Territorial war in the Caucasus could be a test for Russia and the West
(From The Japan Times August 13 issue)

米露関係に影響、カフカスの領土紛争

Historians are likely to conclude that the war that broke out Aug. 9 between Russia and Georgia was in many ways inevitable. The two governments have sparred over the appropriate deference Georgia should show toward its former Soviet overlord, with Moscow insisting that the small Caucasus republic is part of its sphere of influence while Tbilisi sought freedom under the umbrella of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The region of South Ossetia, which separated from Georgia shortly after it won its independence at the end of the Cold War, merely provided the final fatal spark for war.

There is far more at stake here than the loyalties of small states in a volatile region, however. Events of the next few days and weeks could well chart the course for Russia's relations with the West for decades to come. Not only is Moscow's behavior under scrutiny, but so too is that of the United States and European capitals: How far will the West go to accommodate a country whose support is needed to deal with pressing international issues, such as Iran's nuclear ambitions?

Enmity has deep roots in the Russia-Georgia relationship. Russia formally annexed Georgia in 1801 and while independence was regained during the Russian Revolution, it was absorbed into the Soviet sphere of influence shortly after the Bolsheviks took power — a treaty with the Soviet government promising to respect Georgian independence notwithstanding. The country was quick to reassert its independence when the Soviet Union collapsed, but tensions with Moscow have been a mainstay of Georgian foreign policy ever since.

As Georgia broke free from Moscow, South Ossetia and Abkhazia asserted their independence from Georgia, each in a bloody conflict. While both regions have their own languages, cultures, histories and aspirations, Georgians saw them as part of their territory and viewed their bids for independence as Russian ploys to weaken their country.

To guard against Russian encroachment, successive Georgian governments have thrown their lot in with the West. Tbilisi has sought membership in NATO, a move that Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has said "will lead to renewed bloodshed."

As bad as relations between Russia and Georgia have been, they markedly declined with the election of Mr. Mikhail Saakashvili in 2004 as president. Unabashedly pro-West, Mr. Saakashvili took delight in tweaking Russia. Moscow responded with an embargo on Georgian agricultural products, which grew to encompass virtually all its exports. Tbilisi expelled Russian diplomats accused of espionage, and Russia cut all land, sea, air and rail links to Georgia, and then cut all natural gas supplies in winter.

If Russia was trying to provoke Georgia, it succeeded. Mr. Saakashvili may be a darling of the West, but he now looks like a headstrong and dangerous leader. Moscow has made clear that talk about a sphere of influence is not idle diplomatic chatter. It is very prepared to flex its military muscle.

Even if this brief but bloody crisis is over, Moscow's assertiveness raises the prospect of a new era of tension; there is already talk of a new Cold War. A real solution requires far more than an ad hoc response to aggression in the Caucasus. Recent events provide little grounds for hope.

8月9日にロシア・グルジア間で起きた紛争は歴史的に不可避だっただろう。ロシアはこのカフカス地方の共和国を勢力圏と主張、グルジア政府はNATO傘下で自由を求めてきた。ソ連末期にグルジアから分離した南オセチア自治州の存在が紛争の引き金をひいた。

今回の紛争は、小さな自治州の帰属問題だけでなく、ロシアと西欧の関係にも影響を及ぼす。露政府のみならず、欧米の動向が注視される。イラン核問題などの国際的課題でロシアの支持を要する欧米はどこまで介入すべきなのか？

ロシアとグルジアの確執は根深い。1801年にロシアがグルジアを併合、ロシア革命直後にグルジアが独立を宣言。その独立を認める条約にもかかわらず、ソ連は共産党政権確立後、グルジアを勢力圏に取り込んだ。ソ連崩壊後にグルジアは再び独立した。

グルジアの分離に伴い、南オセチアとアブハジアがグルジアからの独立を主張、紛争が始まった。独自の言語、文化、歴史をもつ両地域を領内とみなすグルジアは、その独立運動を露政府によるグルジア弱体化の試みだと見ている。

両政府の関係は親米派サーカシビリ大統領就任で悪化、グルジア産製品禁輸を招いた。グルジアはスパイ容疑で露外交官を追放、ロシアは交通遮断、天然ガス供給停止の措置を取った。

グルジアはロシアの挑発に乗った形となった。西欧の寵児だったサーカシビリ大統領は、身勝手で危険な指導者となった。カフカス地方で起きた紛争にはその場しのぎ以上の対応が必要だが、近況で知る限り希望の兆しは見えない。