Sir, It was reassuring to read the exceptionally well balanced assessment of the Georgian conflict by Professor Anatol Lieven (Aug 26). The political issues are complex, and extend far beyond the borders of the current conflict. However, having been directly involved with the leaderships in Tbilisi, Baku and Moscow when BP and others were developing export pipeline routes across the Caucasus, it would seem to me that President Saakashvili has chosen to ignore the wise words of a Georgian saying: “Better a good neighbour than a distant relative.”

In 1921 Georgia and Azerbaijan were truly let down by Washington and London, when both these young democracies were abandoned to their Bolshivik fate. Like today, their leaderships believed that continued access to Baku oil would guarantee political support from Europe and America. As we have now seen, recent events have had no perceptible impact on global oil prices. The security of one million barrels of export oil a day from Baku is insufficient to risk a global conflict.

Although my heart may lie with Tbilisi, my head is very much located in Moscow. Russia’s “near abroad” has always been at the head of its political agenda.

Terry Adams
Holt, Norfolk

Sir, “The march of history towards global democracy” is being hampered not only by autocracies but also by the very proponents of the Western model of liberal democratic systems (leader, Aug 26). Huge gaps exist between their high moral platitudes and their selfish, power-driven actions. If the governments of the Western democracies examine their behaviour during the past six decades, they should be able to see that unless they change their basic instincts of wanting political and economic domination at all costs, autocracies will continue to flourish. Protecting dictators for geopolitical gains, flouting international laws to protect themselves and lying to their people to justify wars do not help to promote liberal democracy.

For any march to succeed, all the participants must feel part of a common purpose. The persistent negation of the principles of democratic control in the management of IMF and the World Bank; the reluctance to modify the UN system and expand the Security Council; and the Western dominance of the World Trade Organisation are examples of the mindset of Western democracies which widen the divide between the haves and the have-nots, and harm the cause of democratic progress.

Hari Sharan
Seuzach, Switzerland

Sir, I am not sure Anatol Lieven quoting Lord Salisbury, the author of splendid isolation, who told Parliament he would no more give a vote to the Irishman than he would to a “hottentot”, is the best example for David Miliband to be inspired by when he visits Ukraine.

Britain and the rest of Europe have to work out a policy to deal with a Russia that rejects European values and norms. Poland and the Baltic states have been told they could not join Nato or the EU because it might upset the Kremlin. But what is this new doctrine that holds a sovereign nation cannot decide what to do because it shares a border with Russia? Not for the first time, Russian tanks are in a country that does not want them there. Not for the last time, London pullulates with those who find excuses for the Kremlin’s behaviour.

Denis MacShane, MP
House of Commons, London SW1

Explore Letters

• Feedback