U.S., Europe to Form United Front to Russia

August 18th, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will visit America’s European allies ‘to talk with NATO allies about what message the West should send to Russia following its invasion of Georgia.’

Rice said Russia cannot use “disproportionate force” and still ‘be welcomed by international institutions.’

“It’s not going to happen that way,” she said. “Russia will pay a price.”

Although that certainly sounds forceful the question is what she and US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates plan to do. At this moment the two are not specific. Nothing that would send a clear signal to Russia and punish it for its aggressive behavior has been proposed yet.

Gates explained why this is.  “There is no need to rush into everything. We don’t want to do it unilaterally,” he said.

“I think there needs to be a strong, unified response to Russia to send the message that this kind of behavior, characteristic of the Soviet period, has no place in the 21st century,” Gates said.

Rice’s decision to visit Europe comes after U.S. intelligence reports in which it is claimed that Russia has started moving missile launchers into South Ossetia, the breakaway Georgian province. It seems that Russia wants to turn South Ossetia into a second Armenia; military bases are placed in this country and, at least according to Azerbaijani govermnent officials, these bases were used to strike against Georgia.

If Russia now moves troops and missile launchers into South Ossetia it increases the scope of its military. It will make it easier for the Russians to attack other former Soviet Republics in the region. This will, of course, have quite a big impact in the region, especially if Europe and the U.S. don’t do much to contain the Russian imperialist ambitions.

The American approach – working with Europe rather than unilaterally – makes sense though. Rice, Gates and Bush wants ‘the West’ to counter Russia, not just the U.S. This should not be between Russia and the United States, it should be between Russia and the free world. West European countries like Germany and Britain have started to respond angrily to the Russian invasion of Georgia in recent days. The U.S. realizes this, and is trying to unite the West like it has not been united ever since the fall of the Soviet Union.

There is a lot at stake for Europe as well. This should not between the U.S. and Russia because the situation in the region matters to Europe as well.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. David
    August 18th, 2008 at 12:29
    Reply | Quote | #1

    One of the best short term moves that the West could make is to give NATO security guarantees to the Ukraine. As I argued elsewhere on this site, the Ukraine is a vital part of Putin’s strategic plan to turn Europe into a Russian sphere of influence. Unlike most eastern European countries it has both a large population and a large, though poorly equipped, army.

    In the longer term more difficult decisions need to be made. European energy seems to have to come from either Russia or Iran, neither is a savoury regime.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.