Georgia again … further to Sean Gabb’s grand piece, interesting view from Down Under

David Davis

… at Kerplunk, tuesday 12th August. Very good analysis, worth reading in full.

I perhaps did not make myself quite as clear as I ought to have done in my very hawkish statements about this conflict that is developing. Because we (the West) have done nothing on account of not really being able to do anything, it will get worse – not necessarily today or in Georgia, but elsewhere. It is my sad prediction that we shall eventually  be forced to intervene, somewhere. I do not think we will raise a finger for the Baltic States, should they come under some pressure, nor the Ukraine, USSR passports having previously been issued in large numbers.

I am afraid that I do not really accept the diplomatic notion of a “near abroad”, in relation to neo-tyrannical powers, such as the USSR Russia. Rather as militant Islamists and Wahhabis view the world, where there is the Ummah-Wahida and the Dhimma. There is, logally for me, no “near abroad” in which the USSR Russia is allowed to behave as an occupying power.

This notion is an illusion, fostered by intellectual sympathisers with socialism, who live in the West, have never grown up and had real jobs, and who can afford to send their servants to queue at “little local shops” for organic food, served to them by a jovial grocer in a brown labcoat, in line.

Now, through all this Georgian hoo-hah, I have realised something. It has come to my notice that I honestly and sincerely view tyrants (such as Putin)  – all of whom are leftists in the end – as Dhimmis.  Thus they are seen by me as living on borrowed time, not with us but somewhere else: also, for now, at our pleasure, in “our” (“our” is not accurate: it is more accurate to say, other sovereign individuals’) lands, and to be dealt with as soon as possible, and they and their actions and beliefs are to be consigned to the dustbin of ideas.

The people they enslave, which is to say, mostly “their” own that they have elcosed in a “Reich”, are there to be liberated (by us.)

Conversely, libertarianism does not, ot me, encompass the concept of a “near abroad”, in which the writ of individual liberty runs, and not tyranny. Everywhere in the Universe is meet to be rid of collectivism. Why? Because is it inherently bad, and that’s the end of the matter.

In this respect, I really am a jihadist turned upside down. I want the West to actively stand up for liberty, without any regard for national self-interest or cost. I believe this on principle. I do not think that it disqualifies me from being a minimal-statist-libertarian with Old Whig tinges.

But we won’t, will we.

One comment

  1. Dave:

    I have real difficulties with this Russia/Georgia/Ossetia business. It’s like the “Duck-or-Rabbit” Gestalt image — you can look at it either way.

    The historical angles make it very difficult to make sense of the territorial claims of _any_ of the parties. So I guess we have to start with recent history.

    I was enthralled when Mikhail Gorbachev and Eduard Shevarnadze embarked upon their historic task of reforming the USSR. Eduard Shevardnadze onece saidto Mikhael Gorbachev, long before, that Russia could never be a “normal country” as long as it had an Empire.

    I was delighted when Eduard Shevardnadze became President of a newly-independent Georgia,

    Alas, problems accumulated during his term, and his government became more repressive. George Soros helped organize the “Rose Revolution.”

    Alas, the regime of the present ruler has become more and more corrupt and oppressive, as has the US regime and the Russian regime.. I firmly believe that his regime sent Georgian troops into South Ossetia, which has had de facto independence since 1991, partly at the prodding of the US (the “War on Terror” nonsense; and in order to boost his chances in the upcoming Georgian elections by posturing as a macho leader.

    Russian intel wouldof course have intercepted all this, and was fully prepared to launch a counter-strike to push Georgian forces out of Ossetia AND Abkhazia, where theRussians act as peace-keepers.

    The Cheney regime seemed to ignore its own intel on the results of Georgian incursions. Astonishing.

    A few weeks ago, I had a long phone conversation with the Russian Diplomatic Attache in London. I like Russians, and I would very much like them to join us in NATO. Russia has traditionally guarded Europe’s back from Asian attack. I support ABM, and I wanted to know why the Russians so strongly oppose it, especially when they have the world’s only City Defence ABM system around Moscow, with thermonuclear-tipped interceptor missiles controlled by an old IBM 360 mainframe they purchased via Sweden. I very much want Russia and NATO to work together on ABM systems.

    He was really angry with what the US was doing: the Russians had offered the US much better radar facilities, so _why was the US doing this_??

    The US seems focused on getting Georgia into NATO. But this is crazy if it leads to Russa being alienated. Who would you rather have as an ally? Russia, a vast Westernized country spanning eleven time zones? Or Georgia? Better to have both, in good time.

    The Russians now say categorically that the residents of Abkhazia and South Ossetia will be able to make their own free choice between Union with Russia; independence; and association with Georgia. This is clearly a better deal than anything the Georgian regime had in mind for them.

    The US is now humiliated (and dangerous). The Cheney regime ‘exports’ its horrible prison system and its phony “War on Drugs” and cruelly disingenuous “War on Terrorism” and increasingly, “War on Whatever” to places where they are most certainly not wanted.

    Does anyone seriously believe that the Russian Government won’t control militant Islam in South Ossetia and Abkhazia? AT LEAST as well as anything the US can or would be able to do there?

    So: “Duck” or “Rabbit”?



Leave a Reply