OFFLINE

MOSCOW — President Dmitri A. Medvedev on Friday offered to leverage Russia’s relationships in Libya to try to persuade Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi to leave power, an act of long-shot diplomacy that for the first time casts Russia as a central player in events unfolding in North Africa.

Mr. Medvedev’s announcement, which came a day after a 90-minute bilateral meeting with President Obama at the Group of 8 meeting in France, represents a pronounced shift in Russia’s tone on Libya. Russia’s criticism of NATO attacks had become increasingly tough over the last months, reviving a longstanding critique of American unilateralism that had quieted since Mr. Obama took office.

By signing on to the effort, Mr. Medvedev is taking a ****. If Colonel Qaddafi could be persuaded to leave, Russia would win international plaudits but would also bear some responsibility for guaranteeing his safety. If he cannot, Mr. Medvedev might find it more difficult to keep his distance from the military campaign, which is not popular in Russia.

But all those risks may be mitigated by the prestige of being asked to defuse a violent standoff on behalf of world powers.

Mikhail V. Margelov, Russia’s special envoy to the Middle East and Africa, said he had been ordered to fly to Benghazi, the rebel stronghold, to conduct negotiations with the Libyan opposition, with an eye to assessing their vision of a post-Qaddafi government. He has mentioned Qatar and Saudi Arabia as countries that might possibly offer Colonel Qaddafi asylum, and said Group of 8 allies have proposed a variety possibilities for his future, “from a quiet life as a simple Bedouin in the Libyan desert, to the fate of Milosevic in the Hague.”

Russia is in a unique position to negotiate, he said, because “Russian soldiers have never fought against African countries and against the African people.”

i've learned one thing about countries like china and russia, and that is they only do something if it's of benefit to them. not to help protect human rights or any such thing like that.

so, when i see them joining in with the west (especially something involving nato), i have to ask, what's in it for them? surely it can't be just the prestige. i mean, russia supplies europe with a lot of energy resources, as does libya (specifically with oil). so you would think that the turmoil in russia would benefit russia, as europe may be forced to go to russia for more oil and nat gas. so i'm just a little puzzled by this.  

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Dødherre Mørktre:



so, when i see them joining in with the west (especially something involving nato), i have to ask, what's in it for them? surely it can't be just the prestige. i mean, russia supplies europe with a lot of energy resources, as does libya (specifically with oil). so you would think that the turmoil in russia would benefit russia, as europe may be forced to go to russia for more oil and nat gas. so i'm just a little puzzled by this.  

You mean "a little turmoil in libya would benefit russia" maybe? ;-P

Well, by getting into bed early with the "future government" (i.e. the rebels), then Russia is jumping to the head of the queue when it comes to future exploration/drilling rights, contracts for supplying equipment to existing wells etc. Just because Russia has a lot of oil itself doesn't mean Russian oil companies can't do business elsewhere....

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Kieran Colfer:


Well, by getting into bed early with the "future government" (i.e. the rebels), then Russia is jumping to the head of the queue when it comes to future exploration/drilling rights, contracts for supplying equipment to existing wells etc. Just because Russia has a lot of oil itself doesn't mean Russian oil companies can't do business elsewhere....

good point. i guess they're getting in on the ground floor. this is something china has been busy at as well, while america has been giving away it's future in petroleum resources.