"Europe And The U.S. Must Make Clear . . ."
The NYTimes Editorial Board appears to be living is some fantasy world about American power over Russia in the Caucasus. Today they write:
Europe and the United States must make clear to Mr. Medvedev — and the real power player, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin — that more aggression and lies will not be tolerated. They must make clear that Russia will pay a price, in diplomatic standing and economic relations, if it does not immediately withdraw its troops, agree to international mediation and permit the deployment of truly neutral international peacekeepers to Georgia’s breakaway regions, South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
What price is the NYTimes proposing be paid exactly by Russia in terms of "standing?" Every day that Russia is seen as "defying" the Bush Administration is a day Russia's "standing" rises. That explains why today's New York Times front page reports:
President Dmitri A. Medvedev of Russia said Thursday that Russia would act as an international guarantor of the two pro-Russian enclaves at the center of the crisis with Georgia, and Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov said that Georgia could “forget about” territorial integrity because of the war. Together, the comments offered a sharp retort to President Bush’s insistence a day earlier that “the sovereign and territorial integrity of Georgia be respected.”
. . . Mr. Medvedev said he would support the independence aspirations of South Ossetians and Abkhazians if they were in accordance with the United Nations Charter, international conventions of 1966 and the Helsinki Act on Security and Cooperation in European. “You have been defending your land, and the right is on your side,” Mr. Medvedev said at a meeting with leaders of the two breakaway regions.
“Russia’s position is unchanged: we will support any decisions taken by the peoples of South Ossetia and Abkhazia in accordance with the U.N. Charter,” he said, adding that “not only do we support but we will guarantee them.”
(Emphasis supplied.) So, will the United States and the New York Times stand against the "UN Charter?"
Let me be clear about this, the actions of Russia are not in defense of any principle except the perceived self interests of Russia. But there are no moral high grounds here. Georgia provoked this crisis with its assault on South Ossetia. The United States has lost its moral high ground and "standing" (as well as its soft and hard power) this entire decade. "Old" Europe protested, but did nothing else about Iraq. Georgia, as part of "New" Europe, has played along with the Iraq Debacle.
There are no saints in this play, and it is high time the New York Times editorial page and the American Media stop pretending there are any. It is the type of thinking that led them to cheerlead the most disastrous strategic decision of recent memory, the Iraq Debacle. When the New York Times fires Tom "Suck On This" Friedman, then they can talk about "standing."
Speaking for me only
| < More Details of Convention Detention Facility | Hillary's Name to Be Placed In Nomination > |





