| Russia
Georgia War
Washington
Risks Nuclear War by Miscalculation
By F William Engdahl
11/08/08 "Market
Oracle" --- - The dramatic military attack by the
military of the Republic of Georgia on South Ossetia in the last
days has brought the world one major step closer to the ultimate
horror of the Cold War era—a thermonuclear war between Russia
and the United States—by miscalculation. What is playing out in
the Caucasus is being reported in US media in an alarmingly
misleading light, making Moscow appear the lone aggressor. The
question is whether George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are
encouraging the unstable Georgian President, Mikhail Saakashvili
in order to force the next US President to back the NATO
military agenda of the Bush Doctrine. This time Washington may
have badly misjudged the possibilities, as it did in Iraq , but
this time with possible nuclear consequences.
The underlying issue, as I
stressed in my July 11 piece in this space, Georgien,
Washington, Moskau: Atomarer geopolitischer Machtpoker , is
the fact that since the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact in 1991
one after another former member as well as former states of the
USSR have been coaxed and in many cases bribed with false
promises by Washington into joining the counter organization,
NATO.
Rather than initiate discussions
after the 1991 dissolution of the Warsaw Pact about a systematic
dissolution of NATO, Washington has systematically converted
NATO into what can only be called the military vehicle of an
American global imperial rule, linked by a network of military
bases from Kosovo to Poland to Turkey to Iraq and Afghanistan .
In 1999, former Warsaw Pact members Hungary , Poland and the
Czech Republic joined NATO. Bulgaria , Estonia , Latvia ,
Lithuania , Romania , and Slovakia followed suit in March 2004.
Now Washington is putting immense pressure on the EU members of
NATO, especially Germany and France , that they vote in December
to admit Georgia and Ukraine .
The roots
of the conflict
The specific conflict between
Georgia and South Ossetia and Abkhazia has its roots in the
following. First, the Southern Ossetes , who until 1990 formed
an autonomous region of the Georgian Soviet republic, seek to
unite in one state with their co-ethnics in North Ossetia , an
autonomous republic of the Russian Soviet republic and now the
Russian Federation . There is an historically grounded Ossete
fear of violent Georgian nationalism and the experience of
Georgian hatred of ethnic minorities under then Georgian leader
Zviad Gamsakhurdia, which the Ossetes see again under Georgian
President, Mikhel Saakashvili. Saakashvili was brought to power
with US financing and US covert regime change activities in
December 2003 in what was called the Rose Revolution. Now the
thorns of that rose are causing blood to spill.
Abkhazia and South Ossetia—the
first a traditional Black Sea resort area, the second an
impoverished, sparsely populated region that borders Russia to
the north—each has its own language, culture, history. When the
Soviet Union collapsed, both regions sought to separate
themselves from Georgia in bloody conflicts - South Ossetia in
1990-1, Abkhazia in 1992-4.
In December 1990 Georgia under
Gamsakhurdia sent troops into South Ossetia after the region
declared its own sovereignty. This Georgian move was defeated by
Soviet Interior Ministry troops. Then Georgia declared abolition
of the South Ossete autonomous region and its incorporation into
Georgia proper. Both wars ended with cease-fires that were
negotiated by Russia and policed by peacekeeping forces under
the aegis of the recently established Commonwealth of
Independent States. The situation hardened into "frozen
conflicts," like that over Cyprus . By late 2005, Georgia signed
an agreement that it would not use force, and the Abkhaz would
allow the gradual return of 200,000-plus ethnic Georgians who
had fled the violence. But the agreement collapsed in early
2006, when Saakashvili sent troops to retake the Kodori Valley
in Abkhazia. Since then Saakashvili has been escalating
preparations for military action.
Critical is Russia 's support
for the Southern Ossetes . Russia is unwilling to see Georgia
join NATO. In addition, the Ossetes are the oldest Russian
allies in the Caucasus who have provided troops to the Russian
army in many wars. Russia does not wish to abandon them and the
Abkhaz, and fuel yet more ethnic unrest among their compatriots
in the Russian North Caucasus . In a November 2006 referendum,
99 percent of South Ossetians voted for independence from
Georgia , at a time when most of them had long held Russian
passports. This enabled Russian President Medvedev to justify
his military's counter-attack of Georgia on Friday as an effort
to "protect the lives and dignity of Russian citizens, wherever
they may be."
For Russia , Ossetia has been an
important strategic base near the Turkish and Iranian frontiers
since the days of the czars. Georgia is also an important
transit country for oil being pumped from the Caspian Sea to the
Turkish port of Ceyhan and a potential base for Washington
efforts to encircle Tehran .
As far as the Georgians are
concerned, South Ossetia and Abkhazia are simply part of their
national territory, to be recovered at all costs. Promises by
NATO leaders to bring Georgia into the alliance, and
ostentatious declarations of support from Washington , have
emboldened Saakashvili to launch his military offensive against
the two provinces, South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Saakashvili and
likely, Dick Cheney's office in Washington appear to have
miscalculated very badly. Russia has made it clear that it has
no intention of ceding its support for South Ossetia or
Abkhazia.
Proxy War
In March this year as Washington
went ahead to recognize the independence of Kosovo in former
Yugoslavia, making Kosovo a de facto NATO-run territory against
the will of the UN Security Council and especially against
Russian protest, Putin responded with Russian Duma hearings on
recognition of Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Transnistria, a
pro-Russian breakaway republic in Moldova. Moscow argued that
the West's logic on Kosovo should apply as well to these ethnic
communities seeking to free themselves from the control of a
hostile state. In mid-April, Mr. Putin held out the possibility
of recognition for the breakaway republics. It was a
geopolitical chess game in the strategic Caucasus for the
highest stakes—the future of Russia itself.
Saakashvili called
then-President Putin to demand he reverse the decision. He
reminded Putin that the West had taken Georgia 's side. This
past April at the NATO summit in Bucharest, Romania, US
President Bush proposed accepting Georgia into NATO's "Action
Plan for Membership," a precursor to NATO membership. To
Washington 's surprise, ten NATO member states refused to
support his plan, including Germany , France and Italy .
They argued that accepting the
Georgians was problematic, because of the conflicts in Abkhazia
and South Ossetia . They were in reality saying that they would
not be willing to back Georgia as, under Article 5 of the NATO
treaty, which mandates that an armed attack against any NATO
member country must be considered an attack against them all and
consequently requires use of collective armed force of all NATO
members, it would mean that Europe could be faced with war
against Russia over the tiny Caucasus Republic of Georgia, with
its incalculable dictator, Saakashvili. That would mean the
troubled Caucasus would be on a hair-trigger to detonate World
War III.
Russia threatens Georgia , but
Georgia threatens Abkhazia and South Ossetia . Russia looks like
a crocodile to Georgia , but Georgia looks to Russia like the
cats' paw of the West. Since Saakashvili took power in late 2003
the Pentagon has been in Georgia giving military aid and
training. Not only are US military personnel active in Georgia
today. According to an Israeli-intelligence source,
DEBKA file, in 2007, the Georgian President
Saakashvili “commissioned from private Israeli security firms
several hundred military advisers, estimated at up to 1,000, to
train the Georgian armed forces in commando, air, sea, armored
and artillery combat tactics. They also have been giving
instruction on military intelligence and security for the
central regime. Tbilisi also purchased weapons, intelligence and
electronic warfare systems from Israel . These advisers were
undoubtedly deeply involved in the Georgian army's preparations
to conquer the South Ossetian capital Friday.”
Debkafile
reported further, “ Moscow has repeatedly demanded that
Jerusalem halt its military assistance to Georgia , finally
threatening a crisis in bilateral relations. Israel responded by
saying that the only assistance rendered Tbilisi was
‘defensive.'” The Israeli news source added that Israel 's
interest in Georgia has to do as well with Caspian oil pipeline
geopolitics. “ Jerusalem has a strong interest in having Caspian
oil and gas pipelines reach the Turkish terminal port of Ceyhan
, rather than the Russian network. Intense negotiations are
afoot between Israel Turkey, Georgia , Turkmenistan and
Azarbaijan for pipelines to reach Turkey and thence to Israel 's
oil terminal at Ashkelon and on to its Red Sea port of Eilat .
From there, supertankers can carry the gas and oil to the Far
East through the Indian Ocean .”
This means that the attack on
South Ossetia is the first battle in a new proxy warfare between
Anglo-American-Israeli led interests and Russia . The only
question is whether Washington miscalculated the swiftness and
intensity of the Russian response to the Georgian attacks of
8.8.08.
So far, each step in the
Caucasus drama has put the conflict on a yet higher plane of
danger. The next step will no longer be just about the Caucasus
, or even Europe . In 1914 it was the “Guns of August” that
initiated the Great War. This time the Guns of August 2008 could
be the detonator of World War III and a nuclear holocaust of
unspeakable horror.
Nuclear
Primacy: the larger strategic danger
Most in the West are unaware how
dangerous the conflict over two tiny provinces in a remote part
of Eurasia has become. What is left out of most all media
coverage is the strategic military security context of the
Caucasus dispute.
In my book,
Century of War , I describe the
developments by NATO and most directly by Washington since the
end of the Cold War to systematically pursue what military
strategists call Nuclear Primacy. Put simply, if one of two
opposing nuclear powers is able to first develop an operational
anti-missile defense, even primitive, that can dramatically
weaken a potential counter-strike by the opposing side's nuclear
arsenal, the side with missile defense has “won” the nuclear
war.
As mad as this sounds, it has
been explicit Pentagon policy through the last three Presidents
from father Bush in 1990, to Clinton and most aggressively,
George W. Bush. This is the issue where Russia has drawn a deep
line in the sand, understandably so. The forceful US effort to
push Georgia as well as Ukraine into NATO would present Russia
with the spectre of NATO literally coming to its doorstep, a
military threat that is aggressive in the extreme, and untenable
for Russian national security.
This is what gives the seemingly
obscure fight over two provinces the size of Luxemburg the
potential to become the 1914 Sarajevo trigger to a new nuclear
war by miscalculation. The trigger for such a war is not Georgia
's right to annex South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Rather, it is US
insistence on pushing NATO and its missile defense right up to
Russia 's door.
By F. William Engdahl
www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net
COPYRIGHT © 2008 F. William
Engdahl. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
* F. William Engdahl
is the author of A Century of War:
Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order
(Pluto Press) and Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden
Agenda of Genetic Manipulation ,
www.globalresearch.ca . The present series is adapted from
his new book, now in writing, The Rise and Fall
of the American Century: Money and Empire in Our Era.
He may be contacted through his website,
www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net .
Click
on "comments" below to read or post
comments
Comment
Guidelines
Be
succinct, constructive and relevant to the story.
We encourage
engaging, diverse and meaningful commentary. Do
not include personal information such as names,
addresses, phone numbers and emails. Comments
falling outside our guidelines – those
including personal attacks and profanity –
are not permitted.
See our complete Comment
Policy and use
this link to notify us if you have
concerns about a comment. We’ll promptly
review and remove any inappropriate postings.
Send
Page To a Friend
In
accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this
material is distributed without profit to those
who have expressed a prior interest in receiving
the included information for research and
educational purposes. Information Clearing House
has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator
of this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
|
