World flashpoints must be debated (08/21/2008)

There is "no room for debate on this" - President George W. Bush.

Well, sorry Mr. President, but you are wrong.

The president was talking about the recent incursion by Russian troops into the Republic of Georgia in connection with the disputed autonomous region of South Ossetia.

But when it comes to Georgia, there's plenty of room for debate about everything.

For starters, there's room for debate about where the country begins and ends. And that's a key question as far as South Ossetia and another breakaway region known as Abkhazia are concerned.

For a little country, Georgia is one complicated place. It was perhaps best described as "a miniature empire." Short on national civic identity, it is overburdened with conflicting ethnic identities.

Sit down with a bunch of citizens of Georgia and you will soon hear jokes about how the Mingrelians are different from the Svan and the Ossetians are different from the Abkhaz and on and on.

More of the country's history has seen it broken into tiny little bits than as a coherent whole. And when it has been a whole, there has been an unfortunate tendency for the ethnic Georgians to flex their muscles when dealing with the numerous other ethnic groups.

In other words, like a place called Iraq, it's a very complicated region.

And we oversimplify it at our peril.

For instance, there are legitimate questions about who set this latest round of violence into motion.

There's no question that the South Ossetians were provoking the central government, and it's likely the Russian "peace-keepers" on the ground abetted that.

But, at the same time, there had been pretty much a stand-off in the region for more than 15 years and the whole question of South Ossetia's relationship with the Georgian government has been the subject of long-standing negotiations.

Then there's the question of ethnicity. Imagine a situation where Hoosiers or Buckeyes weren't viewed as being as American as those who grew up in the original 13 colonies, then you might begin to have a handle on ethnic differences in this small country.

There is also the question of U.S. behavior in relation to other "frozen conflicts."

Never heard of "frozen conflicts"? Not surprising. Most people haven't.

But they're out there, like South Ossetia and Abkhazia, ticking like time bombs. And how the U.S. responds can have enormous consequences.

Right now, for example, there are cease-fire "frozen conflicts" between Armenia and Azerbaijan in a region known as Nagorno-Karabakh and between Moldova and Russian-backed separatists in a region known as Transnistria.

There are further time bombs in the Ferghana Valley between Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, and the border between Russia and the Baltic states that used to be a part of the former Soviet Union is a little warmer than we'd like. Add to that the whole fragile mess that makes up Pakistan and you get the picture.

None of these situations are places where there is "no room for debate."

Quite the opposite.

These are the potential flash points where American service men and women could be risking their lives. That should move them to the top of the agenda for debate, discussion, and honest assessment.

If we've learned anything in the past few years, it ought to be that thoughtful debate is a better strategy than plunging ahead and arguing about the consequences afterwards. - J.R.[[In-content Ad]]