RICE CRITICIZES RUSSIA FOR DEFENDING RUSSIANS IN SOUTH OSSETIA

Why must the Bush administration, and specifically Condoleeza Rice, continually criticize Russia for defending Russian nationals living in South Ossetia?

Today Rice pompously warned Russia that it faces isolation from the West.

The BBC reports on Rice's speech. Even though for the first time (that I know) that Rice acknowledged that Georgia and its president Mikheil Saakashvili started the conflict, Rice went on to blame Russia for its actions.

""Russia's leaders violated Georgia's sovereignty and territorial integrity and launched a full-scale invasion across an internationally recognised border," she said, adding that Russia had also violated the terms of a ceasefire negotiated by the French President, Nicolas Sarkozy.
Ms Rice said it had been "deeply disconcerting" that Russia had tried to "dismember" Georgia by recognising Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and argued that Russia's actions were part of what she described as a "worsening pattern of behaviour". "

What would the U.S. do if Mexico attacked Tijuana with missiles and artillery and aimed them at civilians, mainly American citizens, who happened to be living there? It would be hard to believe that Bush would not send in several brigades of marines to protect the American ex-patriates from Mexican aggression against a defenseless civilian population.

So why all the condemnation of Russia for doing the exact same thing in South Ossetia after Saakashvili ordered the bombing of Russian civilians living in Tskhinvali, the capital of Ossetia?

Rice and Bush are hypocrites. They know that allowing Georgia to join NATO is a direct threat to Georgia's neighbor, Russia. Suppose Georgia was already a NATO member, other NATO members would have been obligated to join the fighting and fight the Russians. This is insanity and totally irrational.

The world must stop Georgia from becoming a member of NATO and must stop Bush and Rice and Cheney from starting a war with Russia in the last few months of their term.

WHERE IS BUSH'S "DEMOCRACY" IN CONFLICT IN GEORGIA?

I get the impression that the West's condemnation of Russia for recognizing the independence of South Ossetia and Abhkazia has more to do with deep seated fears that almost any country in the West could be subject to independence movements by their own minorities wanting to break away. Here Russia has signaled that it will recognize such movements, at least in other countries, maybe not in its own. All the huffing and puffing of Bush, Cheney and Rice seems totally unrelated to spreading "democracy," one of Bush's favorite words.

If Bush wanted to pursue democracy, instead of telling Russia it had to recognize Georgia's "territorial sovereignty," Bush would be pressing both Putin and Saakashvili to sponsor a referendum in both Abhkazia and South Ossetia for the purpose of ascertaining the will of the people. That would be true democracy in action. But Bush and his cronies send in war ships carrying "relief" cargo to Georgia's ports, obviously intending to show Russia that Bush is not afraid to use military force.

There are still some five months left in Bush's term, so anything can happen between now and then. But don't underestimate the Bush danger. Bush could stumble into a serious shooting confrontation with Russia just as he and the other European leaders who support him stumbled into the Georgia mess by failing to understand the repercussions of Russia's concern about the West recognizing the independence of Kosovo a few months ago. Bush also bears responsibility for Georgia's initiation of the conflict by telling that hot head Saakashvili that the U.S. would back him up vis-a-vis Russia, the implication being with war planes and tanks.

BUSH POLICY TOWARDS RUSSIA HYPOCRITICAL OVER SO. OSSETIA

Why is Bush ratcheting up the tension with Putin, Medvedev and Russia over Russia's recognition of Independence for South Ossetia and Abhkazia?

Someone please tell me the difference between recognizing sovereignty for South Ossetia and recognizing sovereignty for Kosovo. In both cases, the inhabitants have an entirely different culture from the "mother country." The Kosovans are Muslim whereas Serbia is mostly slavic and Orthodox. People in South Ossetia are not Georgian and speak an entirely different language.

So how can Bush and Rice say it is illegal for Russia to recognize South Ossetia when the United States early on this year recognized the independence of Kosovo from Serbia? Rice says Russia's actions violate U.N. resolutions but she never quotes chapter and verse or gives any cites. And anyway, if recognition of South Ossetia is against international law, certainly the Kosovo recognition also has to be. Yet neither Bush nor Rice nor Cheney protested on behalf of Serbia. Why are they protesting now on behalf of Georgia and that hot head Saakashvili?

Here's what Saakashvili did to start this whole mess. On August 7th, he ordered the Georgian army, armed with the latest in American produced lethal missiles to fire upon civilians in South Ossetia's capital Tskhinvali. Instead of working through diplomacy to see if the Ossetians would consent to holding a referendum to see what they preferred in terms of sovereignty, Saakashvili decided to attack the Ossetians and kill them unless they agreed to be part of Georgia. It would be like the U.S. federal government firing missiles against the civilian population of Texas in the event of some federal-state disagreement. Civilized nations don't do this.

BARACK OBAMA NEEDS TO RE-THINK BLIND APPROVAL OF SAAKASHVILI AND CONDEMNATION OF RUSSIA

Now that Joe Biden is selected as VP candidate for the Democrats, I call upon Barack to give us a more realistic policy towards Russia, Georgia and South Ossetia. As Ellen Barry reports in today's Sunday The New York Times, the languages of the Caucasus are varied and unrelated. Why is this important? Because it shows that Georgia cannot validly claim that South Ossetia "belongs" to it culturally or linguistically.

The Ossetians apparently prefer to have nothing to do with Georgians. Their languages and their cultures and their histories are totally different.

So instead of supporting that hot head Georgian Saakashvili in his military quest to re-take South Ossetia, Barack should have a more nuanced approach. First condemn Saakashvili for starting this silly bloody conflict. Second, personally confer with Putin and Medvedev on holding a referendum for the people in South Ossetia and also in Abhkazia to decide if they want independence or if they want to associate with Georgia, and get firm commitments that both Georgia and Russia will abide by the results.

To blindly support Saakashvili and Georgia in their quest to subjugate South Ossetia and Abhkazia is simplistic and undemocratic. The peoples of those regions should have the determining voice. Don't go along with Bush and the culturally insensitive Republicans who support Saakashvili because he speaks good English and is thought to pro-American.