What a successful Georgia could have meant

Daniel Henninger reminds us of what Mikheil Saakashvili's government had been doing in trying to build a democratic, capitalistic government in that former Soviet republic.

They returned to Tbilisi and with Mr. Saakashvili began to erect, piece by piece, a political, economic and financial system that could plug itself smoothly into the ones already running in the West.

On balance, they've succeeded. Growth last year was about 12%. Foreign investment flows have been high.

Much of what they did to make Georgia fit with the world seems pedestrian. They passed laws to enhance property rights. They joined international conventions and institutions affecting arbitration, accounting and ownership. They changed their securities law so corporate insiders couldn't expropriate minority investors. They have pursued free-trade agreements with their regional trading partners. Naturally they want to join NATO. Georgia isn't John Locke's England yet -- the judicial system is notably weak -- but the trajectory is set.

In historical terms, this is essentially what Gen. Douglas MacArthur did for Japan after World War II and Konrad Adenauer did in West Germany. Both were explicit efforts to reorganize a nation to participate in the political and commercial life of the West. "The West," of course, is only a phrase that describes the civilized world's rules of the road during the postwar period. Russia opted out, adopting the Soviet gulag model until 1991.

Georgia is a microcosm of a world of nations now emerging from old systems. In that former, preglobalized world, the West's great powers were on top, and everyone else muddled below. What Georgia represents is an independent nation that has worked hard to be part of the established civilized order, rather than contribute to the chaotic and violent frictions that seem on the verge of constantly overwhelming the world. Putin's Russia is a manufacturer of frictions.

Some argue that Georgia is not a primary American interest. They see Georgia as ultimately a place that transits oil and gas through pipelines from somewhere else to Turkey or onto Europe. Georgia is unlucky geography. This is false.

When this crisis ends, Georgia will be either a model for a world that works or a world whose members do business with knives. Ask BP oil, bereft inside Russia.

If the world's foreign ministries, CEOs, investors and policy intellectuals can't see the implications for their world in Georgia's fate, it's time to reorder our best efforts to playing by Mr. Putin's rules. Many of the West's enemies already have.

If Georgia had been allowed to succeed, Henninger is correct, that it would have served as a model for other countries in that region trying to rise above a brutal past dominated by a dictator and tribalistic loyalties. Unfortunately, Russia seems to be succeeding and its neighbors will know that they are next.