Every country, including Russia, has the right to follow the policy it considers to achieve its interests. And indeed countries, and especially major powers, act in accordance with such a right, and are thus no charities. Nevertheless, Russia's stance on the issues of the Arab Spring raises many questions about the interests Moscow seeks after. We are not here considering the stance from the perspective of how much it achieves Russia's interests, but rather from the perspective of how it reflects on the developments of the Arab Spring, and of the delusions that could be built upon such a stance. Indeed, on the issue of Libya, and after the Security Council issued a resolution allowing the North Atlantic Alliance (NATO) to impose a no-fly zone on Gaddafi's airplanes and to protect Libyan civilians, with what this has entailed in terms of the balance of power on the ground shifting in favor of the rebels, Moscow has clung to efforts aimed at achieving reconciliation in Libya. Such efforts may in themselves be commendable, but they have come too late, after the armed confrontation has widened, and now that the rebels have established a strong base in Benghazi and that their forces are fighting Gaddafi's troops in their own strongholds – in other words, now that efforts towards reconciliation are no longer of any use on the ground. Yet the more dangerous aspect of this is how it is affecting Gaddafi, who received a Russian envoy and sent delegates to Moscow, on the background of Russia clinging to an impossible reconciliation. It has produced in the dictator of Tripoli the delusion that he could, supported by such a Russian stance, turn the tables on the ground, and thus that he has no need to offer any concession to his people for the sake of reconciliation. In effect, the result of this delusion has been that Gaddafi has gone to excesses in continuing to wage war, thus prolonging the confrontation and increasing the death toll and the destruction in Libya, as well as the tragedies at the humanitarian level. In other words, Russia's stance has led to results that are the opposite of the declared aims of Moscow's policy in Libya. And in fact, it has had a negative effect on the development of events by producing the delusion in Gaddafi that there was a major power standing by his side in the face of NATO, and that he could depend on a Russian veto at the Security Council to prevent his regime from being targeted. Moscow thus bears responsibility for prolonging the armed confrontation in Libya, especially in terms of the obstinacy displayed by Gaddafi and his refusal to deal with the conditions laid down by the opposition in order to end the rule of tyranny. Even before Libya, Russia's stance on the Iranian nuclear issue contributed to prolonging the period of negotiations, and to Tehran evading the issue of stopping uranium enrichment, based on support from Russia obstructing any increase of pressures on Iran – thus keeping this crisis inflamed, with all the repercussions this entails in the Gulf region. Today Russia is once again taking a similar stance at the Security Council on the issue of Syria, thereby producing another delusion in Damascus – that relying on Russia's veto could save the Syrian regime itself from increased international pressure, and that there is thus no need to offer any concessions to the protest movement in the country. And as a result of Russia's obstruction of international pressures on the Syrian regime in order to begin enacting political reforms that target the bases of tyranny, this regime is clinging to a solution at the security level, and the confrontation on the streets, as well as the killing, continues. The wrong messages sent by Russia are not obstructing the Western interference complained about, they are obstructing peaceful solutions at the domestic level and prolonging crises and the tragedies they bring, by spreading the delusion that the movement of international struggles will be in favor of the existing regimes, making such regimes cling to confronting their people until the end, based on the delusions produced by Russia's messages. And what drives one to find strange the stance taken by Moscow is the fact that it is putting Russia's direct interest at risk by trying to save regimes that have become nearly paralyzed, if not on the brink of collapse. Clearly the new regimes will deal with countries on the basis of the extent to which they were close to or supported the process of change. This is what the new Libyan officials are saying openly – and the loser here is certainly Russia. Moreover, the current decision-makers in Moscow are the heirs of a tyrannical and security-based regime that is the most powerful in the world. And they can note that this regime, with all its might, could not stand up to the popular spread of demands of freedom in the Soviet Union. That is the lesson they should have applied with the Arab Spring, standing alongside the people instead of buying destructive delusions.
