Syria: Russia & China shafted!

Something that has puzzled me greatly since the Security Council veto on Syria; why is Russia making itself the pariah of the Islamic world outside Syria and Iran? Obama must be doing handstands at the poisoned chalice being passed on to Putrid.

Devilling around for an explanation, I get some clues from the Economist and elsewhere.

First, stuffing America and, to a lesser extent, the West is part of the Russian mind-set. It is a piece of grandstanding by the next and perpetual President in the run-up to an election. Putin has at last the prospect of stern opposition from a large section of Russian society.

This leads on to the next possibility.

Events in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya and the toppling of unpleasant and dictatorial regimes sets a nasty precedent for Russia. The criminals in charge of a totally corrupt, dysfunctional and disintegrating regime where the rule of law does not run will not want the hoi-polloi to start getting ideas.

Then there is the matter of arms. Syria is largely dependent on the Russian arms industry. Putin can kiss that good-bye if (when) Assad goes the same way as Gaddafi.

And Syria hosts a Russian naval base. The outcome would be the same.

What of China?

Mr Chin clearly feels that the time has come to punch his weight in international affairs. The policy was to project ‘soft’ power as a counterweight to America’s ‘hard’ power, to spread its influence around the world, particularly those areas where it has a substantial economic interest, such as Africa. In fact, it has instead been projecting ‘hard power’ in the South China Sea and the Indian Ocean that has left SE Asian counties very worried. American ‘soft power’ is successfully bringing them on-side, as in Burma

It also has a similar motivation to Russia’s. Accepting the principle that loathsome regimes may be toppled by an exasperated people backed by the international community must cause shivers in the politburo of Beijing. ‘Regime change’ to reflect the will of the people is definitely off the agenda, as far as Mr Chin is concerned.

So was the Security Council veto a defeat for international diplomacy?

On the contrary, it was a major triumph, especially for the US. For America to call the veto ‘disgusting, to the applause of the rest of the world,  speaks volumes.

America has successfully passed on the role of hate-figure to Russia and China, as the two nations the Muslim world loves to loathe. The US is the good guy now, after donkey’s years of being the Great Satan. It has isolated Russia and China, and the Russian Foreign Minister is now buzzing around the Middle East like a blue-arsed fly to try to undo some of the damage. Too late!

It is also a triumph for Hillary. Criticised for being too low-profile, she has been quietly beavering away to ensure that the image and reputation of the US is improved, and that its voice is one more respected internationally, after the dreadful damage wreaked by Dubya.

One consequence is that the Obama administration has an 80% approval rating in the West.

He must wish he had the same in the US!