I majored in International Studies and Russian in college, and while I am by absolutely no means an expert, I’m relatively well-informed and extremely interested in the goings on in Russia and Georgia.
My concern is that most of the American reporting I’ve seen reports on the rhetoric the US has been directing at Russia. People who skim a headline or read a regular article about the situation here and there are likely to not be getting anything close to the big picture.
I thought the Wall Street Journal did a pretty good job in “Smoldering Feud, Then War: Tensions at Obscure Border Led to Georgia-Russia Clash.” I especially appreciate the short but to-the point mention of the history (it sites tensions since the 1990s, which have actually been there since before Georgia was a country) and additional politics (especially that Georgia is working to become part of NATO). The summary of how events in this chapter of the conflict unfolded was also nice to see in one place.
However, I think that the article biased in favor of Georgia; for politics this entangled, I think it’s too early in this piece of the conflict and too coincidentally in line with the US government’s stance to conclude that Georgia is at fault. I also find the title offensive. For an article that does a decent job of conveying the fact that this is one of a couple of long-time areas of dispute in the region, calling it “obscure” seems contradictory and… well, kind of stupid. Please, stop pandering to the audience you’ve managed to come close to informing.
That being said, give this article a go if you’d like a better idea of what’s going on. Any other great resources out there?