Next president must put bullying Russia in its place

Russia’s motivation in its August invasion of Georgia was deadly serious. The developing contest between Russia and the West may well be the defining challenge for the next president, just as terrorism was for George W. Bush.

Why would Russia invade Georgia, a small nation in the Caucasus region in a key location between Russia, Central Asia and the Middle East? Energy supplies have much to do with it, but so does the desire of Russia to teach the West a lesson.

Russia has listened for years to Western plans for getting the Central Asian oil and gas bonanza (from Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Azerbaijan) to the West without passing through Russia or Iran, denying both nations the political influence and revenue which control of the pipelines renders.

Georgia is the key to this. One pipeline from the Caspian seaport of Azerbaijan’s capital in Baku to a Turkish port on the Mediterranean carries oil. A second line carries natural gas to Eastern Turkey. Both pipelines pass next to the town of Gori in Georgia. Russian troops now sit near the pumping stations there, which they have not interfered with, but can at will. No one now will invest in new lines through Georgia. This cements Russia’s stranglehold on the Central Asian economies. Russia also wants to punish Georgia’s President Mikheil Saakashvili and cause his downfall. Saakashvili made the mistake of shelling a pro-Russian area, providing the spark for the Russian invasion.

Russia intends to show the United States and the Europeans once and for all that NATO can expand no further to the east. Last spring, President Bush and some European leaders moved to extend NATO membership to Georgia and another larger Russian neighbor, Ukraine. Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin told Bush in May that there will be no Georgia or Ukraine in NATO. After the August invasion, the Russians will have scared enough Europeans out of a positive vote to admit Ukraine or Georgia.

Russia may also re-seize the Crimean Peninsula and the Black Sea Russian naval fleet bases from Ukraine, a major geo-political move, which would further intimidate the Europeans.

Russia hopes also to intimidate Poland and the Czech Republic for the U.S. missile defense system they have agreed to install. The Czechs are to host the radar and the Poles 10 interceptor missiles, to protect against an Iranian threat. The next U.S. president will review this system, which some in the Pentagon are arguing is technically not feasible even if deployed. Following the Russian attack on Georgia, NATO decided to suspend its next partnership meeting with Russia. Russia replied that it is cutting all contacts with NATO. All these Russian moves add up to a policy, not isolated moves. In response we sent humanitarian relief supplies, Vice President Dick Cheney, and a Coast Guard cutter to Georgia. That is not a policy.

The Russians are not afraid of appearing tough. They know the G-8 leaders of the world’s largest economies do not listen to Russia anyway, so what does it matter if Russia is expelled? And if the World Trade Organization (WTO) rebuffs Russian membership, so be it. Russia makes its money on oil, gas, and commodities exports anyway, a strong market that will continue without the WTO.

The Russian policy is a real challenge. The art of responding will be to unite the West and firmly resist without drifting into a war. Russia is important for other reasons — to control the so-called “loose nukes” and keep them from terrorists, to cooperate on limiting Iran’s nuclear ambitions, and to work on Sudan and terrorism. Right now Russia is in the driver’s seat. This contest will be the defining challenge for the next president. Getting the policy right and implementing it successfully will be extraordinarily difficult — and important to Americans and our friends around the world.

John Kelly, a former assistant secretary of state, is ambassador-in-residence at the Sam Nunn School of International Affairs at Georgia Tech.