They were trying to bully Georgia, not conquer it. In five days, they split the country effectively in half, and blockaded their coast. They made their point.

khx72,

You don't think they would have conquered it if they could?

And what would be the purpose of bulling Georgia? Georgia just wants its borders back to their internationally recognized boundaries.

What does Russia want: a slice or more at a time. Conquest - slow or fast is what Russia wants. Given what has happened slow it is.

Russia was provoking Georgia. To what purpose? To create an incident for a military conquest.

This will drive Georgia closer into the American orbit. Is that in Russia's interest?

I believe Russia has overplayed its hand. The Georgians will do better next time. If Russia has the nerve.

BTW,

Russia did a somewhat similar trick in Afghanistan.

They came to restore law and order. What was their ultimate intention? To hold Afghanistan. Russia is still an Imperial power of the old school.

What does the USA do with conquered countries? Make them prosperous strong friends. What does Russia want? A mercantile empire. A bleed of the conquered territories. Why? Because they have to. They are not an economic or technical or cultural powerhouse. They can only maintain their system by theft. If the stealing stops Russia crumbles.

>You don't think they would have conquered it if they could?

Of course they could conquer Georgia, but... Chechnya? Nasty. Do they want a repeat?

>And what would be the purpose of bulling Georgia? Georgia just wants its borders back to their internationally recognized boundaries.

Influence over their government. Influence over their pipelines. Getting NATO to think twice about offering Georgia membership, etc... etc...

>What does Russia want: a slice or more at a time. Conquest - slow or fast is what Russia wants. Given what has happened slow it is.

The Russian's want their USSR-era-influence back on the cheap. Conquest is expensive. Rolling tanks to Gori and back is relatively cheap. As is, say, confiscating BP assets.

>Russia was provoking Georgia. To what purpose? To create an incident for a military conquest.

Or to scare the bejessus out of the Georgian leadership. Mission accomplished. Yeah, the Georgians could, with some creative backdoor arms shipments and cutting edge asymmetrical warfare, grind the Russians to a stalemate, but do they actually want to do this? Do the Georgians really want to their country into Afghanistan and squander their chance atsome kind of prosperity.

>This will drive Georgia closer into the American orbit. Is that in Russia's interest?

Really? I expect the NATO membership application to get quietly "lost". Are Americans, at this point, really that interested in getting in a war with Russia(!) over the next Georgia conflict (and yes, as you said, there will be a next one)? No way.

>I believe Russia has overplayed its hand. The Georgians will do better next time. If Russia has the nerve.

Maybe. But... it took them, what, five days to definitely realize that they were screwed? That doesn't seem very Russian, as they tend to keep at it for years, damn the cost. They have the nerve.

Listen, I agree with everything else in your response. I am not been soft on or pro-Russia by thinking that they won and are going home because they made their point.

I think the Russian ceasefire is more an act of shrewdness than inability to continue. I have no doubt at this point that they could have marched on Tbilisi if they had wished. However, that would have entailed much worse political consequences than they were willing to accept at this point.

Russia doesn't have to conquer Georgia, because the conflict has already proven that it is well able to do so. Despite our training of Georgian forces, they were simply unable to resist the massive mobilization of Russian men, armor, and ships, a mobilization that we didn't even seem to be aware of until too late. Georgia's democracy still exists, but only at the sufferance of Putin's mercy. The Russians have proved that the U.S. and NATO are unable, if not unwilling, to help its supposed allies.

I fear this will have dreadful consequences in the years to come.

That last anon. comment was mine.

no, the previous one.

I think Russia chose to accept a deal now because it is currently at a cost-benefit maximum. My guess is that the relative lack of sophistication in Russian logistics means that combat units can only retain maximum effectiveness for little more than five days. Troops need water, food, and ammunition. Combat vehicles need fuel. After the invasion forces deplete their initial stocks they carried themselves, they require resupply from convoys. These convoys are far more vulnerable to asymmetric attack by the more lightly-armed Georgian forces, fighting on their own ground. Russian forces have pushed into Georgia, without destroying the Georgian army, and as they push deeper into Georgia, the supply lines become longer and thinner.

Instead of committing more Russian forces into a costly long-term operation, the Russian have opted to mount a blitzkrieg without the occupation. Their invasion forces disrupted and routed Georgian forces, then drove hard to key strategic sites. However, with limited logistical endurance, it was in Russia's interest to strike a deal. Russia could have pressed further, but the marginal strategic gains would have small compared to the marginal costs. The Georgian president had promised no surrender, and Russia was simply unwilling to pay that price.

There are probably other reasons - a hardening of world opinion, particularly that of the former Soviet Bloc countries in solidarity with Georgia. But regardless, Russia wins. They have sent a powerful message to their neighbors that the Russian national interest takes precedent over the West, and that the West is powerless to stop them. The West has not contested this message. Russia has earned the fear and respect of Europe and Central Asia at minimal cost, and provided a "splendid little war" for domestic consumption.

Pardon my personal ennui, but I am starting to see nearly everything as a choreographed Broadway show which unfortunately have lives in the balance.

OBTW, I get my "news" on line, which these days, has become nearly as suspect as the news I used to get from MSM. I am offering up my comments with the above caveat.

You have your questions, Simon, and I have mine.

Is it conceivable that this little fledgling, non-NATO democratic nation with the oil pipeline for Europe would set out one day to reclaim territory occupied by dissidents within their borders?

Why YES, we now know it is conceivable that they would do such a thing. What they did might even have been the "right" thing to do, even though it looks pretty damn dumb to an observer on first glance.

Begging the major free world countries for help AFTER the fact? I don't buy that this is how it all came down.

I could conjure up a shitload of theories here, the most innocuous of which is that this exercise might mainline Georgia to their desired NATO status, and that the USA, France, Great Britain, et al, KNEW that not acting in the short term would be better for Georgia in the long term since we all KNOW that NATO has the power to make things "right" and a showing of force only makes you look like a bully, or worse...a world power!

Yet another theory might be that the USA purposely withheld their support in order to joggle the rest of Europe out of their silly daydreams that we can all "play nice" within our own borders with no longer term worldly consequences which will inevitably land on our pristine soil.

Another possibility is that world powers know exactly who they are, and react as the bullies (or saviors) they are expected to be, while really just trying to contain the chaos that might happen when fledgling (pick your poison here) democracies or totalitarian states, come to believe that they are on equal footing with said super powers just BECAUSE they are democracies or totalitarian states.

Yeah, yeah, I know that last one sounds like the overarching objective for all the "Father Knows Best" shows, but heck. Most of us kids grow up to finally acknowledge that maybe father DID know best...or at least much more than we did as kids.

In closing to Simon...apply your question to any one of the above scenarios. Why WOULD Russia do other than what they would previously have been expected to do? Maybe because someone changed the dance music.

Perhaps if Georgia's army had collapsed the Russians would have advanced further. Given continued significant resistance and the low desirability of a full occupation, they stopped.

This: http://informationdissemination.blogspot.com/2008/08/russias-divide-and-conquer-strategy.html makes it sound like the russians came out ahead.

Sure it put all Russias neighbors on high alert, but they were already trending West.

Suppose Europe now decides that making its future energy needs dependent on Russia was a bad idea, how long will it take before they can bring significant coal/nuclear capacity online, especially with continued resistance of the Greens?

Look guys Russia got its ass handed to it. There is no other reason for it to pull out of South Ossetia and give such a favorable deal to Georgia. I'm going to do a post on it.

The post is now on the main page:

http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives/2008/08/some_one_got_ta.html

Anon/KHX 42,

Maybe. But... it took them, what, five days to definitely realize that they were screwed? That doesn't seem very Russian, as they tend to keep at it for years, damn the cost. They have the nerve.

I think that proves my point. In theory the Russians can keep at it for years. Why quit after only 5 days?

I think the counter stroke was in position and the Russians were about to lose their army.

Time to declare victory and go home.

See my latest:

http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives/2008/08/some_one_got_ta.html

Look, I'm on our side, but have any of you noticed that Russia is so far NOT leaving or honoring any promises or agreements?

"Look guys Russia got its ass handed to it. There is no other reason for it to pull out of South Ossetia and give such a favorable deal to Georgia. I'm going to do a post on it."

Uh, they're not pulling out of South Ossetia. Why take your opinion seriously if you don't have the most basic facts?

Anon.,

Why take your opinion seriously when you can't read the date the piece was written.

On the 12th Russia gave France firm assurances that it was pulling out of Georgia. Russia lied.

That is not my fault.

My error was in believing Russia would honor its agreement. It won't happen again.