The UN Security Council approved a no-fly zone and air strikes over Libya late last week, and in a previous blog post on February 23rd we noted, “the prospect of civil war or foreign intervention seems far more likely than Gaddafi stepping down.” Both of these outcomes are now reality as the Security Council voted 10-0 in favor of implementing the measure with five members abstaining. Media attention is largely focused on the air strikes, but the fact that five members of the council abstained from voting was mostly overlooked.

Why did these nations abstain from a vote? The explanation given by the BBC suggests ”Russia and China -which often oppose the use of force against a sovereign country as they believe it sets a dangerous precedent -abstained rather than using their power of veto as permanent members.” Why do these nations believe it may set a dangerous precedent? What internal concerns do these nations have? Open source intelligence tools can reveal interesting quotations linked to political events and actors to help solve critical international relations questions.

In this example, we will focus on the political interaction of Russia vis-a-vis the international community. We will then contrast Russia’s official statements at the UN with its domestic rhetoric. Are they similar or different? First, we need to gain a better understanding of the current Russian political situation.

Real Time Timeline of the Russian opposition movement

From the graph we see that there is a considerable democratic opposition movement in Russia. This movement has been gaining momentum and has been in the news lately:

  • A New York Times article describes the “rare bow to popular pressure”the Kremlin made to pacify opposition leaders in the region of Kaliningrad. The Russian government decided not to back Georgy V. Boos, an unpopular governor in the region. His reappointment was expected to spark some of the most intense protests in recent history.
  • 500 pro-democracy demonstrators rallied in Moscow with the permission of the Russian government following the unrest in Egypt

The Kremlin is generally hostile to any form of protest, but occasionally makes concessions to pro-democracy ethnic Russians. The replacement of Georgy V. Boos is one such example. Still, the unrest in the Middle East has visibly rattled Moscow, and the United Russia Party in recent months has bent more than normal. Protest permits are generally denied in Moscow, but Boris Nemstov was granted permission to protest in late January. So why the recent change in policy?

The elephant in the room for the Russian government is the Muslim population in the North Caucasus region. Over the past twenty years, the government has fought two terrible wars against separatists in the North Caucasus. Both sides committed their fair share of atrocities leaving hundreds of thousands dead, and they essentially remain at war.

The Russian government is afraid of the unrest in the Middle East spreading to the North Caucasus:

Timeline of Medvedev quotes related to the Middle East

  • In another article, the President of Russia explains that, “the situation in the Middle East may lead to the disintegration of major nations into small bits, the rise to power of fanatics and the spread of extremism for decades to come…They were preparing such a scenario for us before and will now try even more to make it happen”. Medvedev is referring to the Chechen militants in this case as the “fanatics” and to the “disintegration of major nations into smaller bits” as the goal of the Chechen separatist movement.

Medvedev may be correct on the stated goal of the Chechen resistance, but the likelihood of pro-democracy resistance spreading to Chechnya seems unlikely. The Russian President’s more realistic concern may be general unrest as seen in the Middle East taking hold in the North Caucasus.

The most interesting point that Recorded Future’s timeline tool uncovered was that Nashi openly supports Colonel Gaddafi. Nashi is the primary youth organization of Vladamir Putin’s United Russia Party and has the firm backing of the Kremlin. It is a bit shocking to read the statements of Boris Yakemenko, a high-ranking ideologist in Nashi: “Libyan leader Col. M. Gaddafi has shown the whole world how to treat provocateurs who aim for revolution, destabilization, and civil war.”

Yakemenko wrote the statement in an essay entitled “The Right Path,” posted on his blog and on Nashi’s official website. These statements of support for Gaddafi are coming from the main youth wing supported by the Russian government. Considering this, how close was Russia to actually using its veto power on the Security Council?

Conclusion

The Russian government believes that foreign intervention in Libya would set a “dangerous precedent” for encroaching on the territory of sovereign states. Using open source analysis we have unraveled some of the facts behind this statement. Evidence suggests that the Russian government is afraid that the unrest in the Middle East will spread to the North Caucasus. In that case, the Russian government would be forced to suppress the Chechen resistance once again. In regard to the UN Security Council, Russia and China would prefer not to have it looking into their own internal security problems.