[Russia's Foreign Minister] Lavrov was cautious about any resolution that is proposed under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter, which allows the use of force to restore international peace and security.
"If such a proposal is made, we will have to write down in the most minute detail the mandate of such a mission under Chapter 7," Lavrov told a joint news conference after talks with Gentiloni.
"We don't want a repeat of the ambiguity that was used for gross abuse of the Libya resolution adopted in 2011."
Lavrov a point. He's psychotic. But absolutely right. The best way to stop illegal immigration is at the point of departure: Libya.
We did twist a no-fly zone resolution (among other shortcuts) into authorization for regime change.
So the Russian notion that European NATO, which had reason to worry about refugees from unrest in Libya to justify the 2011 mission, might apply force under a new UN Security Council resolution to unify Libya under acceptable central authority isn't exactly far-fetched.
Really, using military force against refugee-filled boats is no more a solution than a no-fly zone against Khadaffi's nearly non-existent air force threat to his own civilians was a solution. So why wouldn't Putin think the real goal is something that does make sense?
As an aside, it is funny that people looking to excuse Putin's hostility to the West will reach back to either Bush or even Bill Clinton for reasons it isn't Putin's fault, but they never cast blame on President Obama over this Libya bait and switch.
Mind you, I don't blame President Obama. This is all on Putin. But it is curious, no?
