Medvedev Rebukes Putin Over Libya

7 Responses

  1. As Russia’s (now dismissed) ambassador to Libya correctly noted, Medvedev is a craven coward and traitor to his country. He has sunk deep into anti-Russian liberalism, shown his contempt for Russian popular opinion, and now presents a threat to Russian national security. He should be impeached.

  2. Andy says:

    Interesting – I’d seen that he’d fired the Libyan ambassador for not acting in Russia’s interests, but not seen Chamov’s criticism of Medvedev in response – do you have a quote, or link to a quote?

  3. peter says:

    The only source so far is this ЖЖ post by some retired ФСБ general (scroll down to the blue line).

  4. The news (rumors?) are that he was fired FOR accusing Medvedev of treason.

    Экс-посол России в Ливии Владимир Чамов возвращается в Москву. Чамов прибывает 22 марта 2011 года около 23.00 в аэропорт Шереметьево рейсом из Туниса. По информации ряда изданий, причиной отставки посла за несколько часов до голосования в Совете безопасности ООН по Ливии стало то, что он в телеграмме, направленной на имя Президента России Дмитрия Медведева, назвал его «предателем».

    I salute the hero.

  5. Andy says:

    Thanks Peter and Anatoly.

    Here’s Putin’s response (well, his spokesman’s response – I assume Putin’s wishing he’d not said anything at all right now).

    “But during a visit by Putin to the Slovenian capital of Ljubljana, the premier’s spokesman stressed that the premier’s assessment of the situation was merely his “own point of view.”

    “The announcement by the head of state is Russia’s only official position, and one that everyone adheres to,” Dmitry Peskov told journalists.”

  6. Mark says:

    Oh, I don’t know; Medvedev later made statements that began to sound more and more like he agreed with Putin, such as “indiscriminate use of force” on the part of NATO.

    And I wouldn’t go so far as to say if Russia didn’t veto or vote against the resolution, that presupposed they were not opposed to it. They simply knew there was no percentage in bucking it. And since then the no-fly zone has expanded to NATO acting as the rebel air force, talk of supplying weapons to the rebels (which, experts suggest, will lead to NATO personnel participating directly in a ground war, since the rebels will have to be trained in their use), and urging from disengaged conservatives who have not served in the military for NATO to up the ante to more direct participation. You’ll notice the Arab League, who appeared to back the no-fly zone originally, is getting distinctly uncomfortable with the spectacle of NATO getting its war on.

    Before this is over, Putin may look visionary.