What's happening in Georgia.

[By CC HQ cub reporter Matt Bin.]

The situation in Georgia is going from bad to worse, with the Russians advancing on all fronts and the rest of the world watching helplessly from the sidelines. So what is this conflict about? Why did it break out now? And what can we in the west do about it?

I have a Russian friend who assures me that it's a combination of insanity and stupidity on (Georgian president) Saakashvili's part, and an unbelievably stupid and ruthless escalation on Russia's part. But the west -- primarily NATO -- is at the centre of the conflict.

There are a few important elements in play here. Saakashvili promised to return the autonomous Georgian areas, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, to the Georgian authority. This was a stupid promise. These areas declared their independence from Georgia almost as soon as the country was established, and although they are not recognized by anyone as separate countries they are more or less autonomous within Georgia.

Georgia, like the Ukraine, is trying very hard to join the EU and NATO. Both the USA and Britain sponsored their bid for NATO membership last year. However, Georgia lacks the stability that a NATO country needs; NATO doesn't need problems from within its member states. So even though Georgia has been sucking up pretty hard to Unca Dubya with its 2000 troops in Iraq, there was no way they were getting their NATO ticket punched in the near future.

And if you look at it from Russia's point of view, you can see why they wouldn't want yet another NATO state on their border. They've been fomenting unrest in the breakaway Georgian provinces throughout Putin's term, if not before, and the last thing they need is a hostile alliance on their border, cramping their style. In fact, if I were to ascribe any coherent aim in Russia's recent policy regarding Georgia (though my Russian friend strongly advises against looking for coherence or goals in Russian policy), it would be to hand out rope to Georgia like there's no tomorrow, along with noose-tying instructions and directions to the nearest gallows.

Saakashvili, like an idiot, took the Russian bait and launched a military attack on South Ossetia. The Russian response was sadly predictable, and so tragically overwhelming that we have not yet seen the end of it.

Why would Saakashvili act so stupidly? There are signs that he was hoping that the world -- or specifically, the USA -- would lend him some support. Unfortunately for him, that support wasn't ever going to come. Fred Kaplan has it about right:

Bush continued to entice Saakashvili with weapons, training, and talk of entry into NATO. Of course the Georgians believed that if they got into a firefight with Russia, the Americans would bail them out.

No, the USA never hesitates to throw its allies to the wolves (or its allies' citizens to the Syrians, for that matter). And in the face of Russian military power, the USA and other western powers have been cowed into responding timidly and ineffectually.

Of course, there are the chickenhawks on the right, not to mention the batshit insane on the right, demanding action, envisioning the dream scenario from their childhood where Johnny USA goes in and deals a telling blow to the Red Commie Menace resurgent Russian military machine. But even giving Georgia military support of any kind could lead to a direct confrontation with Russia, a war that the USA is far from ready to fight. Even talking about NATO membership with Georgia is, after this, a proposition that is so remote it's not even on the table.

So what should Canada do? Paul Wells says:

The presidents of Poland and the Baltic states — Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia — release a joint statement on the Russian invasion of Georgia. The statement contains a direct rebuke of NATO for putting Georgian accession to NATO on the slow track [...]

So there’s an option for, say, Canada’s prime minister, if he shares the analysis of its Central and Eastern European colleagues.

I wouldn’t sign [the statement.] But the prime minister has, on occasion, sought to get noticed in what’s sometimes called New Europe. Here’s his chance...

There's no way Harper should stick his neck out on this. Harper is perfectly willing to throw our nation's credibility into the toilet when it comes to Israel; it earns him a pat on the head from Unca Georgie and costs him little at home. But he's not going to risk getting the attention of the local bully just to score a few points with a handful of eastern European states by backing Georgia's bid for NATO membership. Harper's not exactly a world statesman, but surely he knows better than that.

So if we're smart, we'll sit on the sidelines with everyone else, and hope for an end to the conflict. (Maybe, if we still had any, we could send in some peacekeepers afterwards.) For once I'll support Stephen's perpetual bemusement on the international stage, and hope that he keeps his mouth shut unless he's agreeing with NATO. And NATO has lost so much credibility in recent years, it'll probably skulk sheepishly away from the conflict, taking its talk of Georgian and Ukrainian membership with it.

The Caucasus is the Balkans of the 21st century; the USA's empty neocon promises and brainless non-policy regarding Russia have put them on the losing side of the first major war there. Let's hope their next administration will have more sense, and more skill, than the current one. They can't do much worse.