[Actually this whole summary is surprisingly not bad. But the nub is below.]
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/11/world/europe/11ticktock.html
The New York Times
August 11, 2008
News Analysis
In Georgia and Russia, a Perfect Brew for a Blowup
By C. J. CHIVERS
<snip>
[R]ussian specialists...said...that, whatever the merits of Mr.
Saakashvili's positions, his impulsiveness and nationalism sometimes
outstripped his common sense.
The risks were intensified by the fact that the United States did not
merely encourage Georgia's young democracy, it helped militarize the
weak Georgian state.
In his wooing of Washington as he came to power, Mr. Saakashvili firmly
embraced the missions of the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq. At
first he had almost nothing practical to offer. Georgia's military was
small, poorly led, ill-equipped and weak.
But Mr. Saakashvili's rise coincided neatly with a swelling American
need for political support and foreign soldiers in Iraq. His offer of
troops was matched with a Pentagon effort to overhaul Georgia's forces
from bottom to top.
At senior levels, the United States helped rewrite Georgian military
doctrine and train its commanders and staff officers. At the squad
level, American marines and soldiers trained Georgian soldiers in the
fundamentals of battle.
Georgia, meanwhile, began re-equipping its forces with Israeli and
American firearms, reconnaissance drones, communications and
battlefield-management equipment, new convoys of vehicles and
stockpiles of ammunition.
The public goal was to nudge Georgia toward NATO military standards.
Privately, Georgian officials welcomed the martial coaching and
buildup, and they made clear that they considered participation in Iraq
as a sure way to prepare the Georgian military for "national
reunification" -- the local euphemism of choice for restoring Abkhazia
and South Ossetia to Georgian control.
All of these policies collided late last week. One American official
who covers Georgian affairs, speaking on the condition of anonymity
while the United States formulates its next public response, said that
everything had gone wrong.
Mr. Saakashvili had acted rashly, he said, and had given Russia the
grounds to invade. The invasion, he said, was chilling,
disproportionate and brutal, and it was grounds for a strong censure.
But the immediate question was how far Russia would go in putting
Georgia back into what it sees as Georgia's place.
There was no sign throughout the weekend of Kremlin willingness to
negotiate. A national humiliation was under way.
"The Georgians have lost almost everything," the official said. "We
always told them, `Don't do this because the Russians do not have
limited aims.' "