The United States is all kinds of indignant over the fact the Russia and China exercised their veto on the Syria resolution, pronouncing the move "disgusting" and such. No one in our government recognized that it happened as a result of our own damned fool actions.
We led NATO into a war in Libya which was supposedly for the purpose of protecting lives, the so called “responsibility to protect” doctrine, and then from the day we started the mission said that it would not end until Ghadaffi was gone. So whatever we said before, the war was actually about regime change because we didn’t stop until Ghadaffi was not only gone but dead.
“Your actions speak so loudly I can’t hear what you say.”
Now Russia and China are saying that they are not going to support any kind of US-led resolution on Syria because they are concerned that the US and NATO will make use of any such resolution to “engage in regime change as they did in Libya.”
It’s not an invalid position. The UN resolution regarding Libya specifically prohibited action in support of either side, and the US-led NATO forces openly and blatantly supported the rebel forces. Not only did they do so, but the leadership of this country specifically said that support of the rebel forces would not end until “Ghadaffi is out of power,” which is undisguised regime change by force.
So on the “fool me once shame on me…” theory, Russia and China, having supported R2P once and gotten regime change by force, are not going to support R2P by the same actors a second time. I cannot say that I blame them.
Aside from the business interests they have there. And they might be afraid of what public and political pressure could do to thier own regimes. Not that we'd do anything about that of course.....ReplyDelete