The US-Russia Foreign Policy Quandry

When Russia invaded Georgia, the U.S. had a difficult time trying to characterize their objection. They were down this road not too long ago - when they wanted to invade Iraq and only a handful of nations would go along. They listened to no one.

Today, Democrats and Republicans (no difference) have expressed their 'outrage' over Russia's actions. I heard a wide array of statements that were borderline hypocritical including, but not limited to, the following:

"The days of overthrowing leaders by military means in Europe -- those days are gone."

- US Ambassador to UN Zalmay Khalilzad - Emphasis added on the "in Europe" part. Apparently, the Middle East is still fair game...

“In the 21st century, nations don’t invade other nations.”

- John McCain

"This is not 1968 and the invasion of Czechoslovakia where Russia can threaten a neighbor, occupy a capital, overthrow a government and get away with it. Things have changed."

- Condoleeza Rice

I'm not going to insult the intelligence of those who read this blog by further explaining the apparent hypocrisy of these statements.

I'd like to make a couple of points here - there is a damn good reason why the international community is not rushing to the defense of Georgia as quickly as you'd expect - they fired the first shots! South Ossetia has been demanding independence, and Georgia saw an opportunity to try to take back the breakaway region. They did so by force, killing scores of civilians prior to the intervention of Russia. Why did Russia intervene? 90% of South Ossetia's inhabitants are Russian citizens - and the Russian constitution calls for the defense of Russians wherever they reside. Therefore, they are following their constitution (which, by the way, is something that the current US government fails to do). It is for this reason, and for the fact that Georgia attacked the Russian peace keepers who were there.

Another point I'd like to make - the US Government keeps saying that Georgia is a country with democratically elected leaders. But what if the people of a certain region do not agree with the leadership and these leaders don't represent their interests? Democracy is deficient in these areas - right now, there resides an individual in the White House who does not represent me - right here in the U.S. In my opinion, he has no legitimacy. In South Ossetia, the whole region has made a collective decision that Mikheil Saakashvilli does not represent them nor does anyone in the Georgian government. And they are demanding their independence and welcome the Russian intervention. Don't forget the words of our own Declaration of Independence before you pass judgement on this matter -

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.