World powers gather for Libya brainstorming - without Russia

[Hannah Bell]

Russia was not invited to a meeting in London on Tuesday to draw up a common approach towards Libya, where Western forces have become embroiled in a military campaign against Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.

Along with all members of an international coalition involved in the operation, representatives of the United Nations, the Arab League and the African Union are attending the conference.

Currently, the international community is split into three camps on the Libya issue. The first group supports the no-fly zone, but is unwilling to take the intervention any further. The second proposes supplying arms to the rebels to hasten the fall of Gaddafi's regime...

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nation Susan Rice said on Tuesday the U.S. administration has not ruled out providing military support and arms supplies to Libyan rebels. In an interview on ABC's "Good Morning America" show, she said the U.S. goal was "squeezing Gaddafi's resources and cutting off his money, his mercenaries, his arms, providing assistance to the rebels and the opposition."

http://en.rian.ru/world/20110329/163271949.html

[polly7]

1. This is probably a stupid question, but why not Russia? n/t.

[Hannah Bell]

3. "not invited". why? i assume because russia is making statements questioning the intevention.

and i assume the discussion is going to be about escalation -- providing arms or even troops on the ground.

for all the reports i've heard about khaddafi's troops defecting, it seems the opposition should have plenty of arms & men. why do they need nato? khaddafi no longer has air power, wtf is going on?

[polly7]

18. Thanks Hannah Bell, I haven't kept up on the situation like I should have.

wtf is right. I'm conflicted over the whole thing, I just hope any intervention has to do with the humanitarian reasons I first heard. I hate war so much ... this had better not be another Iraq or Afghanistan.

[daleo]

13. If Russia was there, a debate might break out

These meetings are for hashing out an agreement on fine details, not re-examining assumptions.

[Catherina]

2. Can't blame them one bit. It sounds like they're beginning to gloat a little.

"It's good that the London conference is taking place without us. Decisions will be made there that, fortunately, will have nothing to do with us, because it's already clear that they will not lead to anything good."... "We are not interested in this neocolonialism in the Libya case, we are not dancing at this marriage, and this is our conscious choice, which, in my opinion, is more than reasonable."


Do you know if China and India were invited?

Rec'd

[pampango]

19. China and India weren't invited either.

"The conclave excluded two permanent UN Security Council members, Russia and China, as well as ignored India. All three have been critical of the fierce use of force and the western powers taking sides in an internal conflict."

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/europe/Global-message-Gaddafi-must-go/articleshow/7822780.cms

As your quote implies, it's possible that all three sent messages that they really didn't want to be "invited" to a conference that "will not lead to anything good".

If they attended, each would have to decide whether to forcefully criticize the implementation of the UN resolution 1973 (at the risk of alienating the West and the possible future government in Libya-probably why they didn't veto it in the first place); continue to "abstain" (express concern for the nature of the implementation but not to use their positions on the Security Council to try to change its direction); or switch public positions and support the implementation (that's not likely and, if they wanted to switch, they could do it without going to a meeting).

Their governments may believe that it's safer to be on the outside looking in on this one. They (Russia and China didn't veto UN involvement on behalf of civilians here as they did with Burma in 2007, but they may still not be comfortable with the action and prefer not to have any more 'ownership' than is inescapable from their failure to veto it.

[xchrom]

4. Russia not invited gets an Unrec?

Some one is seriously sensitive about this Libya thing.

[Catherina]

5. At least 2 because I rec'd it too. The ploy is to bury unwelcome news

Lalalala can't hear you. Then in 3 years everyone can sit around asking what happened and why do they hate us.

:shrug:

[moondust]

6. Russian arms industry is losing business.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/05/world/europe/05russia.html

Russia will lose $4 billion because of the unrest in Libya and the subsequent United Nations embargo, Sergei V. Chemezov, the director of the Russian state company in charge of weapons exports, said on Friday.

Over all, unrest in the Middle East has toppled or threatens to topple several governments that are longtime customers of Russian military industries, Mr. Chemezov said, and the total losses could reach $10 billion.

[Catherina]

9. I wish the UN would do something lasting for humanity and work on dismantling the arms trade n/t

[moondust]

11. UN

http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/ArmsTradeTreaty/html/ATT.shtml

[Catherina]

14. 2 me that's just meaningless gesticulation. If they were serious, the biggest arms dealers

wouldn't be on the security council. The biggest arms dealers own the UN after winning WWII.

[daleo]

15. This could help their arms business

A lot of leaders could be getting antsy around the world. They might start shopping for the latest Russian stuff. I have no idea how their best stuff would hold up, though.

[moondust]

17. Maybe.

Hard to tell at this point who will get contracts with the new governments in the ME.

[madrchsod]

7. finally a recommend...

those pesky flies strike again

[NightWatcher]

8. carving up contracts? settling on terms to use in the press?

[Distant Observer]

10. Why NO AFRICAN COUNTIES or even African Union representation

[Hannah Bell]

12. huh?

"Along with all members of an international coalition involved in the operation, representatives of the United Nations, the Arab League and the African Union are attending the conference."

[Canuckistanian]

16. Russia had it's chance to veto

They didn't. So now they expect to have a say in future negotiations on Libya?