This is the question that should be worrying the non-Russian world. Hitler had two Sudetenlands, one in Austria, the other in Czechoslovakia. He annexed both and started World War II, the 69th anniversary of the start of which falls next Wednesday.

By invading Georgia and remaining there, Russia has served notice on the rest of the world that she has a legitimate interest in regions where there are Russian-speaking populations, or, as in the case of South Ossetia, Russians as "peace-keepers". These regions include Latvia, Estonia and the Ukraine.

All this, in the context of Vladimir Putin's belief that the break-up of the Soviet Union was a geo-political catastrophe, threatens to make a new Cold War all but inevitable; the Russian President needs to be persuaded that he can no more reassert his country's "right" to re-establish the Soviet Empire than Britain can of proclaiming Queen Elizabeth Empress of India.

Britain's foreign secretary, who seems to be the only person in Europe (whatever happened to Javier Solana?) with something powerful to say to the Russians, has warned that "Russia must not learn the wrong lessons from the Georgia crisis: There can be no going back on fundamental principles of territorial integrity, democratic governance and international law." What Russia has shown in the past fortnight, he went on, was what "anyone could have foretold: that it can defeat Georgia's army. But today Russia is more isolated, less trusted and less respected than two weeks ago". The serious question is, does it care?

Russia's continued presence in Georgia suggests that she intends to be in a position where she can, if she so wishes, threaten oil and gas supplies that flow through Georgia on their way to Europe from Asia and the Caspian. Restriction of energy supplies from Russia itself has been frequent as Latvia, Estonia, Ukraine and the Czech Republic can testify.

Energy has become Russia's economic and diplomatic weapon; it is one that could boomerang. However, one suspects that Mr Putin, smarting under that geo-political catastrophe he said had befallen the Soviet Union, had something else in mind, something altogether more dangerous: control over the Crimea and, therefore, of Ukraine, which wishes to become an EU and Nato member. This is a dangerous card Mr Putin may be tempted to play, unless the EU, for one, shows a bit more backbone in the face of these naked ambitions.

What of Russia as a country to be trusted - has Mr Putin thought sufficiently about that? Dmitry Medvedev may not be afraid of a new Cold War, but it will have come as a bit of a shock that Russia failed to garner the support of any Asian nation that matters over South Ossetia's and Abkhazia's unilateral declaration of independence and the Rusian President's acceptance of that declaration. China, which has its own problem with Tibet, will not have been amused.

Now there's news that Russia may ratchet up the ante disproportionately by supplying Teheran with its S-300 system. This has the ability to track 100 targets simultaneously and strike at planes 75 miles away. It would alter dramatically the balance of power in the Middle East. The United States would not stand for this; nor would Israel; nor, paradoxically, would many Arab states that would regard balefully an exponential increase of Iran's military profile in their area.