Sir, President Saakashvili’s foolishness in attempting to suppress militarily the rebels in South Ossetia has been a disaster for his country and for the West. Russia has moved sure-footedly while Western countries, not least Britain, have dithered and stumbled.

History will judge us harshly. Since the West is at the same geographical disadvantage with Georgia as the USSR was with Cuba, prevention was the key. Immediately satellite evidence showed what Saakashvili was planning, Europe, with or without the US, should have warned him trenchantly of the enormous and unacceptable risks. Belatedly, President Sarkozy for the EU, Chancellor Merkel of Germany and Condoleezza Rice have each flown east trying to save some of the wreckage. At present the fallout still cannot be quantified.

While this calamity was unfolding our Prime Minister was taking his holiday in Southwold or visiting the book fair in Edinburgh or suchlike. Churchill said of Neville Chamberlain, whose family had long been immersed in local government, that he looked at foreign affairs through the wrong end of a municipal drainpipe. It seems that Mr Brown scarcely looks at all.

He would be right to calculate that his party political fortunes depend more on domestic issues than on Georgia. But as Prime Minister he has a higher calling. He has a duty to work for our common good within Nato and the EU. Moreover, although the Security Council itself was being hamstrung by Russia, and by China’s determination to avoid any distraction from the Olympics, Britain’s responsibility as a permanent member, to help maintain international peace and security, still stands. If we are to keep the role we must act the part.

Martin Reith
Strathtay, Perthshire

Sir, Jim McCue asks why Russians have not been invited to join Nato (letter, Aug 12). Until German unification, Russia was not invited to join Nato because it occupied half of a Nato member country without consent. Since 1990 Russia has suppressed internal dissent, supported ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia, upheld dictatorships in Belarus and other Central Asian states, subverted elections in Ukraine and threatened its free neighbours with violence. Last week it invaded Georgian territory beyond South Ossetia, betraying its purported humanitarian objectives. On the major issues, Russia has fought bitterly against the causes of government by popular consent and of non-aggression against such governments. Since the purpose of Nato was collectively to defend the free states of Europe and forestall aggression, it would be absurd to admit a country which actively resists both.

Shashank Joshi
Harvard University

Sir, It now essential for the UN Secretary-General unequivocally to remind all member states, not least Russia and the United States — and the media too — that one party to a conflict cannot claim to be acting in the role of “peacekeeper” in order to justify occupation of another member state. The role of peacekeepers is to act as mediators between the warring parties and, by their presence, to remind the parties of the need to resolve their differences by reference to a higher set of values and understanding, to the greater benefit of all.

It seems that the word and concept has been hijacked to justify war rather than peace.

Gordon Glass
Chairman, Bath & District Branch,
United Nations Association

Explore Letters

• Feedback