Russian units are on the move again in Georgian territory, apparently in violation of the truce agreement. One Russian soldier in a large convoy shouted an ominous flirtation to a press photographer outside Gori, hopefully in jest or lust:
“Come with us, beauty, we’re going to Tbilisi.”
(AP)
A week in a Caucasian foxhole will make any soldier promise a pretty girl the world, but it’s certainly likely elements of the Russian military leadership wouldn’t mind actualizing his advance.
As the incursions continue in Georgia with little plausible justification, and as they appear to contradict the foreign ministry and the president’s more recent aims, the possibility exists that factions within the military field command and political leadership are partially untethered. As well as the more obvious possibility that the country’s duocrats of Medvedev and Putin, aren’t in complete agreement. Given Russian military politics, it’s even not inconceivable that the incursions are being made by a war faction, to provoke further opportunities for territorial acquisition.
Russia, like all nominally closed political cultures with largely state controlled medias, always tends to lend the general impression abroad of highly calculated and deliberate policymaking. This perspective you will note, tends to dominate reporting and commentary on recent events. The conventional explanation for the incursions is thus that they are designed to intentionally destabilize Georgia, foment revolt against the elected government, or degrade its military capability further. As can be seen, every Russian action is assumed to be intentional, centrally directed and cunning.
This is not the general condition of the Russian political reality, particularly given the diversified interests of the post-Soviet era. With a few exceptions, Russian politics has always been governed not by autocrats, but by omnicorporeal monocrats, who govern a body of interests through factional patronage to achieve a kind of patrimonialist authority. This frequently results in internal uncertainty and even contradictory national policy in moments of crisis. It’s possible the schizophrenic behavior of Russia in Georgia is a latent expression of this historical dynamic’s limitations.