in DC cares about America, only their bank accounts.
Posted on 01/26/2013 3:44:29 AM PST by cunning_fish
Moscow
Both Vladimir Putin and his foreign minister have lashed out at the West in recent days for pursuing what they regard as naive and incoherent Middle East policies. The critique targets Western backing of anti-dictator rebellions in Libya and Syria, which, as Mr. Putin tells it, only fuels the spreading flames of extreme Islamist insurrection, including the current war in Mali and last week's terrorist strike on a gas complex in Algeria.
"The Syrian conflict has been raging for almost two years now. Upheaval in Libya, accompanied by the uncontrolled spread of weapons, contributed to the deterioration of the situation in Mali," Mr. Putin said at a meeting with new ambassadors in the Kremlin Thursday.
(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...
"Those whom the French and Africans are fighting now in Mali are the same people who . . . our Western partners armed so that they would overthrow the Gaddafi regime," in Libya in 2011, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told a news conference Wednesday.
Many in the West may be inclined to shrug off Russian criticism as the routine sniping of a government whose Mideast influence has slumped since the Arab Spring began, or the self-serving rationale of an autocratic regime that fears popular revolution and automatically backs authoritarian rulers.
But many Russian experts, including sharp critics of the Kremlin on other issues, argue that Russian leaders are being realists about the blowback that has followed Western interventions in the Muslim world.
They say Moscow has been dealing with the threat of militant jihadists since the Soviet Union's disastrous 1980s war in Afghanistan, and has watched as it has shown up in parts of Russia's heartland. Kremlin leaders accuse the West of an enthusiasm for toppling dictators that has led, not to democracy, but to spreading mayhem and rising Islamist militancy across West Asia and North Africa.
"Russia is on the frontier, we are in jihad territory," says Yevgeny Satanovsky, president of the independent Institute of Middle Eastern Studies in Moscow. "Our own fringes, the northern Caucasus, Central Asia, and even the central Volga region are threatened. That's why we're very clear about who the enemy is.. . . We know this, and you would think that after 9/11 and other events that our American and European colleagues would have some clarity about it, too. Yet they always seem ready to play with fire, and to use militant jihadists against Russia and its national interests – as they did in Afghanistan, Chechnya, Libya, and Syria," he adds.
Over the past decade Russia has used its UN Security Council vote to oppose the US invasion of Iraq aimed at overthrowing dictator Saddam Hussein; yet it has strongly supported NATO's anti-Taliban mission in Afghanistan. Last year, Putin even urged the Western allies not to leave Afghanistan before the "job was done" and Moscow gave NATO the use of a huge airbase in central Russia to help with the resupply effort to its embattled forces there.
Moscow abstained on the March 2011 Security Council resolution that authorized the use of force "to protect civilians" in Libya, and last month it actually backed another resolution empowering France and others to intervene against Islamists threatening to overrun Mali.
On the other hand, Russia has repeatedly vetoed any resolution aimed at international cooperation to ease Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad from power and continues to back his regime with political support and shipments of weaponry. The UN estimates 60,000 killed in the ongoing civil war in Syria, with some 500,000 to 600,000 displaced or categorized as refugees.
Outsiders may be forgiven for seeing Moscow's policies as a bit tangled, not to say hypocritical, but many Russian analysts argue that they have been completely consistent – with the sole exception of former President Dmitry Medvedev's decision to abstain on the Libya "use of force" resolution, which was publicly slammed by then-Prime MThe Libya resolution contained promises to Russia that were never delivered. Today our abstention on that vote can be clearly seen as a mistake, a symption of Medvedev's non-professionalism," says Mr. Satanovsky.
The Russians argue that they back secular goverments and stability, even where it is enforced by a dictatorship, because the alternatives are almost universally worse. They insist that Western efforts to back democratic revolution have backfired almost everywhere, and will continue to do so.
"All attempts to export revolution end badly," says Andrei Klimov, deputy chair of the State Duma's international affairs committee.
"In Iraq, the Americans came in to eliminate fictitious weapons of mass destruction, and knocked out all the pillars of stability in that country. Look at the mess it's in today.... Libya was stable, Syria was stable, until revolutions aided and abetted by Western powers tore them apart. All this chaos is a gift to militant fundamentalists and no one else," he adds.
Russia's backing for the current French-led intervention in Mali is just a case of lining up against the common enemy, the jihadists, pro-Kremlin analysts say.
They point out that the government the West is propping up in Mali is a dictatorship, the result of a military coup last year that overthrew the democratic government on the eve of elections.
"We agree with the French about this. Maybe they're finally seeing the light," says Sergei Markov, vice president of the Plekhanov Economic University in Moscow and a frequent adviser to President Putin in the past.
"It's an attempt to stem the damage that's a result of the misguided operation in Libya. It's against the jihadists and we support it," he adds.
"When the West is helping to destroy a stable regime, and willfully opening the gates to the radical Islamists, we oppose it. . . We wish that Russia and the West could work together on this. We are willing, but we doubt the West is ready to cooperate with us," Mr. Markov says.
"Will it have to take a few more Western ambassadors being killed by the very forces they created before they will listen to us?"
Amazing. I agree with the Russian foreign policy.
Heck, Obama and his backers are trying to destroy THIS country. Because they, like the radical Islamists, would rather, and could only, rule a hell-hole.
it will take a lot more than a bunch of dead ambassadors ~ the problem is the Present is a jihadist himself ~ and a particularly ignorant one at that.
Same here. Backing the jihadis is always against America’s best interest. This policy started in Bosnia.
To be honest it has started as early as 1971 Bengal Bay events.
Brits did it as early as 1854 (Crimean War).
No way man.
Obammy is the smartest, deepest thinker, prettiest president we’ve ever had.
Yeah, right, more like a huge boil of America’s ass/
What Soros wants, Soros gets. Putin should talk to Beck.
Russia, China, and the non NATO world, have figured out that the Zer0 is a lying, double crossing dictator. It will be easy for this group to sabotage Zre0's US operations toward these Islamic Caliphate goals, and cause severe US losses in these operations.
War is coming to the ME and North Africa.
Huh! I think what Putin thinks...how scary is that?
"Will it have to take a few more Western ambassadors being killed by the very forces they created before they will listen to us?"
Probably a lot more than that.
Carter gave us Islamic Revolution in Iran.
Obama gave us Libya, Egypt and wants to give us Syria.
Of course we have to mention that the Bushes gave use Iraq.
What is wrong with these people? Isn’t it obvious that these tribal Muslims are not ready for democracy? They really do not even have a true notion of nation so how can they have a notion of self government. Many if not most do not even believe in self government believing it to be against the law of Islam.
Why do these idiots think that it is a good idea to let these people who believe that all westerners who will not convert to Islam should be put to death should be given the right to choose their own government?
So Obama’s foreign policy is a flop and actually dangerous; who would have guessed?
It is amazing. Obama's foreign policy is a disaster, but election of the foreign policy arm of the US government (the president) is done by imputing Congress's role (domestic policy, tax policy, etc) to the president, and arguing over which presidential candidate will have the better domestic policies. The public is dumb as a sack of marbles.
This administration's side taking when the shit hit the fan in Honduras was a clear tell of things to come.
Technically, that is not correct.
Islam teaches that Christians and Jews should be subjected to rule by Muslims, but not forced to convert. They are reduced to dhimmihood, but not killed.
Yes, that is what Islam teaches but what do the people think?
Read a little about what goes on in Iran concerning the Jewish and Christian minorities.
Putin is dead on.
But still he supports Iran. What’s with that?
BHO2 stated in his autobiography that he was an avowed Marxist/Leninist. That means he is an atheist, and presents himself as Muslim or Chrsitan only when politically advantageous.
He has used the Muslim Brotherhood to destroy whatever emerging capital markets existed in North Africa and the Middle East. Most of the ME imports food in exchange for natural gas and petroleum; expect to see riots in Egypt as they are no longer selling natural gas to Israel, and Egypt will no have hard currency to buy food on the international marketplace.
Vladimir Putin? He is an old-line KGB, and not to be trusted. But Russia forced out Muslims from the Crimea just over a century ago, and demographics indicate they could be overhwhelmed by a growing population of Muslims. Their fear is genuine.
The Middle East is referred to by historians as “the graveyard of Empires” for a very good reason. There really are no genuine nations there except for Israel. All other ‘nations’ are basically family or clan operated criminal operations, sort of like what we see with the Mafia. The ME is a violent place where no one trusts anybody else but especially they do not trust any foreign “allies”.
The United States has followed policies that are foolish. We can’t treat the nations there as though they ARE modern nations when they are not.
What BHO2 is doing is acting as the tool for Globalists seeking a one world government. Their aim is total chaos from which they will rebuild a Global government. The banksters behind all of this make their fortunes from financing war but I have to say, it sure sounds delusional.
Since the mullahs have been in control of Iran for more than 30 years, it tends to disprove your claim that Muslims want to kill all non-believers, since if this were true presumably there would be no infidel minorities left alive there.
But if they don't submit willingly, they are killed.
Sura (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, even if they are of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.