There is some indication that Bush will take a harder line against Russia. I've argued in the past that there is a potential upshot to some of Putin's domestic policies, but his efforts to rebuild the empire shouldn't be tolerated one bit.

While all eyes were on Ukraine, Russia dropped any pretense of subtlety and told Abkhazia to get in line or suffer (lots of stuff in my Georgia Archive).

Good post. Agree with everything you said. I share your concerns. Isn't it interesting that Condi Rice should be so involved at this point given that her particular expertise was the (then) Soviet Union? I'm thinking that such is a good thing (other political differences aside).

Good post, Kriston, this makes up for my neglect in reading enough articles on the situation.

I've been skeptical of Putin from the start. The way he was appointed in advance of the elections by Yeltsin (last day of 1999) seemed too much like he was a chosen successor. The Russian army's disregard for human rights in Chechnya (and appropriation of US war on terror rhetoric) has also been a warning sign. Plus, George Bush said something about Putin's soul, which clearly meant trouble. How much can a KGB man change his stripes, really?

Rob is correct that this makes Russian area studies a hot field once again, but I'm still not comfortable with Condi Rice running the show. Even if she speaks Russian and all, I still disagree with her overall philosophy on making US foreign policy, so the part of the world in which we become engaged is not of much significance, sadly.

I'll still root for the Bushies to succeed. I don't see much reason for partisanship to get in the way since, absent a bunch of Russian terrorists pulling off a major attack in the US, we won't see this rivaling the Middle East in voters' consciousness any time soon.