Methinks He Doth Protest Too Much!

Daily Kos has a piece detailing McCain's lobbying ties to the Republic of Georgia, which, given his statement on the conflict in South Ossetia become slightly interesting to me. The Kos piece describes the statement- (in full, here) as 'confrontational' but reading it, I'm not seeing that too much. Granted, it seems fairly one sided in favor of the Georgians, but what is to be done?

Every other government out there (that I've seen) seems to be intent on taking a neutral stance calling on both sides to quit it and come talk about it. Neither side is listening of course, but let's look at the current timeline of events:

Georgia and South Ossetia had negotiated a ceasefire, but fighting broke out anyway- so who broke the ceasefire? If the idea is to get both sides to lay off, we gotta slap the people who broke the ceasefire in the first place (p.s. I think it was probably Georgia) but at the same time- doesn't Georgia have a right to use force against separatist rebels? Hmmm... there it gets hazy. Russia has had its fingers in Abkhazia and South Ossetia for years now- it keeps Georgia from fully consolidating its territory and democracy and keeps them weak and somewhat in the Russian orbit. But now Saakashvili wants to join NATO. That's a no-no. Now Saakashvili wants to bring the breakaway regions back under Tblisi's control and send the Russian's packing. That's a no-no too.

There's more at stake here than just the mere question of 'who started it?' Russia and Georgia are going to go all in on this one because there's too much at stake for both. After rollbacks in the Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan and with Russia feeling its oats, so to speak and increasingly confident neither government is going to want to back down. Both sides lose too much if they do. We need a solution which proves the benefits to negotiation to both sides. And one-sided statements in favor of Georgia just show the lack of awareness of what's at stake here. (It's also worth noting that if Republican War Policies hadn't tied us down, we might have more options than strongly worded letters of complaint. What say you to that, Senator McCain?)

We're faced with a tricky needle to thread. An open conflict between the two sides has probably been inevitable for years and now it's come. Neither side is going to want to back down, so we need carrots and sticks to prove the benefits to negotiation to both sides. What those carrots and sticks are is a total different bag of chips entirely.

But the UN won't be able to do squat with Russia holding a veto. The US is tied down militarily and has its hands full in Iraq and Afghanistan (and probably shouldn't be moving troops to the area anyway. Things are bad enough as it is.) So if there's to be military aid, it should come from the Europeans- and it should only come if Russia violates Georgian territory with the goal of overthrowing the Republic of Georgia and replacing it with a government more friendly to their interests. That'd be a major red line that we're nowhere near yet- but it's one to watch out for. But it's going to be tricky, but negotiation needs to be done before this goes from bad to worse in a big hurry.

As for McCain... well it doesn't speak well for his leadership abilities. Granted Obama following the Bush Administration's line of 'everyone quit it, dammit!' isn't very muscular and stick waving, but this isn't a situation that calls for that. McCain lacks nuance- but given that I've seen pieces on Kos that posit a huge oil conspiracy behind our concern over this, it doesn't surprise me that McCain is feeling bellicose. Defending Georgia is a must. Getting people to stop before that becomes necessary would be a plus- if McCain is guilty of anything, it's of being a Washington insider with too many lobbying friends and being maybe a half-step ahead of events. Bellicosity towards the Russians might have its place soon, but let's see if we can get them to lay off and talk first.