 |
Fighting in Georgia Highlights McCain's Confusion Over Russia
As the conflict over the breakaway region of South Ossetia threatens to explode into all-out war between Georgia and Russia, Republican presidential nominee John McCain weighed in. "What's most critical now," McCain said, "is to avoid further confrontation between Russian and Georgian military forces." But given his confused and contradictory statements about expelling Russia from the G8, what may be most critical to American voters is whether John McCain understands what he's talking about.
According to the AP, McCain this morning called for a U.S. diplomatic initiative in conjunction with America's European partners to halt the violence:
He said the U.S. should work with the European Union to put diplomatic pressure on Russia and help establish an independent peace keeping force in South Ossetia.
But McCain first needs to explain whether or not that pressure includes his on-again/off-again promise to kick Russia out the G8 group of industrialized nations.
Last November, McCain penned an article in Foreign Affairs in which he announced his intent to expel Russia from the G8. In a March 26th speech, he made his plan crystal clear:
"We should start by ensuring that the G-8, the group of eight highly industrialized states, becomes again a club of leading market democracies: it should include Brazil and India but exclude Russia."
But facing almost universal condemnation from foreign policy analysts who characterized booting Russia from the G8 as logistically impossible and just plain "dumb," the McCain campaign quickly disowned it. On June 25th, Reuters reported that an anonymous McCain adviser claimed the policy towards Russia was no longer operative:
He also dismissed McCain's comment last October on Russia and the G-8 as "a holdover from an earlier period," adding: "It doesn't reflect where he is right now."
Yet one month later, John McCain was back on the trail, calling once again for Moscow to get the heave-ho. Appearing on ABC This Week with George Stephanopolous on July 27, McCain insisted it was back on:
STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me ask you about your position to exclude Russia from the G-8. How are you going to get that done? Every other G-8 nation is against it.
MCCAIN: Well, you have to take positions whether other nations agree or not, because you have to do what's best for America...
No doubt, McCain is right that the next president must do "what's best for America." Georgia is a U.S. ally, one which President Bush has pushed to add to the ranks of NATO. Meanwhile, the United States is pressing to deploy the U.S. missile defense system in Eastern Europe, including in a non-existent nation John McCain recently called "Czechoslovakia."
So as the fighting in Georgia becomes a election here, John McCain needs to be crystal clear. When it comes to Washington's relations with Moscow and the G8, is Russia in or out?
UPDATE 1: On Friday, ThinkProgress documented McCain adviser Randy Scheunemann's lobbying work for the government of Georgia. In a piece Saturday on the candidates' response to the Georgia crisis, the Politico briefly raises the issue of Scheunemann's lobbying - and McCain's tough talk about the Russian invasion. As for McCain's inconsistent promise to expel Russia from the G8, it is mentioned only once in passing.
UPDATE 2: Back on May 27, McCain gave a major address on nuclear non-proliferation in which his strategic incoherence towards Russia was once again on display. Just months after calling for a "League of Democracies" and the expulsion of Russia from the G8, McCain in May portrayed Russia as an essential partner in the global struggle to contain the spread of nuclear weapons. For more details, see:
"McCain Vows to Both Work with Moscow, Expel Russia from G8."
—Perrspective
09:32 AM Permalink
Although electing knowledgeable leaders would be a plus for the U.S., the deplorable level of international awareness by the the population would barely change. And, since this stupid electorate would be voting in these supposedly informed leaders, we probably would get back to square one. Great stuff, eh? There's nothing like running around in circles to clear the mind.
The problem is that one can never tell whether what McCain says reflects an honestly held policy position (albeit merely the present flip or flop of that position), loss of memory, ignorance, or just genuine befuddlement. That's dangerous because it means those who really care about policy, whether American voters or foreign leaders, are left without a clue as to what policies he would actually pursue. It might be funny at first, but then it gets really scary--Like Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove.
Mccain claims to have 35 years of foreign policy and military experience. Well, where's that experience at on this matter? All he's done is confuse voters and our allies. No wonder they all like Obama- at least he knows what he's talking about.
We can't afford to have wishy-washiness in the middle of a Caucaus mountains war.
How long USA and so called “democratic countries” will cover the truth about this war?Around 1000 USA marines and military instructors use to train georgian`s troops before this war.USA,ISRAEL,UKRAINE, sold weapon to Georgia in huge volume.At this days african -americans military instructors were found dead in South Ossetia.New Hitler,Saakashvili who killed 2000 people mostly kids,elderly people has protection from USA,ISRAEL,UKRAINE,GB and some “friends countries”.Genocide by Saakashvili rewarded by countries who sold weapon to this dictator.Newspapers,tv,radio telling the same story about Russian invasion,buy nobody says,that this war was planned event,long time before by good paid dictator Saakashvili. This is moment of truth and sooner or later people and countries who did it will be punished by God.
How it started. Just in brief:
1. Last Thursday - one day before the opening of the Olympics
Georgia* announced openly* that it started
its military operation in the region of South Ossetia to blot out the separatists there.
Georgia used up to 150 artillery systems, tanks and armored vehicles in the siege of the small capital of this region. The town was heavily shelled and 80%-destroyed by 3 PM next day. By raw estimates 1600 people died by that time. Thousands others fled to Russia. They were of the native nation - Ossetians.
There were no Russian troops during that period except for one 400-people battalion of the Peace-keepers equipped with lights arms only, having no artillery, no tanks. 15 of these solders were shot dead, 50 wounded.
2. Russian reaction.
Putin was in Beijing (Olimpics opening ceremony).
In his interview to would-news reporters he said that Russia would have to react and response. Though he did not mentioned how it would do it.
3. Georgian “victory”
By 2.00 - 3.00 PM last Friday Georgian officials declared that two thirds of the territory of South Ossetia was cleared off Ossetian separatists and that Georgian military troops put in possession of the territory of South Ossetia. The sepatatists’ troops lost their positions and were mostly defeated but continued fighting. Up to 30 000 thousand refugees fled in the north (to Russia).
4. Further Russian response.
By 4.00-5.00 PM Russia announced that it started to bring its forces in Ossetia to stop the bloodshed and help out those remaining Russian peace-keeping battalion which was still fighting in their camp in Ossetia.
5. Would reaction. It was immediate. Breaking news: Russia attacked Georgia!
P.S. During all this period I was constantly switching from Russian, Georgian and Would news sites and TV channels. I was very much disappointed with the fact that all the time up to the point # 4 the western sources gave very scarce information on all that mess or did not give it at all. It left an impression that they were waiting for the moment of Russian forces indraught into conflict. They gave those breaking news the standard label: Russian tanks in Georgia! Thus the mass media were absolutely sure about your reaction and attitude. Judge by youself.
The problem is that one can never tell whether what McCain says reflects an honestly held policy position (albeit merely the present flip or flop of that position), loss of memory, ignorance, or just genuine befuddlement. That's dangerous because it means those who really care about policy, whether American voters or foreign leaders, are left without a clue as to what policies he would actually pursue. It might be funny at first, but then it gets really scary--Like Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove.
I think I don't totally agree with your opinion here...
|
