卡内基国际和平基金会-US-Russia-Relations-in-the-Aftermath-of-the-Georgia-Crisis_42页_459kb

U.S.-Russia Relations in the Aftermath of the Georgia Crisis: Summary

Core Content

The testimony by Michael McFaul and Richard Kagan before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on September 9, 2008, focuses on the U.S. response to the 2008 Georgia-Russia conflict and the broader implications for U.S.-Russia relations. Both experts emphasize the need for a comprehensive and strategic approach, rather than simplistic reactions, to address the crisis and its long-term consequences.

Main Views

Michael McFaul

• U.S.-Russia Relationship: The U.S.-Russia relationship has deteriorated significantly since the 1990s, with Russia pursuing a grand strategy in the region that includes supporting separatist movements in Georgia.
• Georgia's Actions: President Saakashvili's decision to move troops into South Ossetia was a mistake, but it is not the same as a full-scale invasion. The U.S. should not be distracted by the specifics of the conflict and instead focus on broader strategic goals.
• Strategic Approach: McFaul outlines a 12-step strategy for U.S. engagement with Russia, which includes:
  • Reunifying the U.S. alliance.
  • Affirming NATO Article V commitments.
  • Supporting Georgian territorial integrity.
  • Rebuilding Russia through democracy assistance.
  • Sanctioning countries and entities that recognize South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
  • Increasing independent information flow into the region.
  • Continuing to support democracy in the region.
  • Engaging Russia on issues like nuclear reduction and nonproliferation.
  • Keeping the door open for a democratic Russia to re-engage with the West.
• Critique of U.S. Policy: He criticizes the U.S. for not fully recognizing the strategic importance of the issue and for underestimating Russia's intent to assert dominance over former Soviet states.

Richard Kagan

• Russia's Actions: Kagan argues that Russia's actions in Georgia were a full-scale invasion of a sovereign state, not a defensive operation. He highlights the illegal military actions, including the occupation of key Georgian cities and infrastructure.
• Legal and Moral Equivalence: He stresses that there is no legal or moral equivalence between Georgia's actions and Russia's, as Georgia did not attack Russia, while Russia launched a strategic bombing campaign.
• International Law Violations: Kagan points out that Russia violated multiple international agreements and norms, including those related to the protection of ethnic minorities and the use of force.
• Military Deterrence: He emphasizes the need for the U.S. to provide military assistance to Georgia and Ukraine to deter further Russian aggression, arguing that this is not just about replenishing lost equipment but upgrading capabilities.
• NATO Reassessment: Kagan calls for a reevaluation of NATO's purpose and its readiness to address a potential Russian military threat, given the changes in the strategic landscape.

Key Information

• Georgia's Military Configuration: Georgia had not prepared its military for resisting Russian aggression, which was a flaw in the U.S. assistance program.
• Russian Propaganda: Russia has used propaganda to justify its actions, including false claims of genocide and the assertion of a right to intervene in neighboring states.
• Ukraine's Role: The conflict in Georgia has created a destabilizing precedent for Ukraine, especially with the internal political tensions between Yushchenko and Tymoshenko.
• Strategic Implications: The U.S. must recognize that its policy of "business as usual" with Russia is not effective in countering Russian strategic goals.
• Military Assistance: There is a need to provide more than just replenishment; the U.S. should invest in upgrading Georgia's and Ukraine's military capabilities to deter Russian aggression.
• Human Rights Concerns: Kagan highlights the ethnic cleansing by Ossetian separatists under Russian support, citing Human Rights Watch as a source.

Conclusion

Both McFaul and Kagan argue that the U.S. must adopt a more strategic and comprehensive approach to its relations with Russia, focusing on rebuilding democratic institutions, reinforcing alliances, and demonstrating firm support for Georgia and Ukraine. They caution against both appeasement and isolation, advocating instead for a balanced, principled, and forward-looking policy that upholds international law and supports regional stability.