CHINA, RUSSIA, AND THE FAILURE OF THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT IN SYRIA: DOES THE FEAR OF REGIME CHANGE OFFER A SERVICEABLE EXPLANATION?
CHINA, RUSSIA, AND THE FAILURE OF THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT IN SYRIA: DOES THE FEAR OF REGIME CHANGE OFFER A SERVICEABLE EXPLANATION?

Summary/Abstract: The following pages analyse the motivations behind the Russian and Chinese vetoes that prevented three Security Council resolutions from entering into force. In particular, their commonly accepted argument that they used their veto power in order to prevent a repetition of the regime change that happened in Libya will be challenged on various grounds as it seems that it was not an outright objection of regime change but rather the frustration of having been left aside during the post-Gaddafi scramble for oil and other economic benefits, that led to their voting behaviour. In addition, Russia almost had no other option than using its veto power because of its close ties to the Assad regime. Here, Libya rather created an environment of distrust that Russia cling on its ally in fear that a newly-imposed regime would not continue this special relationship.

• Details
• Contents