Things have been pretty grim in Syria for many weeks now, deteriorating even further from earlier in the five-month-long repression.  Depending on what numbers you are consulting, the death toll from the government crackdowns has reached as high as 1,700 people, with regular reports of a few dozen protesters killed per weekday.  The pressure has been growing in intensity, with Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates joining the chorus of Western countries calling for an end to the violence, and, from some governments, the more explicit demand that Bashar al-Assad step down.  You know things have gotten serious when they’ve even been banned from competing in the next World Cup.

So how has Russia responded to these atrocities?  Well on Wednesday they said they would continuing selling arms to Syria despite all the pressure, theoretically to make sure they are well equipped for this bloodbath (to the tune of $5.9 billion in the first half the year).  Next, Moscow has gotten out in front against the referral of a Syria case to the International Criminal Court, indicating that they would veto such a resolution.  And then, just in case their position wasn’t clear, there was this bit:

“We do not share the United States and the European Union’s point of view regarding President (Bashar) al-Assad and will continue to pursue our consistent and principled stance on Syria,” the foreign ministry said in a statement.

Assad needs to be given “sufficient time to implement the declared large-scale programme of social, political and economic reforms,” the foreign ministry said.

For a government that is seeking to portray itself as a global leader capable of problem solving, the diplomatic response to the violent crackdowns in the Arab world leave much to be desired.  Whether these policy positions are guided by geopolitical interest, ideology, business, or the old fashioned do-whatever-is-opposite-of-Washington, many people are getting tired of the games.