Why McCain Loves Misha

NEWSWEEK

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

SPONSORED BY

But in the years since, the president has lost patience with dissenters. His government is now a one-man show, former allies complain. "Misha is the only one making decisions in Georgia," says former foreign minister Salome Zourabichvili, now an opposition leader. "He was alone when he made a decision to start the war, and he is alone now. The world needs to beware."

The ugliest moment came last November, when baton-wielding riot cops put an end to five days of antigovernment protests that turned violent. Within hours, 250 Georgian Special Forces soldiers raided Imedi TV, a pro-opposition station. "On the stairs to the first floor, a person in camouflage pointed a gun at my forehead," says Imedi's news director, Giorgi Targamadze. "I could see my colleagues lying face down on the floor." More than 500 people were hospitalized, but Saakashvili stands by the crackdown. "Crowds attacked the police, and we did what any other European country would do," he says. The phone consultations with McCain continued as always. "Senator McCain made clear that he wanted full freedoms restored, internationally monitored free elections and greater institutionalization of political reforms," says the source close to McCain, again asking not to be named discussing a private conversation. Still, many opposition leaders say Saakashvili thought his Washington friendships would insulate him from criticism.

A confrontation over Georgia's breakaway regions has been brewing for a long time. Moscow first sided with separatists in Abkhazia and South Ossetia during the chaos that followed the Soviet collapse, and tensions have soared in recent years. According to a source close to the Russian administration who spoke on condition of anonymity, the diminutive prime minister Vladimir Putin was stung to hear that Saakashvili privately called him "Lilliputin." But nothing has upset the Russian leader more than Georgia's desire to join NATO. After Saakashvili got a partial green light for eventual membership at the alliance's April meeting in Bucharest, the Kremlin began preparing for war, says Pavel Felgenhauer, a Moscow-based military analyst. Russian troops began a series of exercises inside South Ossetia, and Russian military engineers repaired a strategic railway into Abkhazia, allowing the rapid deployment of armored units.

Even so, in the end it was Saakashvili who gave the order to fire first. The Georgian president says he made the decision after receiving intelligence reports of massive Russian convoys crossing into Ossetian territory. "We had no choice," Saakashvili says. "I could not sit back while my country was being invaded." But by shooting first, he allowed the Russians to claim that they were merely intervening to keep the Georgians from committing "genocide." Saakashvili denies doing anything to provoke Russia. "Putin is a hooligan in the courtyard who is going around breaking windows," he says. "There was nothing we could do to 'provoke' the hooligan: he had chosen his victim."

Russia plainly wanted to lure Saakashvili into a war he couldn't win. So why did he take the bait? "There has always been a section of the Georgian leadership who believed the only way to internationalize this problem was to start a fight," says a senior U.S. official who's not authorized to speak on the record. "We've been telling them all along: Don't do it!" One senior Saakashvili adviser saw the showdown coming a year ago and told friends he was close to quitting in frustration. "They're going to start a war in order to lose it," the aide warned two colleagues, who spoke to NEWSWEEK on condition of anonymity. Nevertheless, Saakashvili denies any intention of dragging Georgia's allies into war. "I absolutely don't want Europe to fight for us," he says. "But Europe faces a choice: to stop [Russian] aggression here or wait for it to claim its next victim."

Still, GOP realists aren't sure his version of events can be trusted. Some natives of the breakaway regions say Georgian troops targeted civilians—as Moscow has repeatedly argued. "What worries me is that Senator McCain did not talk to senior Russian officials," says Simes. "I always thought if you're a combat pilot, you'd want to understand the enemy. But neither he nor his advisers are interested in getting the Russian side of the story."

Nonsense, says Scheunemann. "Senator McCain is completely aware of Russian positions and actions," the foreign-policy aide says. "That is why he has expressed concern over Russian policies for so many years." The former administration official shares Simes's concern, but he's … realistic. The final weeks of a presidential run are "not the optimum situation to have a foreign-policy seminar," he says. "I have no doubt that if and when he's president, [McCain] will want to listen to different perspectives and take balanced decisions."

With Anna Nemtsova in Tbilisi and Dan Ephron and Suzanne Smalley in Washington

« Prev Page

Member Comments

- Reply
- Report Abuse
Posted By: Johnsm @ 05/01/2009 12:28:27 PM

Russia has taken off its mask of ' peace keeper' and has shown the world its true face. It is the face of an aggressor, intruder and violator of souvereignty of other countries. It is a neo-colonial dictatorship and KGB-regime. Bandits that govern Russia today, Putin and Medvedev, have succeeded in ending Georgia's membership of the GUS and in loosing Russia's 'peace-mandate'. This is the biggest victory that can be achieved against these empire consisting completely of weapons and nuclear rockets. Despite the signing of a peace agreement they continue bombing civilian targets like hospitals and private cars, killing journalists and tourists. These are the two faces of Russia that still tries to sell its mask of lies to the world. Shame on Russia for killing innocent men, women and children in S. Ossetia, shame on you. Now the world has recognized this shame
- Reply
- Report Abuse
Posted By: streetwise @ 10/29/2008 11:29:52 AM

Capitalism as it is (not as it should be) is not more moral than socialism (even than "real" socialism): it is just more effective . It is nearer to the human nature (even in its less noble sides), and it's based on the individual interest, that is a real source of energy . The point is, any source of energy is bound to cause disasters if it is left absolutely uchecked or ill-managed (just think to Chernobil or Three Miles Island) and so is individual interest and the same capitalism, if left to its own (and to its moving apologethes) . To avoid this regrettable end, it is necessary a certain amount not only of law enforcement, but even of state intervention and regulation (even if far lesser than that unavoidable for socialism) . The recent events show one more time that the idea of a self-regulating market (and capitalism) that gives weath to all those wo deserve it ("owner society" etc.) is a fairy tale, just as the "workers' heaven" was on the other side . There hare to be some limits "from outside" . And only the state can fix them (besides other things that ONLY the state can do, to limit or avoid the "collateral damages" of an "individual-interest-based system) . And this is not Marx the bogey man...
- Reply
- Report Abuse
Posted By: Jim Johnson @ 10/16/2008 7:50:58 PM

Obama's view of the future of America - Socialism which is the next step to Communism!!

Under socialism a ruling class of intellectuals, bureaucrats and social planners decide what people want or what is good for society and then use the coercive power of the State to regulate, tax, and redistribute the wealth of those who work for a living. In other words, socialism is a form of legalized theft.

The morality of socialism can be summed-up in two words: envy and self-sacrifice. Envy is the desire to not only possess another's wealth but also the desire to see another's wealth lowered to the level of one's own. Socialism's teaching on self-sacrifice was nicely summarized by two of its greatest defenders, Hermann Goering and Bennito Mussolini. The highest principle of Nazism (National Socialism), said Goering, is: "Common good comes before private good." Fascism, said
Mussolini, is "a life in which the individual, through the sacrifice of his own private interests??realizes that completely spiritual existence in which his value as a man lies."

Socialism is the social system which institutionalizes envy and self-sacrifice: It is the social system which uses compulsion and the organized violence of the State to expropriate wealth from the producer class for its redistribution to the parasitical class.

Despite the intellectuals' psychotic hatred of capitalism, it is the only moral and just social system.

Capitalism is the only moral system because it requires human beings to deal with one another as traders--that is, as free moral agents trading and selling goods and services on the basis of mutual consent.

Capitalism is the only just system because the sole criterion that determines the value of thing exchanged is the free, voluntary, universal judgement of the consumer. Coercion and fraud are anathema to the free-market system.

It is both moral and just because the degree to which man rises or falls in society is determined by the degree to which he uses his mind. Capitalism is the only social system that rewards merit, ability and achievement, regardless of one's birth or station in life.

Yes, there are winners and losers in capitalism. The winners are those who are honest, industrious, thoughtful, prudent, frugal, responsible, disciplined, and efficient. The losers are those who are shiftless, lazy, imprudent, extravagant, negligent, impractical, and inefficient. [What about the role of luckbeing in the right place at the right time or the wrong place at the wrong time? R. R. Pope}

Capitalism is the only social system that rewards virtue and punishes vice. This applies to both the business executive and the carpenter, the lawyer and the factory worker.