The debate has kept going partly fuelled I guess by the escalation of the war of words between Russia and the West following Russia's decision to follow the West's recognition of Kosovo's breakaway from Serbia, by recognising the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
On last night's programme (listen here) we looked at the latest front in the war of words, with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's accusing the US of deliberately provoking the Georgia conflict.
It seems to be a riposte to allegations by the Georgian President, Mikhail Saakashvili, and echoed by Western critics of Moscow, that Russia had planned to attack Georgia and that Georgia's attack on South Ossetia on 8 August was merely a pretext.
Mr Putin's claim has been met by expressions of incredulity in Washington - but the Russians claim to have found hard evidence that Americans were with Georgian forces inside South Ossetia.
The rights and wrongs of Georgian and Russian actions have been discussed at length elsewhere on BBC blogs so I don't intend to go into that again. But I have been struck by the refusal of Western leaders to acknowledge that there is any comparison between their decision to insist that Kosovo had to become independent - in other words their refusal to respect the territorial integrity of Serbia - and Russia's decision to recognise the two Georgian breakaway regions - Moscow's refusal to respect the territorial integrity of Georgia.
Western leaders have been arguing this week that territorial integrity and national sovereignty must be respected and accused Russia of trying to redraw the borders of Europe.
This has led some commentators to accuse Western leaders of hypocrisy (here is just one example by a long-time critic of the Kosovo war and Western media coverage of that conflict and others to offer a stout defence).
I am not sure journalists, including us on The World Tonight, have been as effective as we could have been in challenging those who argue there is no link or comparison between what has happened in Serbia and Georgia.
This week on The World Tonight we have had interviews with Russian politicians and challenged them on why they believe Kosovo did not deserve recognition, but Abkhazia and South Ossetia do.
On Wednesday (listen here) we tried to take a dispassionate look at the concept of territorial integrity in international law and ask if the recognition of UDI by Kosovo, Abkhazia and South Ossetia had undermined the attempt to strengthen the international rule of law all the major protagonists in this story say they are in favour of.
The item didn't work as planned as the interviewee, who was on live, ended up comparing the merits of the three territories' right to independence, coming down in favour of Kosovo and against the other two. Our attempt to analyse for the audience the legal basis for the accusations and counter-accusations flying between Moscow and Western capitals, and whether they have damaged international law did not really work, though we will try to return to this as the story shows no signs of going away any time soon.
Finally, in response to some direct criticisms of my blog from last week and the BBC's coverage:
- Some criticised my decision to try to avoid using the word "invasion" to describe Russia's offensive against Georgia. My reasoning is that there has been a very active attempt by both Georgia and Russia to shape the debate in the media over the rights and wrongs of their conflict. One of Georgia's accusations is that Russia launched a full-scale invasion of their country, while Russia presented it as a limited military operation for humanitarian reasons. In order to avoid the impression of taking sides I think it is better to find alternatives to the word invasion, which still describe what the Russians have done. "Offensive" or "incursion" are two possibles though I accept that all language carries connotations and finding words that are value-free is arguably an impossible task.
- We were accused of failing to report Human Rights Watch's investigation of the death toll in South Ossetia, which put the figure much lower than the initial Russian claim of around 2,000. In fact, several BBC outlets, including The World Tonight, interviewed Anna Neistat, the Human Rights Watch researcher who worked on the investigation cited.