The Conjecturer

A big reason for Russia and China’s intransigence is the NATO coalition that led the intervention, which badly overstepped the range of permissible actions stipulated in the UN Security Council Resolution that authorized intervention. Russia was an early critic of such actions as France’s weapons shipments to the rebels — criticism that could have been accounted for (Moscow never made any secret of its concerns) but which seemed to be ignored in the rush to intervene. President Obama made a rapid transition from saying “regime change is not on the table” last March (part of the bargain to get Russian abstention from the UNSC vote) to publicly calling for his ouster. France and the UK used similar language, ignoring the politics of getting UN approval for intervention.

Now, when there is another escalating crisis in Syria — Bashar al-Assad’s unjustifiable mass-murder of protesters — Russia and China have stepped in to veto further UNSC action. This was an entirely predictable response, as both Russia and China were openly scornful of the misleading statements made by interventionists in NATO and the Arab League to get support for Libya.

Over at The Atlantic, I try to unravel some of the large problems unleashed by our little intervention in Libya. And it ain’t pretty.
  1. jasencomstock reblogged this from theconjecturer
  2. theconjecturer posted this