Carl Bildt, ex-viceroy of Bosnia and currently the Swedish FM, writes on his blog that the Georgian affair is "about principles fundamental to the peace and stability of all of Europe."
He also claims that the war was provoked by the Ossetians, that Russia is engaged in a "large-scale aggressive action" and that "no state has the right to unilaterally intervene military in another state with the pretext of protecting its citizens."
Let's start from that last one. Ever heard of the United States of America?
Moving along, then. One has to be either stupid or harbor malicious intent to call the Russian action "aggressive" when it was clearly a response to the Georgian attack on South Ossetia. Russia is a guarantor of the truce that froze the conflict in the early 1990s when Ossetia and Abkhazia seceded from Tbilisi; as such, it certainly had the right and one might even argue duty to intervene when the truce was violated by, say, the Georgian army invading Ossetia wholesale.
Of course, Tbilisi claims that Ossetians attacked first. Just like Poland. Why would the Ossetians provoke the war? They had de facto independence, Russian citizenship, and could wait the Georgians out pretty much indefinitely. One could argue that it would be in Russia's long-term interest to remove an American client regime from Tbilisi, but why now? And remember, it is Washington, and not Moscow, that's been going around the world installing puppet governments.
Even if he were right on any of his points - and he is not - Bildt was a participant in the dismemberment of Yugoslavia, the Bosnian protectorate, and the occupation of Kosovo. That means he's got no credibility to talk about principles or international law, or peace, or stability. None.
But his sort of "analysis" is the one you'll find common in the West: Evil Russia manipulates, provokes, attacks, threatens. Yeah, right.
It's called projection. Look it up.
4 comments:
Thank you. Back when Kosovo illegally declared "independence" from Serbia, areas like South Ossetia were mentioned as wanting to do the same thing.
George Will, on ABC this morning, said something to the effect that "horrors! we have a major power invading and dropping bombs on a European country..." as if it had never happened before.
Do you know the expression, "what's good for the goose....." (is good for the gander)
I know the expression, indeed. The problem with it is that Americans - and Europeans, to a great extent - have moved away from objectively defined morality. So, in their view, bombing as such is neither good nor evil, it's the identity of the bomber. If Americans do something, it is by definition good. If the Serbs, Russians, or [insert name of villain of the day] do it, it's "genocide!!1!1"
This isn't hypocrisy, or double standards - it's no standards at all beyond "us good, them bad."
Reading what people like Bildt write you would be forgiven for thinking they can't remember anything that happened more than a week ago. I guess that is what its like to have no morals to stick to.
I have to say i'm happy to see Russia haven't gone in half heartedly. I hope they keep it up and spend the next week or two taking out every bit of Georgian military until they have nothing left. And unlike those cowards at NATO i bet they wont resort to targeting civilians
Hi Grey Falcon,
I just wanted to let you know that I have just posted an analysis of the causes, nature and importance of the war in Ossetia on my blog. If you are interested, please check it out here:
http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/2008/08/real-meaning-of-south-ossetian-war.html
Kind regards,
The Saker
Post a Comment