COMMENTARY: Georgia and Russia - it’s worth reading the lines themselves

print this

By Susanna Niinivaara
     
      When pondering the goals of Russia in Georgia and South Ossetia, reference has repeatedly been made to a comment by then-President Vladimir Putin in 2005. According to Putin, the dissolution of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical disaster of the 20th century. Now it has been pondered if the goal of the present behaviour in Russia would be the restoration of the age of the Soviet Union. In such a case, Georgia would be one of the countries that would fit within the borders.
      Another place to search for the logic behind Russia’s actions would be the other statements of Russian leaders - ones that have been repeated much more frequently than the one sentence about the Soviet Union.
     
Russia has repeatedly said with the voice of Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, for instance, that Kosovo’s independence can serve as an example for the independence of disputed provinces, such as South Osssetia and Abkhasia.
      Russia has repeatedly, during the time of both Putin and his successor Dmitri Medvedev, harped on the idea that it will not fail to react to the expansion of NATO, and to the missile defence system planned by the United States for Poland and the Czech Republic.
     
During his short presidency, Medvedev has been busy speaking about the need to establish a new security system for Europe. The idea is a continuity to a speech Putin held in Munich in 2007, in which he criticises as dangerous the attempt by the United States to establish a unipolar world. Putin called the expansion of NATO a serious provocation.
      After the victorious Presidential elections, Medvedev gave his first interview to the British Financial Times newspaper, and gave a warning about the consequences of eastward expansion.
     
During the time of the Soviet Union, Kremlinology was practiced, involving intense reading between the lines as a way of understanding Russia’s actions.
      Sometimes it is worth considering the other option of that more straightforward analysis.
      The NATO meeting in Bucharest has generally been seen as a victory for Russia, as NATO did not take Georgia and Ukraine into its membership programme yet. However, this is small comfort for Russia, as NATO promised to take on Ukraine and Georgia as members some day.
     
Helsingin Sanomat / First published in print 9.9.2008
     
The writer is the Moscow correspondent of Helsingin Sanomat


Previously in HS International Edition:
  Vanhanen: Strong support for Georgia but no sanctions against Russia (1.9.2008)
  Vanhanen: South Ossetia crisis will affect next national defence report (19.8.2008)
  Vanhanen and Stubb criticise Russian military action in Georgia (26.8.2008)

SUSANNA NIINIVAARA / Helsingin Sanomat
susanna.niinivaara@hs.fi