Frozen Conflict

Today, Vice President Biden appeared in Tbilisi, Georgia both to revisit the conflict between Georgia and Russia and to implicitly and explicitly show where the US stands. Nearly one year ago, August 2008, it's the start of the Beijing Olympic Games. But, the headlines were dominated by another more sinister incident: "Beijing wow's world, Moscow rolls tanks." In what seemed to be entirely surreal and completely out of the blue to nearly everyone, Russia had utilized it's entire war machine to invade and devastate a country with a land mass ratio of 245:1 (Russia 17,075,200 sq/km : Georgia 69,700 sq/km). This incident, however unexpected, was clearly brewing if one had seen the warning signs.

The conflict between Russia and Georgia is what is known as a frozen conflict, a state of hostilities between two countries or groups of people that doesn't have much violence has the potential to explode into a full blown conflict. Georgia has been at odds with Russia since the break up of the Soviet Union because of it's close relations with the US. Russia doesn't like countries in its back yard and within its sphere of influence being allied with the US, especially when we're looking to make Georgia a NATO member.

But, there is another significant side to this situation. South Ossetia and Abkhazia are two provinces within Georgia as its boarders are currently defined that are classified as breakaway provinces, meaning they're trying to secede from Georgia and join the Russian Federation. Russia holds the position that these two regions should be able to determine their own status while Georgia is standing tall on a territorial integrity claim. Under the current system of international law, both arguments are completely valid. However, neither country appeared like it was going to let such an issue be decided by the UN or any of its arbitrating bodies.

The conflict exploded in August of 2008 when Georgian forces moved into the provinces, attempting to quell a violent uprising. Russia responded almost instantly with its full military might. The swiftness of the conflict surprised everyone except for those who saw the warning signs. In 2007, Georgia brought several accusations against Russia to the UN, attempting to attain some sort of offical recognition of Russia's official involvement in pushing South Ossetia and Abkhazia to the tipping point.

The accusations centered around three separate incidents in 2007. First was the killing of two Russians alleged to be military officers in Abkhazia; Georgia claimed that they were providing arms, logistics, and training to rebels in the region. Second was a claim that Russia had violated Georgia's air space by flying a Mig fighter jet over the boarder and dropping a bomb that failed to detonate; Georgia backed this claim up with radar tracking evidence. The third, and perhaps most publicized, accusation occurred in early 2008 when fighter jets shot down a Georgian Unmanned Aerial Vehical (UAV). This time there was nearly concrete evidence of Russian involvement. The camera on the UAV captured video evidence of the Mig jet's identity before it was shot down. Add that to the radar evidence that shows the Mig took off from Abkhazia and one has to wonder if Russia wasn't planning ahead for the conflict that occurred in August later that year.

At stake here is relations with one of our most important regional allies as well as our relations with Russia. It is important to note that Biden gained great foreign policy clout during the 60's and 70's by playing a major role as a senator in nuclear arms reduction treaty negotiations with the Soviet Union. Today, the symbolism of Biden's playing an active role in formulating and carrying out our foreign policy towards Russia is extremely significant. He's probably one of the only remaining actors within our government that can adequately address a crisis in relations with Russia.

That being said, the gut check here is simple and yet complex. We cannot alienate Georgia and leave them alone in the wake of such a devastating conflict, being that they are a close ally. At the same time, we cannot afford to make political moves that would distance ourselves from Russia for various reasons, including but not limited to their ever present veto threat in the UN Security Council. Our relationship with Russia is already reaching frigid status due to many moves made under the Bush administration, including our push for the European Missile Defense Shield, our "America's way or the highway" style of diplomacy, and the international destabilization caused by the Bush Doctrine of Pre-emption. While Obama/Biden's election did signify change (or so we thought), Russia is clearly very wary of accepting that our ways have changed so abruptly. However, Biden took a more objective stance and did a good job of explicitly showing that the US is committed to standing by its allies while still attempting to rebuild relations with Russia. He also implicitly signified that the US is not going to attempt to force a resolution to the conflict between Georgia and Russia by showing that we'd rather let Russia take the first step, something that Russia is bound to like whether they acknowledge that or not.