Russia is stepping up its campaign to impose a moral equivalence between its military action against Georgia over South Ossetia last summer and NATO’s intervention against Serbia over Kosovo in 1998-1999. The Kremlin line consists of justifying Moscow’s actions by claiming that it is implementing the resolution of the U.N. Security Council imposing a “responsibility to protect” civilian populations from genocidal threats, even from their own legitimate government. That resolution was passed in response to events in Rwanda, but it has never been implemented by major U.N. member states.

Calling the comparison a “red herring,” that is being fabricated by Russia, Jamie Rubin, former U.S. assistant secretary of state under the Clinton administration, writes in the current issue of The New Republic that the international community’s action in Kosovo was “all about moral intervention” whereas Russia’s action in Georgia is “all about geopolitical resentment.”

Rubin points out that condemnation for Serbia’s crimes against Kosovo’s ethnic Albanian majority began with “unanimity among the major powers – the United States, key European governments, and, yes, even Russia.” Moscow supported economic sanctions against Serbia, and Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanovo even admitted to then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright that the “threat of force might be necessary.”

So what has happened that made Russia change its tune? For one, the Bush administration strained relations with Moscow in 2003, by defying Russia’s objections to the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Rubin says that then-president Putin is a temperamental leader who took this affront personally. (After all, he notes, Putin had supported U.S. actions in Afghanistan, the scene of past Soviet humiliation.) So Putin viewed it as adding insult to injury when the U.S. and the EU moved to recognize Kosovo’s independence – against Moscow’s objections.

Creating false moral equivalences is no new tactic for Russia. Back in August during the Russian invasion of Georgia, European Affairs predicted the Kremlin’s tactics, saying that “Russia will certainly play the recognition card in negotiations about the outcome and future shape of Georgia” and explaining that “Russia wants to pay back the West in its own coin for recognizing Kosovo’s independence in defiance of Moscow.”

Now, Russian President Dmitri Medvedev argues that “there is certainly no serious argument which would allow one to … separate the process of recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia from decisions taken with regard to Kosovo.”

The idea that Russia is claiming to be the guardian of human rights will not convince many people, but Russia’s attempt to create a parallel between Georgia and Serbia – the two countries that have lost provinces after outside nations intervened in the interest of local civilian populations – irritates U.S. and European officials. Rubin calls Russia’s analogy “nonsense” and says that this flawed logic will draw Russia into a corner – aggravating what the European Affairs blog called “one of [Russia’s] chronic weaknesses: isolation.”

The Russian Duma’s resolution calling for recognition of the Georgian breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia is non-binding, so President Dmitri Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin have the option of ignoring it. Indeed, they may not wish to stop short of a step liable to stir up secessionist fever in Chechnya and other restive regions within Russia’s own borders.

But Russia will certainly play the “recognition card” in negotiations about the outcome and future shape of Georgia. For one thing, Russia wants to pay back the West in its own coin for recognizing Kosovo’s independence in defiance of Moscow.

Each of the two regions has also expressed the wish to join Russia officially if they gain independence. This would expand Russian territory deep into Georgia. In practice, South Ossetia and Abkhazia are already independent, but Georgia depends on each region for key transportation infrastructure — such as the port of Sukhumi in Abkhazia for imports.

Europe is highly concerned that Russia could recognize secessionist regions in Georgia and in other nearby countries, according to Stratfor, a U.S. company offering on-line intelligence analysis. When Europe recognized Kosovo, it had control of the security situation there. In contrast, “there are countless other secessionist regions - Transdniestria in Moldova, for example - that were already stirring because of Kosovo’s independence and could really light up if they see Russia as a new guarantor of independence,” Stratfor reported.

In Russia itself, formal recognition of the breakaway republics on the ground of self-determination could create a dangerous domino effect within Russian borders. Russia has more than a dozen secessionist regions, many of which are powerful and organized. Moreover, some of these regions could attract strong foreign support - a situation the West could use to destabilize Russia or get Moscow involved in another set of wars within its own territory.

The Kremlin has worked very hard in the past few years to clamp down on the most volatile places, like Chechnya, Ingushetia and Dagestan, but there is always the possibility that these regions could flare up again very quickly.

In Georgia, reports indicate that organized cyber-warfare attacks continue against key government websites - attacks that appear to be coming from organized groups in Russia.

Suspicions that these attacks - like an even larger cyber-assault last year on Estonia - are offensive tactics orchestrated and used by the Russian government and have triggered fresh thinking in the U.S. and European capitals about what strategy might help deter such cyber-aggression in the future.

“Cyber-attack by a nation is very different from cyber-attack by a hacker,” says Admiral Bill Owens, a specialist about the threat. He told the Financial Times that the risks for major nations are rising to the point where it may be time to consider a defensive doctrine similar to “mutually assured destruction.” That was the name for a balance of nuclear weapons between the superpowers during the cold war that convinced both sides that it would be self-destructive to launch a nuclear attack.

Similarly, Owens said, diplomats might take another page from cold war arms-control and urge countries to pledge “no first use” of cyber-war - along the lines of the “no first use” pledges about nuclear weapons.

Although Georgia does not have enough web infrastructures to be very vulnerable in this area, the organized hacking it sustained comes against a background of reported attacks on government facilities in the U.S., France, Britain and Germany that were apparently probes of Western defenses or espionage to glean secret information. Both Russia and China have specialized military units that specialize in cyber-warfare, according to Western specialists. NATO is developing similar expertise.

Evoking the possibility of Western retaliation against attacks masterminded by another government, Owens said “I think that the U.S. and China have an ability to shut down each other’s societies on the internet today.”

This latest cyber-attack has spurred Europe and the U.S. to seek policy clarifications, new technical ripostes and closer cooperation, including via NATO. Michael Chertoff, U.S. Homeland Security Secretary, outlining plans for a “Manhattan project” for IT-security, warned recently that “a big and successful attack would have cascading effects across the country and across the world”.

Though there are similarities in both attacks there are also key differences between Estonia and Georgia specialists say. This time the hackers are targeting specific government websites such as the president’s, the parliament’s and the foreign ministry’s. In fact, web traffic is being redirected to sites in Russia and Turkey that could be the first step towards controlling Georgia’s incoming and outgoing high-level communications. That is the kind of control Russia would need to help oust President Mikheil Saakasvili.

Moscow’s use of military force against neighboring Georgia is bound to be a major setback for the West in its “pipeline war” with Russia in which the US and the EU are trying to devise ways of getting oil and gas directly to European markets without going through Russia.

Much of these Western hopes center on the territory of Georgia as a passageway from Central Asia to Turkey and its European neighbors.

Now it will be much harder to convince investors that these new pipelines are safe long-term bets for their money, according to Georgia Falls Victim to Pipeline Politics by a Platt’s specialist writing for the BBC.

This U.S. plan was described in European Affairs by its top US architect, Assistant Secretary of State Matthew Bryza in a recent issue.

The escalation of Russian pressure on Georgia, since the West supported Kosovo’s declaration of independence, has been charted in our European Affairs blog.

As noted here before, Georgia and its allies (including the United States and most EU member states) have feared that Russia might be “paving the way” for official recognition of Abkhazia and Ossetia, the Georgian provinces with separatist ambitions. Following the West’s recognition of Kosovo, which Russia opposed, Moscow warned that the move could cause further provincial splits in the porous Caucasus region, and some Europeans feared that the warning might become a self-fulfilling prophecy– especially with help from Moscow. With each passing week, there are fresh signs that the concern may have been well-founded as, according to reports today, Russia now says it intends to upgrade ties with the two separatist territories in neighboring Georgia.

The Georgian government in Tbilisi attacked the plan as “creeping annexation” aimed at creating problems liable to complicate Georgia’s acceptance into NATO. From today’s Wall Street Journal:

Abkhazia and South Ossetia broke away from Georgian control in fighting during the early 1990s. They are protected by Russian peacekeepers, use Russian rubles, and Russian passports have been issued in recent years to a majority of the population.

Wednesday’s statement said Russia’s goal was to improve the economies of the two territories, and not to provoke confrontation with Tbilisi. It also stopped short of formally recognizing the territories’ bids for independence, though leaders in the territories and Russia’s parliament welcomed the move as a step toward recognition.

“The State Duma passed an appeal proposing the president consider the possible recognition of Abkhazia and North Ossetia. The president has taken the first step in this direction,” Oleg Morozov, first deputy speaker of Russia’s parliament said Wednesday, Russian news agency Interfax reported.

Despite strong support from the U.S. and several European nations, Georgia’s bid for NATO membership was thwarted earlier this month when Germany, France and some other European members balked at U.S. pressure and refused to agree that conditions were ripe to offer Georgia (and Ukraine, which also borders Russia) a Membership Action Plan, which is the preliminary step to a candidacy for membership in the alliance. Any NATO steps toward admitting Georgia or other eastward expansion by NATO were stiffly opposed by outgoing Russian President Vladimir Putin and his successor, Dmitry Medvedev.

RadioFree Europe also has an extensive account of the latest developments:

Determined to thwart Tbilisi’s goals of reintegration, [Russia] remains a steadfast supporter of the breakaway regime and maintains considerable leverage as the dominant player in international mediation efforts.

In recent weeks, Moscow has actively stepped up its presence in the breakaway regions, lifting economic sanctions and moving to establish semi-official “embassies.” Russian President Vladimir Putin on April 16 ordered his government to recognize legal entities registered in Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

Moscow, mindful of its own separatist conflicts, is likely to stop short of recognizing Tskhinvali and Sukhumi’s self-declared independence. But such moves are still deeply aggravating to Tbilisi, and ensure that Russia will continue to play a decisive role in the region.

Related Posts:
NATO Approves U.S. Missile Agenda as Allies Postpone Georgia and Ukraine, 3 April 2008
European Officials Fear Russian Meddling in Georgian Separatist Region of Abkhazia, 11 March 2008
Medvedev Steps Up Rhetoric, Warns Against NATO Expansion Eastward, 25 March 2008

See Also:
Georgia: Could More Dialogue, Fewer Demands, Be Ticket On Abkhazia? [RadioFree Europe, 16 April 2008]
Russia to Bolster Ties to Separatist Areas in Georgia [Wall Street Journal, 17 April 2008]

President Bush’s plan to build a missile-defense shield in Europe won approval from NATO at yesterday’s Bucharest summit meetings, marking an important victory for the U.S. agenda and for American hopes of getting Moscow to ease its opposition. But the summit balked at U.S. pressure to start an admission process for Ukraine and Georgia as premature and liable to raise tensions with Russia.

The planned ballistic missile-defense system involves 10 interceptor missiles based in Poland and a tracking radar site in the Czech Republic. Poland and the Czech Republic are pleased to announce the completion of negotiations on a missile defense agreement,” says a joint statement by the two countries, issued on the fringes of the NATO summit in Bucharest (3 April).

In endorsing the project, a statement by the 26 nations alliance said that the system “will be linked to other US missile defense facilities in Europe and the US.” In addition according to NATO’s Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, the alliance will “develop options for a comprehensive missile defense architecture to extend coverage to all ally territory and population not otherwise covered by the US system.” These areas – including Turkey, Greece, Bulgaria and Romania – would not be protected by the missile shield as currently planned. In addition, plans are under discussion about how a NATO-focused network of defenses against short-and-medium-range missiles could be “bolted onto” the planned U.S. shield supposed to operate against long-range attacks.

The U.S. was less successful in its bid to gain NATO admission for the former Soviet republics of Georgia and Ukraine. The alliance moved to admit Croatia and Albania, but Germany and France led opposition to Bush’s push to expand the alliance into Georgia and Ukraine with a “membership action plan (MAP),” arguing that such a move would unduly provoke Russia, which has vehemently opposed the idea. Most NATO governments also take the view that both these countries have internal troubles – separatism in Georgia, a deep split about Russia in Ukraine – that could become problematical if they were put officially on track to NATO membership. (more…)

Incoming Russian President Dmitry Medvedev had some strong words for Western leaders in an interview with the Financial Times today. Amid President Bush’s recent statements in support of expanding the NATO alliance to include Georgia and reports that Ukraine is also taking steps towards NATO membership, Medvedev said that Russia is “not happy” about the prospect of eastward NATO expansion.

From today’s FT:

His comments, in an interview with the Financial Times, will step up pressure on the alliance not to allow the two states to join Nato’s “membership action plan” at a summit in Bucharest next week. Vladimir Putin, outgoing Russian president, is due to attend part of the summit. …

“We are not happy about the situation around Georgia and Ukraine. We consider that it is extremely troublesome for the existing structure of European security,” Mr Medvedev said during a two-hour interview, his first since winning Russia’s presidential election on March 2.

“No state can be pleased about having representatives of a military bloc to which it does not belong coming close to its borders.”

Mr Medvedev also suggested joining the military alliance was against most Ukrainians’ wishes, as opinion polls have shown.

“This is … even more difficult to explain when the vast majority of citizens of … Ukraine, are categorically against joining Nato, while the government … follows a different policy,” he said.

Medvedev’s comments come in the wake of statements by Georgian officials that they fear Russia is planning to annex the Georgian separatist region of Abkhazia. NATO member states will meet next week in Bucharest for their annual summit, where they will discuss possible membership for the former Soviet territories. Medvedev officially takes over as president on May 7.

Medvedev’s video interview with the FT is available on their website. A full transcript is also available.

Related Posts:
Can Europe Stay Out of the Geopolitical Face-Off Between the US and Russia?, 21 March 2008
European Officials Fear Russian Meddling in Georgian Separatist Region of Abkhazia, 11 March 2008

See Also:
Medvedev warns against expanding Nato east, Financial Times, 25 March 2008
Bush backs closer NATO ties with Georgia, Reuters, 19 March 2008
Ukraine says Bush to visit before NATO summit, Reuters, 13 March 2008

The Bush administration pushed ahead this week in its face-off with Russia over independence for Kosovo - and Russia pushed back in the Caucasus.

Since warning that recognition of Kosovars’ demands could trigger similar separatist ambitions in Abkhasia and elsewhere in Georgia, Moscow has announced plans to move more Russian “peacekeepers” into the breakaway province of Georgia - a step that alarmed Georgian leaders as a possible step toward full recognition threatening to partially dismember Georgia.

President Mikhail Saakashvili of the Republic of Georgia was on an official visit to Washington, where he obtained President George W. Bush’s backing for NATO, at its forthcoming summit, to offer to open a negotiating process that could ultimately bring Georgia into the Western alliance. Bush also announced that he was approving Kosovo as a candidate to receive U.S. military assistance.

This escalation between Washington and Moscow marks the outbreak of a new Cold War, according to Stratfor, an on-line geopolitical think-tank. Of course, the United States outweighs Russia and it is geographically remote from the theater of conflict. That leaves the Europeans in the front line. For the moment, they are trying to keep out of the way, but they will end up having to play major roles as independent actors in this new Cold War, Stratfor’s analyst said.

The current diplomatic inertness in the European Union can be seen in the three main governments: Germany, France and the United Kingdom are not interested in confronting Russia.

“Berlin made this very clear when it expressed a lack of interest in NATO expansion, the independence of Kosovo and the Ukraine gas issue. This is not surprising, given that the Germans are dependent upon Moscow for energy. Beyond energy, Germany’s wider economic relationship with and its proximity to Russia inform its lack of appetite for confrontation with the Kremlin,” Stratfor said.

France has its international ambitions targeted elsewhere, mainly in re-asserting its stature in Europe and emerging as a more credible player in the Middle East. “It wants no part of this new West-versus-Russia competition,” Stratfor says. Britain is preoccupied domestically.

But this will change, Stratfor predicts. Germany is re-emerging on its own again as an international power player; Britain ultimately cannot detach itself from any major U.S. geopolitical commitment; and France will ultimately find it untenable to ignore this clash. “Europe’s geography - and the fact that, unlike during the original Cold War, there isn’t an iron curtain in place - will force the Europeans to jump in or at least choose sides.”

Related Article: “The Start of Cold War II?” Stratfor’s Political Diary, 21 March 2008

European foreign ministries feel “preoccupation and anxiety” over the possibility that Russia is preparing to extend official recognition to Abkhazia, the breakaway province of Georgia, the European Commission’s top official for external relations, Benita Ferrero-Waldner said this week. Her comment was published Monday by the EU Observer, an on-line news service, as EU foreign ministers gathered for a meeting in Slovenia, which currently holds the EU’s rotating presidency.

Her sense of alarm echoed calls by Sweden and Poland for the EU to take a stronger stance in support of Georgia in the wake of Moscow’s action last Thursday in opening free trade with the territory. Commissioner Ferrero-Waldner stressed European support for Georgia and cited spreading alarm in Europe that “Russia may be paving the way for recognition of Abkhazia.” This territory on the Black Sea has set up its own government and is protected by Russian peacekeepers, but it has not been recognized by anyone.

Moscow, in improving ties with Abkhazia, seems to be intent on fulfilling its own dire warning that Western-backed independence for Kosovo last month could create a precedent for further “Balkanizing” splits in the Caucasus. Moscow has not cited Kosovo in its statements about Abkhazia, but Slovenia’s foreign minister, Dimitrij Rupel, who chaired the EU meeting, was quoted saying that “Russia and [the rest of] the Confederation of Independent States have decided to draw certain parallels with Kosovo.”

Officials in Georgia lashed out at Russia’s attitude. The speaker of the country’s parliament, Nino Burjanadze, called Russia’s recent actions “really bad news” for Georgia. He predicted that the Russians’ abandoning the international embargo on direct trade with Abkhazia “means that they are going, step by step, in the direction of the annexation of this territory.”

Related Posts:
Kosovo’s Independence Boosts Copycat Separatists in Georgia, 7 March 2008
Kosovo: A Real Geopolitical Precedent, 14 February 2008

See Also:
EU foreign ministers concerned Russia to recognize Abkhazia (EU Observer, 11 March 2008)

Separatist ambitions in the Caucasus region have received their first tangible boost from the example of Kosovo’s independence. The breakaway Abkhazia region in Georgia appealed to international bodies for recognition of its independence in messages sent March 7, the day after Russia announced that it was lifting its trade restrictions on the territory.

The move came two days after a similar move by South Ossetia, another region of Georgia that is in revolt against the central government in Tbilisi. In their appeal, the political leaders of South Ossetia, also heavily pro-Russian, said that “the Kosovo precedent presents a convincing argument” for recognition of the province’s independent because – as with Kosovo in Serbia – “co-existence” had become demonstrably impossible with Georgia. The friction between Georgia and Russia is aggravated, too, by the former’s efforts to join the NATO alliance.

(more…)