God save us from authoritarian politicians and their historical pretensions.

It was a miracle that the UN security council resolution 1973 on Libya was passed. Only 10 of 15 countries voted for the resolution when nine were needed to push it through. Neither Russia or China vetoed despite the widespread prediction beforehand that they wouldn't want to set any precedent for foreign intervention in countries with oppressive regimes.

Of course like most miracles it starts to tarnish a bit once you look closer. The Arab League seemed to want to have their cake and eat it - their chairman didn't wait long after the resolution was passed to start voicing worries about it. However, this at least was fairly understandable. Those with long memories will know that the subject of western countries bombing Libya is a bit of a touchy one in the Middle East.

Then, out of the blue, Putin takes on Gadaffi's rhetoric and starts referring to the resolution as a 'call to crusade'. I'm not entirely sure why this stock phrase always gets dragged out. Yes this is a coalition of broadly Christian states carrying out military operations in an Arab country. However, as far as I can see they haven't made any move to occupy Jerusalem yet and the Pope isn't signing the jet pilot's shirts before they fly out. The intervention in Libya is humanitarian and sanctioned by international law. Any attempt to try and muddy the waters with reference to religious or (supposed) culture clashes is the act of a fantasist or arch deceiver.

Also in historical terms it is completely absurd. Do we call the German occupation of Northern Italy in WW2 the second Gothic invasion? No, because over a millenia has passed and 20th century Germans had as little cultural and ethnic relation to the Visigoths as a modern Briton has to a Celtic tribesman. What is it that is so special about the Crusades which means that so many political commentators and politicians believe they can be used as a catch all description of any conflict between European/North American and Arab states?

Medvedev's surly 'criticism' of Putin, which nevertheless expressed his reservations about international intervention in Libya, showed a far greater grip of 'realpolitik' than Putin's absurd comparisons. Nobody is expecting Russia to be happy about allowing UN intervention in Libyan affairs but Putin could at least have tried not to play into the hands of Gadaffi's propaganda mill.