Making Putin Pay [WSJ OpEd]

Wall Street Journal ^ | 16 August 2008 | Wall Street Journal

[COBOL2Java]

Vladimir Putin proved last weekend that Russia's army can push over Georgia's army. In the past 48 hours, the West has begun to push back. If its leaders stay the course, they may yet turn Mr. Putin's meager military success into a significant political defeat.

---

Snip

---

Both Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates are specialists in the Soviet era and are acutely aware of the price paid in human terms to bring the Soviet Union to dissolution in 1991. It must discomfit them to see that achievement threaten to unravel, especially after having invested so much in good relations with Mr. Putin. So it is reassuring to hear Mr. Gates say the Russians run the risk of damaging relations with the West "for years to come." This isn't just some point of disagreement. The Americans and their allies must continue to make Mr. Putin pay a political penalty for Georgia.

---

Snip

---

Western authorities should also explore the vulnerability of Russian assets abroad. At the least, they can make life difficult for the holders of those assets. Post-Soviet Russia allowed the emergence of businessmen and entrepreneurs who indeed wish to function as normal participants in world commerce. Their number, however, assuredly includes the lucky billionaires under Mr. Putin's protection. All of them want to benefit from the West's rules. That privilege should be restricted so long as Mr. Putin breaks the rules.

[rmlew]

Ever since Muscovy beat Novgorod for dominane in Russia, the Russian soul has been that of a slave seeking a good master. They want fair and just Czars.
Of course, our failure to push post-Soviet Russai to hold Nuremberg-like trials for communists and our idiocy of promoting privatization before Rule of law, also has discredited democracy in Russia.

[Words]

My statement was in regard to the fact that selling goes both ways. Try bullying your customer when they come into your store to buy something. No matter how much they need your product, they will start doing whatever they can to find another store to shop in. Just a capitalist fact...not a threat.

That's why both are not interested in confrontation.

Not over Georgia. Russia will lose G8 and maybe WTO unless they spend some time pretending to kiss ass. Which they probably will. But continued efforts to reestablish a Soviet style intimidation over Europe will over time erode willingness to invest in Russia or deal with them. That will probably happen also. Russia has not had this economic resurgence in a vacuum.....and will not be able to maintain it when they create a vacuum.

Hardly possible.

Clinton is an example of short term thinking. Kosovo was an example of Clintonesque short term thinking. I am not sure its a good idea for Russia to emulate Clintonian strategy as a revenge for Clintonian strategy.

Either way one wants to put it, the damage has been done.

Take me for instance...I fully supported Russia in the efforts against Chechnyan fanatics and was irritated that the West was not more supportive of Russia. Now, after the Georgia episode, I will not be mustering any support for Russia.

But the FNC said a couple days Georgia embarked on that military adventure against the advice of the State not to do so. Am I missing something?

[Nowhere Man]

I have always thought that Russia's best strategic move would be to fully integrate with the West and become a leader of the West as a frontline state. They have a terrible demographic problem along with growing populations of unfriendlies to the south...plus resource hungry China. I am not sure they can defend that massive landmass with their future population for the long run. In 100 years they will be overrun by their growing southern neighbors. They only way to stop that would have been to integrate fully with the west.

They ally with the Muslims to the south against the West because they sense a loss of power from Soviet days. But they have made a short term deal with the devil that will ultimately kill them. Makes no real long-term sense.

I know, let's say if they get into a war with Red China between now and the foreseeable future, as time goes by, they cannot put as many "boots on the ground." Airpower can help, but it comes down to the man (and woman, due to population pressures) with a rifle. Russia would lose in a conventional war with Red China, even during the Korean War, they said that if you had a machine gun that will never break and run out of ammo, you will die of old age and they will still be charging you. If Russia is faced with that, expect the great equalizer, nukes, to by used, Red China will nuke back and even if the West escapes direct attack, we might still have the Moslem threat, a depressed economy, a boatload of refugees and taking count how many times the fallout cloud passes around the world.

Historically, the Iranians called the USSR/Russia the "lesser Satan" so eventually, if they survive, they will wind up on Iran's and the Moslem world's crap list. Come to think of it, Nostadamous did say there will be a point the Russians/Soviets would ally with the Moslems for manpower but it would bite them in the butt eventually.

[cricket]

If it is not a restoration of their sovereignty; their Democracy. . .their Country;. . .

Well. . .true inasmuch as they have not lost it - yet.

But; if Russian has their way. . .

What do the South Ossetians want?

[Words]

If we're very fortunate, we may see the demise of the destructive green movement.

Hopefully, but "Very fortunate" is the clause. Hardly going to happen - this make-work make-issues crowd thrives on it.

[the invisib1e hand]

Vlad trolls, here? As often as I’ve slammed him, I’m surprised I haven’t been flamed.

[Sal]

The trolls have flamed me a little in some other posts, but their flames seem to indict themselves and their cause and/or make themselves look ridiculous so I’m pretty comfortable with it.