Not our war
Russia refrains from directly interfering in the operation “to enforce peace” by the Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. Apparently, Moscow does not have a holistic position on this issue at all - events are taking place too far from its borders. Not to mention the fact that it is not pragmatic to interfere with the West - any aggravation of the situation in the "oil-bearing" states benefits the Russian budget.As some Russian media reported on Monday, the Kremlin, on the eve of the adoption of the UN resolution on Libya, which gave the green light to launch operations against the armed forces loyal to the Gaddafi regime, intended to support France and the United States by voting “for”. As a result, as you know, it was decided not to impose a veto on the document in the UN Security Council, but also not to support it. And Natalya Timakova, press secretary of the President of Dmitry Medvedev, assured the journalists that this was planned - Moscow’s position on the Libyan issue was unchanged: Gaddafi is destroying the civilian population of her country.
And indeed, despite the "personal" position on Libya shown by the Russian president, on the whole, the Russian attitude to this crisis was unchanged. All experts agree that for the Russian authorities what is happening in North Africa as a whole, including in Egypt and Tunisia, was at least as surprising as their Western European counterparts. So Russia didn’t have its own point of view on the problem, unlike, say, French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who allegedly received money from Gaddafi for the electoral campaign in 2007. At the same time, unlike in the West, public opinion in Russia did not force the authorities to actively participate in supporting “democratic revolutions” in Arab countries, including, as in the case of France and Tunisia, when this contradicted the interests of the national ruling class.
So Moscow was free not to participate in the conflict at all, like, say, Germany. And it was precisely this cautious position that dismissed, by the way, its ambassador to Libya precisely because it disproportionately protected the interests of Gaddafi, and not our national ones. As Rosbalt was told by the President of the Middle East Institute, Yevgeny Satanovsky, there is no point for Moscow to run through a minefield together with France and the United States, but there’s also no need to defend Gaddafi with Hugo Chavez and Alexander Lukashenko. It is more convenient to observe the conflict from the side.
The calculation here is simple: firstly, any action of the coalition against Gaddafi leads to a further increase in oil and gas prices, which has a positive effect on the Russian budget. Secondly, as Fyodor Lukyanov, the chief editor of Russia in Global Politics, notes, there is a possibility, like China, when it is profitable, not to have a position on some issues of international politics at all - and Russia tries itself in this “less global” role . Finally, thirdly, non-interference in Libyan affairs increases respect for Russia from other Arab states.
And the reason for this, apparently, is that Arab and African rulers everywhere involuntarily try on the "accidentally bombed" tent of Muammar Gaddafi. After all, even in Iraq, the anti-Huseyn coalition caught and then judged Saddam, and he was formally sentenced to death, and not destroyed during a special operation. The same, or rather, even more difficult from a legal point of view, was done with the former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic. And in Libya, we can well talk about the "elimination" of the leader of an independent state. And it scares the neighbors.
And this is well understood in Russia. At least, judging by the fact that it is the problem of the "personal issue" Gaddafi intends to note in his statement to the State Duma. This is exactly what Russian officials may have in mind, including the speaker of the upper house of parliament, Boris Gryzlov, when they talk about the “disproportionate” use of force. Shoot down Libyan planes and bomb Tanks - in proportion. This, they say, is the protection of civilians. But the tent of Muammar Gaddafi (it doesn’t matter if they were aiming at him or at a military facility near him) is already disproportionate. Moreover, a disproportionate unwritten set of rules, which always followed international diplomacy. Only their own people can execute their leader, but not foreigners. Then the UN operation immediately turns into a “military intervention” or “military adventure”, as State Duma deputy Andrei Klimov dubbed the operation in Libya in a conversation with Rosbalt. And Russia never belonged to the category of adventurer states, always fearing that the West would apply the same rules to it that it allows itself to apply to the so-called third world countries.
Well, if Gaddafi is able to eliminate the opposition, then in Moscow they will obviously not be against it. After all, this will not violate the unwritten rules of the game, but only repeat what happened in Tunisia and Egypt, only in a more bloody form.
Information