WASHINGTON // The rebukes of Russia kept coming yesterday, with George W Bush calling its response to the conflict in South Ossetia "disproportionate" and saying he had expressed "grave concern" to Vladimir Putin, the Russian prime minister.
One day earlier, Dick Cheney, the vice president, had some hawkish words of his own: in a telephone call with Mikheil Saakashvili, the Georgian president, Mr Cheney was reported to have said Russia's military incursion into Georgia "must not go unanswered" and that its continuation would have "serious consequences" for its relations with the United States and the broader international community. It is unclear whether Washington's tough language will, or even can, translate into anything more than just that and how the conflict that is threatening Georgia's very sovereignty will reshape the United States' already strained relationship with its former cold war nemesis.
The Bush administration has said it intends to seek a UN Security Council resolution condemning Russia's actions in Georgia. But even if that move succeeds, it would be more symbolic than anything. "The fundamental problem is that the United States does not have a lot of leverage with Russia right now," said Jeffrey Mankoff, adjunct fellow for Russia studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. "We at the moment seem to need them more than they need us. There's not a whole lot we can do, short of verbal diplomacy."
Seven years ago, when Mr Bush first met Mr Putin, then his Russian counterpart, the US president famously said he had looked straight into the Russian's eye and got "a sense of his soul". The two have visited each other at their personal residences; one widely distributed photograph shows them taking a spin in Mr Putin's vintage Volga automobile, with Mr Bush behind the wheel. No matter the personal ties between Mr Bush and Mr Putin, the US relationship with Russia has been strained in recent years over numerous issues including Kosovo's independence, how to deal with the threat of Iran, US plans to build a missile shield in eastern Europe and, now, the first military intervention by Russia outside its borders since the Soviet Union crumbled.
If anything would prompt Mr Bush to change his "sense" of Mr Putin - who is widely believed to be in direct control of the campaign in Georgia - it seemingly would be this. Still, Washington's options, perhaps by default more than by design, appear limited. Mr Saakashvili, a staunch ally of the United States (the road to the airport in the Georgian capital of Tbilisi is named after Mr Bush) and de facto provocateur of Russia since he rose to power in the 2003 Rose Revolution, has attempted to rally support from the United States at every turn, including in its bid to join Nato.
On Friday, Mr Saakashvili said in an interview with CNN that the conflict in South Ossetia "is not about Georgia anymore. It's about America, its values." US diplomats have, at least so far, all but ruled out military intervention on behalf of its ally, largely because, as some have been saying privately in the US media, they need Russia too much. "Iran is certainly the most immediately important issue where the US needs Russian co-operation, at least," said Mr Mankoff, adding that the Russians have also provided key intelligence for Nato operations in Afghanistan. "That kind of co-operation is something that the US would be hesitant to jeopardise."
As if there were any doubt, the events of recent days have driven home the reality that Russia, emboldened by its oil and gas wealth, has risen once again - and wholly on its own terms. In comments broadcast on Russian TV yesterday, according to wire reports, Mr Putin sharply rebuked the United States, as he sometimes does, noting Washington's assistance in returning Georgian troops from the war zone in Iraq to the one in South Ossetia.
"It's a pity that some of our partners instead of helping are trying to get in the way," Mr Putin said. "The very scale of this cynicism is astonishing - the attempt to turn white into black, black into white, and to adeptly portray victims of aggression as aggressors and place the responsibility for the consequences of the aggression on the victims." Even as the European Union called on Russia to halt the bombing and sent a contingent to Moscow yesterday in pursuit of peace, observers questioned what the efforts would and could yield. Indeed, it seemed entirely up to Russia to decide how far, and with what strength, to push its hand.
"It's not entirely clear what leverage anyone has over Russia," said Cory D Welt, associate director of the Eurasian Strategy Project at Georgetown University. Together, the United States and its allies in Europe, who rely on Russia for much of their oil and gas, might use a kind of "soft leverage" to try to force the Russians to back down, Mr Welt said. But attempts at diplomacy with Russia may go only so far.
"There's only so much that the US government can will itself to get involved," he said. "The tools that they have, they can pull them all out, but if it's short of military force, it's back in the Russians' court." Mr Bush made further public comments on the South Ossetian conflict yesterday from Beijing, where he was attending the Olympic Games. In a conversation with Mr Putin, he said he had called Russia's response "disproportionate" and the violence there "unacceptable".
"I was very firm with Vladimir Putin - he and I have got a good relationship - just like I was firm with the Russian president," Mr Bush said in an interview with NBC Sports. To be sure, the coming days will test that relationship, and the force of that firmness. @Email:eniedowski@thenational.ae
