I think that this column by Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. in the Wall Street Journal, if not well intentioned, does a lot of projecting and stretching, including a number of favorite ideological issues attached to unrelated events. His central argument, however, is very interesting: “Western powers may not do much immediately about his squeeze on Georgia, but over time he will find he has created conditions for the emergence of a coalition to contain Russian energy power.” But Mr. Jenkins is assuming that Washington and the EU are capable of acting strategically in their own interests in relations with Russia – something that I have not seen evidence of in quite a long time. Furthermore, the “containment” of Russian energy imperialism is in essence the promotion of market competition – which is actually very good for Russia’s future. Let’s not be tricked into thinking that Russia can’t be powerful and successful while at the same time there is stability in the Caucasus and near abroad. There’s no reason to assume that Putin’s grandiose and confrontational foreign policy ambitions represent the interests of the Russian people.

First Yukos, Then Georgia August 13, 2008; Page A15 Now the world is getting an idea of what a “war for oil” really looks like. Few in the West appreciate the degree to which Vladimir Putin and the Soviet, er, Russian, elite subscribe to a prewar view of power relations and national greatness. Their view is not based on self-reproducing institutions and innovation and the power of trade, but on territory and resources — lebensraum, as one of their intellectual progenitors called it.