In a UN Security Council session on Sunday, the US ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad challenged his Russian counterpart, Ambassador Vitaly Churkin, by asking: "Is your government's objective regime change in Georgia, the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Georgia?" The Associated Press reported that the Russian ambassador responded: "I'd like to say straightaway that regime change is an American expression. We do not use such an expression. But sometimes there are occasions, and we know from history, that there are different leaders who come to power, either democratically or semi-democratically, and they become an obstacle." The New York Times reported: "As the bloody military mismatch between Russia and Georgia unfolded over the past three days, even the main players were surprised by how quickly small border skirmishes slipped into a conflict that threatened the Georgian government and perhaps the country itself. "Several American and Georgian officials said unlike when Russia invaded Afghanistan in 1979, a move in which Soviet forces were massed before the attack, the nation had not appeared poised for an invasion last week. As late as Wednesday, they said, Russian diplomats had been pressing for negotiations between Georgia and South Ossetia, the breakaway region where the combat flared and then escalated into full-scale war. "'It doesn't look like this was premeditated, with a massive staging of equipment,' one senior American official said. 'Until the night before the fighting, Russia seemed to be playing a constructive role.'" In Asia Times, John Helmer asked whether Russia's war aim was to force President Mikheil Saakashvili out of power. "Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov reportedly told US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice over the weekend that Saakashvili 'must go'. Bernard Kouchner, the French foreign minister, on a mediation mission on Monday between the Georgian and Russian capitals, will hear the same view in Moscow. "The Russian argument is that, since coming to power in 2003, Saakashvili has militarised his country with US, Nato and Israeli arms, military training and money, for no purpose except to threaten Russia, and the minority nationalities of the region, who seek the protection of Moscow - the Abkhazians and the Ossetians. "Saakashvili, the Russian argument runs, has initiated military escalation over the past year because his political base has cracked and his domestic support is dwindling. The Georgian political opposition at home, and in exile abroad, agrees. They charge the president and his family, including the powerful Timur Alasaniya, Saakashvili's uncle, of growing corruptly rich off the arms trade and of seizing the country's resource, port and trading concessions for themselves and their supporters." Brian Whitmore wrote: "The Georgian leader's strategy is clear. Tbilisi's small army is no match for the Russian military machine. Saakashvili's only chance of success in his bid to regain control of the Moscow-backed breakaway region of South Ossetia, therefore, is to globalise the conflict and turn it into a central front of a new struggle between Moscow and the West. "'What Russia has been doing against Georgia for the last two days represents an open aggression, unprecedented in modern times,' Saakashvili said in a televised address on August 8. 'It is a direct challenge for the whole world. If Russia is not stopped today by the whole world, tomorrow Russian tanks might reach any European capital. I think everyone has understood this by now.' "So far, the West has not taken the bait. The United States and the European Union are sending envoys to Georgia to try to broker a ceasefire and Western leaders have issued predictable statements calling on both sides to show restraint." In an editorial in The Wall Street Journal, Georgia's president wrote: "Can a Russia that wages aggressive war on its neighbours be a partner for Europe? It is clear that Russia's current leadership is bent on restoring a neocolonial form of control over the entire space once governed by Moscow. "If Georgia falls, this will also mean the fall of the West in the entire former Soviet Union and beyond. Leaders in neighbouring states - whether in Ukraine, in other Caucasian states or in Central Asia - will have to consider whether the price of freedom and independence is indeed too high." The Washington Post said: "Western reporters entering South Ossetia with Russian troops... saw Georgian soldiers' bodies lying uncollected in the streets of Tskhinvali, the region's capital, and heavy damage to the city. Georgian troops launched an offensive to take control of the breakaway region early Friday. Civilians told the reporters that Georgian tanks had fired indiscriminately during the two-day seizure of the city, killing and wounding many city residents. "Georgia's retreat is translating into popular anger among Georgians against the United States and the European Union, and a widespread sentiment that this small, pro-Western country has been abandoned to face Russia alone. Georgian officials said that the West's credibility is on the line and that failure to stop the continuing attacks could embolden Russia to threaten other countries in the region." The New York Times spoke to Georgian troops on retreat as they passed through Gori. "One soldier, his face a mask of exhaustion, cradled a Kalashnikov. "'We killed as many of them as we could,' he said. 'But where are our friends?' "It was the question of the day. As Russian forces massed Sunday on two fronts, Georgians were heading south with whatever they could carry. When they met Western journalists, they all said the same thing: Where is the United States? When is Nato coming?" Likewise, The Times reported: "As a Russian jet bombed fields around his village, Djimali Avago, a Georgian farmer, asked me: 'Why won't America and Nato help us? If they won't help us now, why did we help them in Iraq?' " In The Washington Post, Mikhail Gorbachev, the last president of the Soviet Union, wrote: "What happened on the night of Aug 7 is beyond comprehension. The Georgian military attacked the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali with multiple rocket launchers designed to devastate large areas. Russia had to respond. To accuse it of aggression against 'small, defenceless Georgia' is not just hypocritical but shows a lack of humanity. "Mounting a military assault against innocents was a reckless decision whose tragic consequences, for thousands of people of different nationalities, are now clear. The Georgian leadership could do this only with the perceived support and encouragement of a much more powerful force. Georgian armed forces were trained by hundreds of US instructors, and its sophisticated military equipment was bought in a number of countries. This, coupled with the promise of Nato membership, emboldened Georgian leaders into thinking that they could get away with a 'blitzkrieg' in South Ossetia. "In other words, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili was expecting unconditional support from the West, and the West had given him reason to think he would have it. Now that the Georgian military assault has been routed, both the Georgian government and its supporters should rethink their position." In The National Interest, Dimitri K Simes noted that the Bush administration and outside commentators have been appalled by Russia's disproportionate response to the Georgian attack. "But proportionality is in the eye of the beholder. In July 2006, after Hizbollah captured two Israeli soldiers and killed three others - smaller losses than those inflicted on the Russian troops in Tskhinvali - the Israelis launched a massive bombardment of Lebanon, including Beirut, killing more than a thousand Lebanese, many of them civilians. When some in the UN Security Council sought to condemn Israel's 'disproportionate response,' the United States acted as Israel's staunchest defender and prevented any resolution critical of Israel. "Notwithstanding this background, the United States has no good choices in dealing with the crisis. There is no realistic way to remove Russian forces from Abkhazia and South Ossetia short of a major war with Russia, which no responsible American political leader would advocate at this point. But whatever Saakashvili's responsibility is for the confrontation, America cannot allow an ally to be soundly defeated or especially overthrown by an insurgent Russia. Accordingly, the first priority for the United States should be to make abundantly clear to Moscow that any attempt at forceful regime change in Georgia will have severe consequences for the US-Russian relationship and that the United States would help Georgia to resist on the ground."