The devil you don't know.

Having sent my various family members home, I am back, namely to referee what seems to be a brewing source of antagonism between Titus and badboy. To overly simplify in my summation of the situation: badboy hates all things Russian, including its "people"; whereas Titus adores all things Russian, excluding its government.

Now, as I have no real dog in this hunt - I respect the storied history of Russia (at least more then Napoleon did) while being very skeptical of their new"democracy" - I will put on my research cap as to the current government's actions and what has lead us this point.

First the external actions, namely in Ossettia and Georgia, are meaningless without understanding the internal politics (or lack thereof) which have been in motion since the fall of the Soviet Union. Few people realize what occurred soon after the reigns of power were passed to Boris Yeltsin. As he went about democratizing his nation a funny thing happened, he became somewhat unpopular. The transition to democracy, as all are, was messy. Unemployment, organized crime, prostitution, and less then "honest" capitalists took advantage of the chaos. And just prior to the first election of a head of state in Russia's history (and I mean literally the first, as Titus knows) the media - perhaps the most obvious beneficiary of a newly free state - had to make a choice. Elements of the communist Party, still legal and operating like any other at that time (store front offices and the sort) were making grounds in the polling. Not enough to retake the government mind you, but to win enough seats in Parliament so as to turn the chaos towards their advantage. You might wonder how any Russian might support the communist party, given a choice, but think about what I wrote a moment ago - prostitution, unemployment, organized crime, this "messy" business of democracy, "we can make it all go away while maintaining your new freedoms in this NEW communist Party" they promised. This might seem appealing to poor or victimized Russians, or those not sharing in the new ventures into capitalism. So, the media made its choice - collectively the major newspapers and television outlets undertook the mission of ensuring Yeltsin's victory in the upcoming elections. No more shots of him looking drunk. No more stumbles on the tarmac were to be aired. No more missteps in speak (namely less then sober mumbling) aired. Glorious ceremonies in which he looked "presidential" were broad casted -Yeltsin waiving to thousands of gathered supporters. Yeltsin in hospitals visiting sick children; at plant and industrial grand openings. They made him look as if he was making zero mistakes and ushering Russia into a new age of prosperity. And this is certainly not a critical commentary on my part. They were merely doing their bit to ensure the survival of this weak democracy as it crawled out of its infancy. So, Yeltsin wins, and big. However, not long subsequent to his election (he wasn't reelected because his first post during the transition was self/Pulpit bureau appointed) his health began to fade and quite frankly he was getting old. Knowing that the new Russian democracy was still fragile he (and his inner circle) decided to hand over power - an endorsement from the newly popular Yeltsin, backed by the media, was tantamount to naming the next president - to a younger, bright, and strong Vladimir Putin. He had been loyal to Boris during the transition and as a former Colonel in the KGB he seemed like the perfect pick - a man whom had embraced democratization AND knew where all the bodies were buried (quite literally I would imagine). So the pro-Yeltsin media naturally became the pro-Putin media. Putin, having then won his own landslide, undertook a single mission - ensure the future prosperity of the Russian democracy ... even if that means behaving undemocratic at times, wink, wink. Putin's Kremlin then went about making pro-government media coverage a defacto policy. If you wanted high ranking government officials on your program; if you wanted to be granted (eventually lucrative) government operating permits for your broadcasts and towers; if you wanted to be "successful" as a news or general television station, radio or newspaper outlet, then the pro-Yeltsin, now pro-Putin coverage would continue. In other words he didn't pass a law demanding submission, he simply created the conditions so as to get the CEO's to voluntarily comply ... which they have. The most extreme example probably occurred about 6 months ago. I read this article in USA Today on my way back from NEPA, at O'Hare airport. It seems that the most popular news/debate program (their equivalent to an O'Reilly but with a panel) made the hasty choice to have on an anti-Putin political science professor. And as is practice, representatives of Putin were allowed to view the taped broadcast prior to its airing. And surprise, surprise, they objected to the poly-sci gent's criticisms. The problem is there wasn't sufficient time to re tape the broadcast before air time. What to do? The show's producer, in a hurry to comply with the "defacto policy", directed his engineers to digitally erase the anti-Putin panelist, and edit out his audio. And they did. However, they didn't do it well. During the entire broadcast a human hand sat on the arm of an otherwise empty chair, occasionally moving and gesturing about ... an oddity noticed by the audience to say the least. When questioned by foreign Western journalists as to just why they digitally erased the man at all, "I mean aren't you guys a democracy now?" was the thrust, the producer responded (and with a straight face), "He didn't have anything interesting to say anyway."

So, in warding off the resurgence of elements within the Communist Party - the devil they did know - they have unwittingly fallen under the direction of the devil they didn't, Putin. So what does that mean politically for Vladimir? Well, if there is zero opposition press, then how you operate domestically is lets say, "less hindered." When a recent oil magnate - whom surfaced with the capital to purchase lucrative oil contracts as natural resources were "de-nationalized" during the transition to democracy - got a little big for his britches (read: he got very wealthy and decided he might want to run for president, and financially backed candidates of opposing parties) he was suddenly under investigation by the Russian version of the FBI for the ominous accusation of "corruption." His assets seized, he was imprisoned, and his oil contracts and pipe lines dispersed to his competitors. Message sent. With no opposition press and any opposition politicians of serious note successfully intimidated, Putin has been free to "more easily" plod along with his mission - ensuring a return to Russian preeminence in the world. And to keep up appearances that an actual democracy is underway, Putin both created and assumed the post of Prime Minister and "allowed" Medvedev to ascend to the presidency, making it look to the glancing eye as if a peaceful transition of power had occurred. One thing however - Putin never stopped running the government. In eerily similar Bismarkian/Hitler fashion (Bismark being the German President during first Von Papen then Hitler's Prime Ministries, until Bismark's death when Adolf combined the two posts) Putin has created a scenario in which the traditionally ceremonial position of "Head of Sate" was retained by his lackey, while his new Prime Ministry is tasked as "the head of government." Putin hasn't gone anywhere my friends.

That leads us to Georgia. Now think about this if you're Putin - the only real opponent you have in the world is the US, and they are fighting a war on two fronts already. You have no domestic media opposition. No real political opponents. And to certify the reach of your own power you have, without batting an eye, created a post out of whole cloth which ensures your continued presence indefinitely as the head of government all while personally naming your "mini me" (good one Titus) to succeed you in the now largely ceremonial role as president. Under those circumstances do you give any hesitation to now reintroducing the world to Russian military might? I find it ironic that as dozens of nations are gathered in Beijing to show the world what they do best, Russia is in Georgia showing the world what they do best - namely intimidate their neighbors into submission. We could discuss the various geopolitical assumptions being made as to why this conflict arose, there are varying theories: Ossetia (southern Georgia) is 90% Russian, has always been pro-Russian (as opposed to pro-Georgian) and has long had separatists leanings. Russia can claim it's simply "liberating" her brothers and sisters. Also Georgia has rich fossil fuel deposits and they share the coast of the Black Sea, which gives Western Europe access to those deposits. Some say that Russia wants to further control just how much energy the West receives. Another theory involves Iran. Georgia enjoys a border with Turkey. And in any conflict with Iran the US would almost certainly need to utilize Turkish air bases. If Russia controls the Georgian border with Turkey it would serve to only extend its influence with that nation - namely pressuring them to slam the door shut on us prior to any Iranian conflict. Another reason may be Chechnya. Chechen fighters are (and accurately so) considered terrorists to the Russian Federation. If you look at a map Russia controls about 3/4 of the square mileage around the Chechnyan enclave. Guess whose border sits on the remaining 1/4? Georgia. And it has infuriated Russia to no end that although Georgia does concur that elements of terrorism exists in Chechnya, they (Georgia) has been known to negotiate with Chechen political representatives. And add this - if you are a "Red-fella" (Russian mafia) gun runner, and you supply Chechen rebels, then your best bet is to smuggle down into Georgia, then hook back up into Cechnya - avoiding that 3/4 of Russian military patrolled territory. And this almost certainly occurs (especially if you ask a Russian). But each and every reason I've just listed is a micro issue subordinate to the macro - as the Russian economy leaps forward (due to very low taxes and rich natural resources) Putin has decided to let the other shoe drop in terms of resurfacing as a world superpower - demonstrating the Russian military can, and more importantly will, act if they feel it's in their national interests.

For the US the bottom line is this: regardless of what Clinton and Bush should or shouldn't have been doing in the interim, after over a decade's break, the West's geopolitical game of chess with the Russians is again engaged. And the American electorate should note, that's a game the Russians are very adept at. We will need our best man to sit down at that playing board across from them ... and to further torture the metaphor, I wouldn't trust Obama at a game of checkers. Putin has just announced "knight to rook's pawn."

It's our move ....


(sources: globalsecurity.org, stratfor.com, various USA Today archives, and the world map in my office)