The Russo-Georgian War and the Balance of Power

By Stratfor's founder and CEO, Dr. George Friedman

The Russian invasion of Georgia has not changed the balance of power in Eurasia. It simply announced that the balance of power had already shifted. The United States has been absorbed in its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as potential conflict with Iran and a destabilizing situation in Pakistan. It has no strategic ground forces in reserve and is in no position to intervene on the Russian periphery. This, as we have argued, has opened a window of opportunity for the Russians to reassert their influence in the former Soviet sphere. Moscow did not have to concern itself with the potential response of the United States or Europe; hence, the invasion did not shift the balance of power. The balance of power had already shifted, and it was up to the Russians when to make this public. They did that Aug. 8.

---
The Mystery Behind the Georgian Invasion

In this simple chronicle, there is something quite mysterious: Why did the Georgians choose to invade South Ossetia on Thursday night? There had been a great deal of shelling by the South Ossetians of Georgian villages for the previous three nights, but while possibly more intense than usual, artillery exchanges were routine. The Georgians might not have fought well, but they committed fairly substantial forces that must have taken at the very least several days to deploy and supply. Georgia’s move was deliberate.

The United States is Georgia’s closest ally. It maintained about 130 military advisers in Georgia, along with civilian advisers, contractors involved in all aspects of the Georgian government and people doing business in Georgia. It is inconceivable that the Americans were unaware of Georgia’s mobilization and intentions. It is also inconceivable that the Americans were unaware that the Russians had deployed substantial forces on the South Ossetian frontier. U.S. technical intelligence, from satellite imagery and signals intelligence to unmanned aerial vehicles, could not miss the fact that thousands of Russian troops were moving to forward positions. The Russians clearly knew the Georgians were ready to move. How could the United States not be aware of the Russians? Indeed, given the posture of Russian troops, how could intelligence analysts have missed the possibility that the Russians had laid a trap, hoping for a Georgian invasion to justify its own counterattack?

It is very difficult to imagine that the Georgians launched their attack against U.S. wishes. The Georgians rely on the United States, and they were in no position to defy it. This leaves two possibilities. The first is a massive breakdown in intelligence, in which the United States either was unaware of the existence of Russian forces, or knew of the Russian forces but — along with the Georgians — miscalculated Russia’s intentions. The second is that the United States, along with other countries, has viewed Russia through the prism of the 1990s, when the Russian military was in shambles and the Russian government was paralyzed. The United States has not seen Russia make a decisive military move beyond its borders since the Afghan war of the 1970s-1980s. The Russians had systematically avoided such moves for years. The United States had assumed that the Russians would not risk the consequences of an invasion.

If this was the case, then it points to the central reality of this situation: The Russians had changed dramatically, along with the balance of power in the region. They welcomed the opportunity to drive home the new reality, which was that they could invade Georgia and the United States and Europe could not respond. As for risk, they did not view the invasion as risky. Militarily, there was no counter. Economically, Russia is an energy exporter doing quite well — indeed, the Europeans need Russian energy even more than the Russians need to sell it to them. Politically, as we shall see, the Americans needed the Russians more than the Russians needed the Americans. Moscow’s calculus was that this was the moment to strike. The Russians had been building up to it for months, as we have discussed, and they struck.

MORE...

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0808/S00170.htm

Senators from both sides warning about the temperature rising there.

Nope. A little skirmish to revive the fear factor? Georgian/Ossetian civilians just collateral damage?

Wag the dog..... These guys don't care if civilians die to further their agenda.

I thought boy there is no way on the face of this green earth that we (the US) can be blamed for this.

And just as sure as the sun comes up in the morning, here we are as progressives blaming the United States.

Why do we never learn?

This plays into a public perception (fair or not) first stated by Jean Kirkpatrick that a significant chunk of the Democratic party will blame America first in any situation no matter what the facts are.
then with this as a stereo type is it any wonder we have such a hell of time convincing Joe and Jane six pack we as a party can be trusted to defend the nation.

No as a matter of fact some of us progressives come off as arrogant above the poor peasant know it alls that are aghast that the public (AKA: Sheepele) would listen to GOP lies and not understand the legitimacy of our approach.

The public at large understands that there are in fact bad people in the world who mean to harm to others.

This holds true at the local level (violent crime, etc).

And on the international level.

To the degree we are blinded by our hatred of Shrub and all thing GOP and thus blame the US for this war between Russia and Georgia, to that degree we look silly to the general populace.

And by doing so we help John McCain.

Think about it.

Think about it.