what is Russia's real motive?

[© tweed]

I only have the most awkward understanding of the whole conflict and I only really started reading things in an attempt to understand today.  one thing seems to be missing: why is Russian REALLY getting involved?  I think it is safe to say that they aren't mobilizing out of care and love for the Ossetian people, considering how they feel about Chechen independence...

pardon if this has been discussed before / is a dumb question

[Kaine for Senate '18]

My guess is that they want the land for themselves.

[Hash]

They hate Saakashvili since he took power. Putin doesn't respond well to anti-Russian leaders at his borders.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Paranoia. Mostly.

[Daniel Adams]

The Russians feel they "own" the countries surrounding them and that it cannot allow them to ally themselves with the West and NATO. Saakashvili's Georgia has been one of the most pro-Western ex-Soviet nations and Russia feels it must overthrow him before he joins NATO and goes out of their reach (as happened with Estonia).

These de facto independent nations propped up by the Russian military (as "peacekeepers") are the way Russia has tried to excerise pressure over their neighbor's governments. Those nations are actually Russian puppet states with little or no popular support and extremely corrupt and undemocratic governments.

[dead0man]

Lots of possible reasons to follow:
They want control of the oil pipline that runs through Georgia
They want to punish an ally to America and Georgia was the easiest victim
They want a buffer zone where they can get one
They want to gauge the reaction the west gives to their actions
They want to gauge the abilities of their military against a well trained, fairly modern military

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Lots of possible reasons to follow:
They want control of the oil pipline that runs through Georgia
They want to punish an ally to America and Georgia was the easiest victim
They want a buffer zone where they can get one
They want to gauge the reaction the west gives to their actions
They want to gauge the abilities of their military against a well trained, fairly modern military

The same, plus:

They want to show their force

[ag]

You should understand the Russians' state of mind these days. They feel humiliated by the 90s and are supersmug in the current high-oil era. They dislike the outside world and are paranoid about the world hating (the last, though not true until now, might become a self-fulfilling prophesy, eventually) or "disrespecting" them (bears to recall a common Russian maxim: "if you are afraid of me, that means you respect me").

Georgians have, of course, behaved idiotically - they stoked Russians' paranoia and the feeling of disrespect (as well as exhibited a degree of nationalism and empire-building a small country in a precarious corner of the world can ill afford). Still, the Russian reaction towards that country has been outsized ever since the Soviet break-up - and, I am afraid, not merely pathetically stupid, but also sincere. The current Georgian leader has become a poster boy for the "western perfidy" (frankly, I believe any Georgian leader, not servile to Russians would, but that's another issue). Most Russians, even seemingly reasonable and educated about the outside world, sincerely believe that Saakashvili is an "American puppett", "a governor, selected and appointed by the US" specially to annoy them (try telling an average Russian that Americans would have supported any not radically anti-Western Georgian leadership, and they think you are a naive idiot, or worse).  Thus, not being able to "get to" the evil US power, they satisfy their feelings of revenge and feed their inferiority complex by screwing the "American satelite".

[ilikeverin]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Possible, but a little simplistic.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I doubt it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's a bit 20th century.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Fairly plausible as a minor reason.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Likely another contributor.


I think a lot of the theories floating about there are way too Americentric.  Countries don't invade other countries simply because of the invaded country's allies, if no open state of war exists.  And don't give me any of that "PUTIN IS CRAAAAAAAZY" crap; he may be ruthless and power-hungry, but he's not that stupid nor that irrational.  I think it's happening to cement Russia's already formidable power over former Soviet states: "If you resist, look what happens to you!  Now give us your natural gas/oil/women."  Georgia is a good testing ground for this because:
1) Georgia happened to pick some vaguely antagonistic maneuvers, giving a possible pretext.
2) Georgia did so around the Olympics, providing a distraction.
3) Georgia is a rather close ally of the West, allowing Russia to see a sort of "worst case scenario" for reaction.

[Хahar 🤔]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Possible, but a little simplistic.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I doubt it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's a bit 20th century.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Fairly plausible as a minor reason.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Likely another contributor.


I think a lot of the theories floating about there are way too Americentric.  Countries don't invade other countries simply because of the invaded country's allies, if no open state of war exists.  And don't give me any of that "PUTIN IS CRAAAAAAAZY" crap; he may be ruthless and power-hungry, but he's not that stupid nor that irrational.  I think it's happening to cement Russia's already formidable power over former Soviet states: "If you resist, look what happens to you!  Now give us your natural gas/oil/women."  Georgia is a good testing ground for this because:
1) Georgia happened to pick some vaguely antagonistic maneuvers, giving a possible pretext.
2) Georgia did so around the Olympics, providing a distraction.
3) Georgia is a rather close ally of the West, allowing Russia to see a sort of "worst case scenario" for reaction.

Great analysis, ILV.

[Frodo]

To remind the world (and itself) that it is still a great power, and what better way to demonstrate its revived military might than to re-establish some measure of control over what it considers as its own backyard? 

At least that's my understanding of the Russian mindset.

[J. J.]

Paranoia. Mostly.

A 300 year old paranoia, at least.  It's not Putin, it's standard Tsarist/Soviet/Russian paranoia.

[??????????]

Paranoia. Mostly.

A 300 year old paranoia, at least.  It's not Putin, it's standard Tsarist/Soviet/Russian paranoia.

In Soviet Russia paranoia owns you.

[12th Doctor]

The Georgian government is strongly pro-Western, strongly anti-Russian.  Putin is using the pretext of helping the separatists as an excuse to install a pro-Russian government in Georgia, if not dismantle it entirely.  Soon, he will use some pretext to do the same to Ukraine, not like he hasn't already been up to such things, but success in Georgia will undoubtedly embolden the Russians to make an even more obvious move.

[Silent Hunter]

Control the oil pipeline and hold Europe over a barrel, so to speak.

[dead0man]

Control the oil pipeline and hold Europe over a barrel, so to speak.

Which should be unacceptable to the West.

[Cubby]

Control the oil pipeline and hold Europe over a barrel, so to speak.

Which should be unacceptable to the West.

It should be. But because we were stupid enough to invade Iraq, our military is now too over-stretched to start a third war. Even Russia is smart enough not to try and directly topple the Georgian government in a full invasion.

[12th Doctor]

Control the oil pipeline and hold Europe over a barrel, so to speak.

They already control a very significant portion of Europe's petroleum supply.

[dead0man]

Control the oil pipeline and hold Europe over a barrel, so to speak.

Which should be unacceptable to the West.

It should be. But because we were stupid enough to invade Iraq, our military is now too over-stretched to start a third war. Even Russia is smart enough not to try and directly topple the Georgian government in a full invasion.

The West's military is over-stretched?  Having Europe over a barrel isn't just America's problem...believe it or not, it would be Europe's problem too.

[StateBoiler]

This is Russia's real motive. Stratfor covers this for a living, and they are paid by their customers to be unbiased, otherwise they'd lose their job.

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/russo_georgian_war_and_balance_power

Part 1:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[StateBoiler]

Part 2:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[StateBoiler]

Here's a second opinion:

http://informationdissemination.blogspot.com/2008/08/russias-divide-and-conquer-strategy.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Cubby]

Control the oil pipeline and hold Europe over a barrel, so to speak.

Which should be unacceptable to the West.

It should be. But because we were stupid enough to invade Iraq, our military is now too over-stretched to start a third war. Even Russia is smart enough not to try and directly topple the Georgian government in a full invasion.

The West's military is over-stretched?  Having Europe over a barrel isn't just America's problem...believe it or not, it would be Europe's problem too.

I meant the US military was over-stretched. The EU doesn't do any military work besides peace-keeping in Kosovo.

[dead0man]

Control the oil pipeline and hold Europe over a barrel, so to speak.

Which should be unacceptable to the West.

It should be. But because we were stupid enough to invade Iraq, our military is now too over-stretched to start a third war. Even Russia is smart enough not to try and directly topple the Georgian government in a full invasion.

The West's military is over-stretched?  Having Europe over a barrel isn't just America's problem...believe it or not, it would be Europe's problem too.

I meant the US military was over-stretched. The EU doesn't do any military work besides peace-keeping in Kosovo.

No, the US Army and Marines are over stretched.  "military" is much to broad of a term to be appropriate.  The US being in Iraq was/is not keeping us from assisting Georgia militarily.  I know it's fun to tie everything to Iraq/Bush, but there are enough legitimate complaints against the guy to keep us busy.  We don't need to make any more up.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Control the oil pipeline and hold Europe over a barrel, so to speak.

Which should be unacceptable to the West.

It should be. But because we were stupid enough to invade Iraq, our military is now too over-stretched to start a third war. Even Russia is smart enough not to try and directly topple the Georgian government in a full invasion.

The West's military is over-stretched?  Having Europe over a barrel isn't just America's problem...believe it or not, it would be Europe's problem too.

I meant the US military was over-stretched. The EU doesn't do any military work besides peace-keeping in Kosovo.

In Europe, yes, maybe. But if we don't do more, it is that we just... can't! We are talking about EU, a big market of small countries with not a lot of power geopolitically speaking.