anything), has delusions of being the modern Tzar, and has orchestrated everything.
You are right without the oil , they are next to nothing. Even with the oil, they are letting their infrastructure crumble and most of their people in poverty, and it is getting worse daily.
All three regions discussed are important simply because the people of the regions do not want Russian authority. Russians are a very minor part of the population but want the control. The rest of the former East Bloc countries were the only ones (besides us) to really stand at the Georgians side. Why?
It is simple really. They cast off the yoke of Russian dominance in the 90's and do not want it back. If you have ever been to the Baltics, even with significant Russian populations still there, they despise the Russians and it will be decades before the are integrated into their culture, if ever.
If they ever got the chance, Kallinigrad (an enclave of Russia in Europe) which was where my wife was born, would leave Russia for anyone else, and they are majority Russian, but they are impoverished, deprived and totally controlled, regardless of what you see on TV.
This whole thing is Russian in design. I seriously doubt there will be another Cold War, I just hope it will not be something more serious. The best solution would be another Russian Revolution, but the people have no arms and no defense.
The real sad thing is that if the 1917 revolution had not taken place, the whole area would probably now be a thriving democracy, as was the fate of most of the other monarchies.
That and the problem with so many Americans wanting some form of socialism here. Sad.
I'm laughing, because what you said (Carol Lloyd and I were discussing your article yesterday) is EXACTLY the same thing that she said. I do so hope that you are correct.
However, I hope that the U.S. and the rest of the world are not underestimating China. They do love to get at us with their little espionage tactics, don't they, and God only knows just WHAT thefts are behind that wall.
That being said, thank you for answering my question!
I know that the U.S. doesn't either, as it is folly to underestimate a serious (key word, being "serious") adversary.
That government is simply NOT to be trusted, Ty. That is why the Chinese people of the Bay Area went ballistic when that torch arrived here. Schwarzzie had to intervene in the situation. They (our Bay Area Chinese KNOW as well) what that government is capable of.
I am not sure it is the Russians (or at least just the Russians) who want the Cold War back, and as you hinted, I suspect ideology has little to do with Russia's reasons. Russia is feeling insecure and if looked at from an historical viewpoint, that sense of insecurity and sense of having been humiliated is understandable.
Since the end of the fall of the Berlin Wall Russia's sphere of influence has been nearly if not reduced to a level not seen since the early day's of Catherine the Great's reign and we have been attempting to reduce it beyond even that.
I am not sure how many of Russia's leaders for the Russia's leaders for the past century or so have not actually been Russian, but just off the top of my head I can think of two that came from the very republics that we have been encouraging to break away from Russia, They are Stalin, a Georgian and Khrushchev, a Ukrainian. Just check Brezhnev was also a Ukrainian. These leaders were accepted as being Russian because they were from area's that had long been within the boundaries of the Russian sphere of influence that they were considered to be part of Russia.
In a sense we have been trying to reduce Russia to the Russian equivalent of our original 13 colonies and it a large extent succeeding in that attempt. It is little wonder that the Russians feel insecure! I, for one, am not sure the Cold War ever ended we just thought it did, because Russia wasn't fighting back and we were winning by default. So the question is does Putin and to resume the Cold War or has started to fight back in a war that we helped keep alive? Economically, Russia, bear little resemblance to a communist state and we can no longer pretend that it is a matter of economic ideology, it is a matter of power,
Bert claims, Russia would be a democracy if the Russian Revolution of 1917 had not occurred, but the fact is that the Russian Revolution would not have occurred if the Tsars and the nobility had been willing to share power and had not resisted a constitutional monarchy so forcefully. Their resistance made revolution inevitable, and the Communist merely took advantage of that unrest to assume power.
I will add, that Russia and indeed the entire former USSR might today be democracy if we had let Gorbachev continue with his reforms instead encouraging Yeltsin to continue his own quest for power and thereby increase our own influence. Gorbachev saw the need to let the people to have more power if the USSR was to survive, but his slower solution was not acceptable to Regan and those who did not want to share power with another powerful nation, even a democracy so they opted to encourage the breakup of the Soviet Union and deal with multiple power seekers who at least gave the appearance of being content with controlling a comparatively small portion of this planet. It was the old divide and conquer strategy, and it worked until one of those more petty leaders had his own leadership challenged. If Georgia's president is so much in favor of democracy why has he not suggested letting the people of Abkhazia, and South Ossetia decide if they want to independent nations or part of Georgia or even part of Russia?
I suspect his preference for democracy extends only as far as his ability to have a sense of control over the outcome of any election. His ascent to power was after all marked by a revolution in 1003 that deposed an elected leader. That was justified by claims that the 2000 election was marked by fraud and I have not been able to ascertain if those claims were justified. I am sure he is not the only Georgian who thinks he/she is able to rule Georgia. I wonder if anyone has looked at how dissidents Georgia are treated?
That is among the things our next president must consider with an open mind and not with one that assumes that person who claims to be on our side is right.
Neeetah, for the most part, I agree. China cannot be trusted. They are a very clever and evil government who would do almost anything to achieve their goals. However, they can be trusted not to do anything stupid. We control China's economy. China is totally dependent on us. We can pressure them and force them to reform and take action on issues that they have more leverage on, such as Sudan.
"Russia is feeling insecure and if looked at from an historical viewpoint, that sense of insecurity and sense of having been humiliated is understandable."
Agreed. Russia has always been under some kind of attack, whether it be military or political. They are no strongers to it, and they are not strangers to the consequences of it either. Russia's leadership is understandably parinoid, and our leadership has failed to fully understand that.
"If Georgia's president is so much in favor of democracy why has he not suggested letting the people of Abkhazia, and South Ossetia decide if they want to independent nations or part of Georgia or even part of Russia"
Georgia will not let them go for the same reason that we did not let the South go. Your nation and everything you believe in means nothing if anyone can just split off from you. Sometimes, you have to hold your nation together, no matter the consequences. And in most cases, keeping a nation together is better than balkinization.
Way to go America! Declaring victory prematurely really worked out well, didn't it?