Business as usual?
Europe is really having very short memory. After the Russian aggression against Georgia on 8.august 2008 European leaders stand up and promised to make to Russia absolutely clear, that such of behavior could not be tolerated in Europe. To demonstrate that they are serious with this message, Europe decided to cancel – or postpone as it was officially said – the negotiations with Moscow on a new “Partnership and Cooperation Agreement”. Europe insisted that Russia must obey a six-point ceasefire deal, which ended the Georgia war on Aug 12, before any talks on the partnership agreement can start again. The restart of negotiations depended on Russian compliance with those commitments that it made in August.
Unfortunately the Russia has not done this. It has actually broken most of points of the ceasefire deal by failing by example to withdraw its forces to their pre-war positions. Russian troops have left most of the so called buffer-zone, but is still occupying parts of territories controlled by Georgia till the start of the military conflict. European observers are not having access to the territories of South-Ossetia and Abkhazia, as a result of this the provocations, bombings and conflicts are continuing in the border area. Russia is having significantly more troops on the territory as before the conflict.
Some European leaders have nevertheless decided to close their eyes to all this. They say that Russia is doing everything it´s supposed to do, so it is time to restart the negotiations. This would amount to a return to “business as usual” and sends a signal that Russia had escaped any lasting diplomatic penalty for invading Georgia. Such of decision would show Russia that aggression pays off, that Europe is incapable of holding a firm line against aggression and that Russia’s neighbors cannot rely on the EU to protect them from Russian bullying. Even as Moscow has declared that it is actually “not so interested” on these negotiations, the restart of the talks would be an important symbol. Russia would claim a victory if they started, getting signal: “We did it!”
This is very bad message not only for Europe but for Russia itself. The war with Georgia has been for Russia both geopolitically and economically very costly. Economist Andrey Illarionov, a former adviser to Vladimir Putin and now an outspoken critic of the Russian authorities, has described the conflict with Georgia as a “geopolitical catastrophe for Russia” since it destroyed the delicate geopolitical balance that Russia established in the South Caucasus over two centuries in alliance with Georgia. It turned Russia also to the conflict with CIS members and Asian countries. Collapse of the Russian stocks after the invasion was dramatic, helping Russia to become “worst performer” during world-wide economic crises. “Victory” over small Georgia has helped Putin to bolster support to its totalitarian policies inside of Russia. When West now accepts such behavior and returns to “business as usual” the democratic forces, protesting against the invasion, would get another hit. These are reasons why Poland, Baltic and most of Nordic countries with Great Britain have opposed the proposal to restart negotiations with Russia. How long they can resist the pressure of “old Europe” will be seen. In this moment it is nevertheless necessary to look back to the history, which teach us that appeasement of aggressor never pays off.
Russia is waging a “pipeline war” against the West:
http://oilandglory.com/2007/10/americas-unnoticed-new-war.html
While analysing the motive powers of the Russian aggression against Georgia, the Baku – Ceyhan oil pipeline, traversing through Georgia, should not remain unnoticed.
Pipeline projects, such like Nord Stream and South Stream, are a weapon for Russia – and her Achilles heel, in the same time:
http://www.businessweek.com/blogs/russia_oil_politics/archives/2008/08/russias_achille.html
Hence, in order to curb the russian bear, blocking the afore-mentioned pipeline projects could be an option.
Please support an appeal against the Nord Stream pipeline: http://www.balticsea.lt/en
Dear Mr. Laar,
I am a permission researcher trying to gain permission to reprint one of your speeches in a forthcoming textbook. Could you please contact me via e-mail so that I can send you the request directly? Thank you so much!
Having just finsihed Mart’s book War in the Woods I was very embarrased to learn about the failure of the western allies to enforce the north atlantic charter, something that as a Brit I had not heard of before…it doesnt get much of a mention in Britian for obvious reasons. I am atleast glad to learn that Britian is taking a stronger line in dealing with the Bear this time.
Appeasement is completly inappropriate, is clear that Georgia was a test case for Russia and giving them a successful result is just asking for trouble. In my mind the issue shouldnt be about the possibility of restarting talks but what more permenant puntive actions should be taken against them for firstly invading Georgia and secondly not adearing to the sarkozy agreement.
Atleast now putin has shown his attitude towards such agreements, as such future situtions can be meet with immediate enforecment and not the relaxed instruction to the bully that he should simply decrease the amount of money he is taking from the smaller kids.
Mr. Laar, do you think Russia could invade Baltic countries as it invaded Georgia?
Dear Michal – no I do not think so – Russia is more dangerous for us thanks to its weaknesses and not strenght – when Russia continues attempts to restore Soviet Empire, it will not deal its huge problems – and when it collapses, this will not be a good news.
Mr. Laar, hot topic emerged in the recent days – a topic that, I asume, would be better explained by people like you – Europe suffers a gas crisis, which is caused again by major players on the market. Russia “liberates” Europe of its gas dependancy or what?
I am writing from Bulgaria, where we are freezing right now due to the collapse gas supply. What to expect next?