Georgia's Risky Move

{
  "authors": [
    "Dmitri Trenin"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "Caucasus",
    "Russia",
    "Georgia",
    "Western Europe"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

In The Media

Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center

Georgia's Risky Move

Russia’s response to Georgia’s large-scale military operation in South Ossetia transformed the conflict from a regional dispute over an obscure ethnic group into an emerging international crisis between Russia and the West. While Georgia may have succeeded in causing Russia to move in with heavy forces, the United States and Europe need to pause and think before following Saakashvili's script.

By Dmitri Trenin

Published on Aug 9, 2008

Source: Washington Post

For months, Russia's tactic was to prove to the west that Georgia was too irresponsible to be considered for admission to NATO. Georgia, for its part, sought to impress on the western publics and governments that Russia, in both Abkhazia and South Ossetia, was an aggressor and occupier. All parties to the conflicts in the two breakaway regions tried to provoke the other side into "showing its true colors".

Acting under time pressure, Georgia has dramatically upped the ante by mounting a large-scale military operation to recover the separatist enclave in South Ossetia. As expected, its now well-trained and well-equipped forces overran the Ossetian formations and took over their capital town, causing a massive loss of life. This spectacular Act I of the unfolding drama received only muted reaction in the international media.

Not so the following Act. President Saakashvili has succeeded in causing Russia to move in with heavy forces. Immediately, the nature of the conflict has been transformed. It is no longer about an obscure ethnic group tucked in somewhere in the Caucasus mountains. The image reverberating around the world is that of Russia's recidivist invasion against one of its tiny neighbors. Moscow stepped right into the trap Tbilisi had laid for it.

Almost inevitably, Act II leads to Act III, for which Saakashvili is already calling. The conflict is no longer about Russia and Georgia, he says, it is about American/Western values. Georgia is a frontline state in the emerging new confrontation: a democratic David fighting the Russian Goliath. This is serious. Much has been prophesized recently about the advent of a new Cold War, and the recent developments in the Caucasus, at least in their superficial and very partial interpretation, seem to corroborate the story.

Yet, the United States and Europe need to pause and think. Standing up for Georgia is one thing, but following Saakashvili's script is another. So far, each step in the Caucasus drama has put the conflict on a yet higher plane. The next step will no longer be just about the Caucasus, or even Europe. Remember the Guns of August.

Dmitri Trenin is a Senior Associate of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and Deputy Director of its Moscow center.

About the Author

Dmitri Trenin

Former Director, Carnegie Moscow Center

Trenin was director of the Carnegie Moscow Center from 2008 to early 2022.

Recent Work

Commentary
Mapping Russia’s New Approach to the Post-Soviet Space
- Dmitri Trenin
Commentary
What a Week of Talks Between Russia and the West Revealed
- Dmitri Trenin

Foreign Policy North America United States Caucasus Russia Georgia Western Europe

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center

Commentary
Diwan
The U.S. Risks Much, but Gains Little, with Iran
In an interview, Hassan Mneimneh discusses the ongoing conflict and the myriad miscalculations characterizing it.
Michael Young
Commentary
Diwan
The Greatest Dangers May Lie Ahead
In an interview, Nicole Grajewski discusses the military dimension of the U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran.
Michael Young
Commentary
Diwan
Firepower Against Willpower
In an interview, Naysan Rafati assesses the first week that followed the U.S. and Israeli attack on Iran.
Michael Young
Commentary
Diwan
What Is Israel’s Plan in Lebanon?
At heart, to impose unconditional surrender on Hezbollah and uproot the party among its coreligionists.
Yezid Sayigh
Commentary
Emissary
Bombing Campaigns Do Not Bring About Democracy. Nor Does Regime Change Without a Plan.
Just look at Iraq in 1991.
Marwan Muasher

Georgia's Risky Move