Bob Barr Talks Russia/Georgia Conflict

By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Barr, Foreign Policy, Georgia, Russia

And makes a lot of sense…

“Obviously, America should encourage both countries to back down and resolve their differences peacefully,” explains Barr. But “the status of South Ossetia, as well as Abkhazia, another Russian-supported separatist zone within Georgia, matters a lot more to Russia, on which the two territories border, than to the U.S. Moreover, Washington itself set a precedent for Russia when it intervened in Kosovo a decade ago, attacking Serbia to win independence for the separatist ethnic-Albanian majority,” notes Barr.

“The purpose of alliances is to defend America,” says Barr. “We should not create or expand alliances where the U.S. does not have vital interests. If the Europeans want to defend distant countries like Georgia, they can do so—after all, the European Union has a larger population and bigger GDP than America, without any of Washington’s other global military commitments. It is time for Europe to accept responsibility for its own security.”

Obviously, I’m aligned with Barr on this issue. I don’t think getting involved in this conflict does us any good, especially when our recent past is checkered with pre-emptive conflicts that undermine our ability to speak with authority on this issue.

What do you think?


This entry was posted on Thursday, August 14th, 2008 and is filed under Barr, Foreign Policy, Georgia, Russia. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

3 Responses to “Bob Barr Talks Russia/Georgia Conflict”

  1. wj Says:

    Perhaps a better, or at least more useful, question would be: what could the US actually do, even if we wanted to? To which the answer is, militarily, damn little. In fact, about the only thing I can see in that line that might be possible is to have the Mediterranian fleet steam up into the Black Sea for a port call on an ally.

    Beyond that? Diplomatic moves (almost certainly futile; Russia doesn’t care) and economic actions (also largely futile; Europe is too dependent on Russian gas to provide any support).

    And if there is nothing that we can do, what we should do is rather a moot point.

  2. Bob Aman Says:

    Frankly, his stance is a good one. It’s not particularly friendly or diplomatic, but it is realistic, and right now we need a hard dose of realism.

    I don’t like what Russia’s doing, but we don’t have any viable options available to us beyond the familiar inquiries of, “Hey, can’t we all get along?” Russia can’t be trusted, but aggressive posturing certainly isn’t going to help if we can’t back it up.

  3. jay Says:

    Why does the American media demonize Russia so much…?

    Why does the US always seek out an Enemy to malign..?

Leave a Reply


NOTE TO COMMENTERS:


You must ALWAYS fill in the two word CAPTCHA below to submit a comment. And if this is your first time commenting on Donklephant, it will be held in a moderation queue for approval. Please don't resubmit the same comment a couple times. We'll get around to moderating it soon enough.


Also, sometimes even if you've commented before, it may still get placed in a moderation queue and/or sent to the spam folder. If it's just in moderation queue, it'll be published, but it may be deleted if it lands in the spam folder. My apologies if this happens but there are some keywords that push it into the spam folder.


One last note, we will not tolerate comments that disparage people based on age, sex, handicap, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. We reserve the right to delete these comments and ban the people who make them from ever commenting here again.


Thanks for understanding and have a pleasurable commenting experience.


Related Posts: