Right now, much of Libya is celebrating and even giving our president credit for the downfall of the Gaddafi regime. I don’t want to rain on anyone’s parade, but we’ve seen similar things in the past. We watched Iraqis dance on the face of a fallen Saddam Hussein statue and celebrate the collapse of his regime. But the next thing that happened was a total breakdown of social order. Professor Juan Cole is very optimistic about where Libya is headed, and I don’t discount his predictions. I just remain skeptical that you can take the lid off a totalitarian government like Gaddafi’s without things flying out of the bottle.
As a general matter, dictators don’t repress people for the sheer sadistic pleasure of it, but because they preside over societies with great internal divisions. In Syria, an Alawite minority lords it over a Sunni majority. In Bahrain, a Sunni majority lords it over a Shi’a majority. The Soviet Union was made up of many different ethnicities, with substantial religious diversity. Dictators can be more or less benevolent or sadistic depending on their character, but it’s rare for a leader to kill people for the hell of it. Contrary to Prof. Cole’s assertions, I don’t single out Arab countries when I make this observation.
Every country has it’s own particular challenges. We had slavery. The United Kingdom has Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Spain, Germany, and Italy didn’t easily become unified countries, nor did they easily embrace democracy. Their ethnic and/or religious diversity may have played a direct role in their turn to fascism.
So, it really is very early to be saying ‘Mission Accomplished’ in Libya. Not to pee in anyone’s Wheaties, but we need to temper our enthusiasm a bit.
Meh, Gaddafi isn’t much like the Alawite Assad or Mubarak or some Soviet having to maintain control over the Ukraine and the Caucasus simultaneously.
A lot of those African dictators were genuinely fucking crazy. I think of Gaddafi as being a lot like Ricardo Diaz from GTA: Vice City. The guy was a massive drug addict who had an all-female team of bodyguards, after all.
…and we also killed a lot of Indians. Our expansion westward was not as glorious as even Obama at times has depicted it. Just sayin’, lest it be skipped over.
.
Not on the radar screen of US media these past six months, however the European nations led bij Cameron, Sarkozy and Merkel have been involved in nation building from the outset. The international support of Arab nations and the African Union was most important. The rebel city of Benghazi has seen many heads of states visit and consular offices established. The NATO forces have established training facilities and put boots of elite troops on the ground. Libya has a small population of 6.5 million, great wealth due to its gas/oil resources and a vast amount of land. The Mediterranean shoreline extends some 1,000 miles.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence.".
‘Real Moment of Victory for Libyans When Al Qathafi is Captured’
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."The Europeans are interested in a generally democratic and prosperous North Africa for the same reason that the US is interested in a democratic and prosperous Mexico. To reduce immigration.
Sarkozy in particular has to take steps to reduce the flow of muslims into France or risk being defeated by Marine Le Pen. Italy so far has taken the bulk of refugees from Tunisia and Libya who have landed on Lampedusa Island.
The financial crisis has put pressure on the Eurozone. The refugee crisis has put pressure on the EU within the boundaries of free access across borders. Both if not checked will fragment Europe and reverse the institutional trends that the US put in place to prevent another general European war.
Most likely the formal recognition of the TNC allowed France, Italy, and Qatar to perform missions on a bilateral basis–beyond the restrictions of the UN Resolution 1973.
We watched Iraqis dance on the face of a fallen Saddam Hussein statue and celebrate the collapse of his regime.
And our media fawned and preened and compared that even to the falling of the Berlin wall.
Only, as was revealed within a week, the whole event was staged-managed by the US military. The square with the statue was protected by US tanks from every direction and the “citizens” were US-sponsored exiles flown in for the event. All camera shots were relatively close in focus to hide just how sparse the “crowd” was.
In fact, people examining all the photos of Iraqi’s “celebrating” their “liberation” found that it was the same small group of imported exiles, taken over and over in different situations.
Funny how that little detail has been lost to history.
It’s been forgotten because it isn’t really true.
Well, first, that article is dated in January of this year. The stage-managed nature of the event was largely forgotten before that.
Second, that article is written by a journalist on the scene who saw the event as impromptu, not really planned, but over exaggerated by the media. Even if that version of events is true it still underscores how the US media acted as the Pentagon Ministry of Truth throughout 2002-2003. But, that article is not without its critics.
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/01/04/media-as-a-branch-of-government/
Has anyone noticed that the GOP/tea baggers running for president are completely silent?
This not Iraq. No one is saying ‘mission accomplished’. I’m relieved Obama isn’t issuing a deck of cards with the faces of the 52 most wanted Libyans.
As my dad used to say, and as Pres Obama will certainly acknowledge is that generally speaking the easy part is getting the job, the hard part is shoving the herd up the road day after day after day.
I saw CNN’s Fran Townsend commenting that of course Libya shouldn’t be held up as an example…talk about a woman who forgot to check her consequences this morning…I suppose if it isn’t leadership with a lie and a bomb attached to it and 10 years of sacrifice then it’s failed strategy
.
Boo,
The point is valid, and somehow I don’t expect to see President Obama dressed in a flak jacket doing a commander codpiece routine on the deck of the USS Cucamonga.
However, you do realize that that Iraqis dancing on the face of a fallen Saddam Hussein statue was a staged media event, don’t you?
http://www.twf.org/News/Y2003/0411-Statue.html
No, it really wasn’t a staged media event. It was an event near the Palestine Hotel where a lot of media people had been holed up for a long time. It was an event partially inspired and partially executed by the U.S. military. But it was still spontaneous and real.
I forget, did you raise concerns like this when the people of Tunisia and Egypt overthrew their dictators?
This isn’t Iraq. This is the Libyan people overthrowing their dictator themselves, without foreign invaders shooting their way into cities or taking over the government.
This absence of western forces also means that another element in Iraq’s collapse – the thousands of foreign jihadists flooding into the country to wreck it as much as possible and set off a civil war just to screw with us – is unlikely to be present.
Heh. Egpyt was already a worst-case scenario for us. We were propping up an unpopular dictator which directly led people to fly planes into our buildings. But, yes, I warned that letting go in Egypt could complicate our foreign policy and have other unhappy effects. I still supported the revolutionaries. As for Tunisia, I don’t think I even cared.
OK then.
Skepticism and level-headedness are wise reactions to good news.
Let’s see how much Sharia Laws dominates the post Ka-daffy nation we’ve just helped create.
We too often seem to celebrate the arrival of democracy while we gladly watch liberty be ground up by what’s popular among a majority of the dimwitted who will just as assuredly shoot you for disobedience to their views, who are often no better or even worse then what was toppled… Lest we forget we supported some serious radical Islam Albanians when sticking our nose into Kosovo, etc.
Arab Spring isn’t optional. Popular uprisings had already overthrown two governments, including the country where a quarter of the world’s Arabs live, before we even offered the Libyan rebels our good wishes.
I think it’s good that we’re not on the wrong side of history this time, like we were when we decided that all of the peasants rising up in Central America were Bolshevik fanatics. I don’t feel like handing over these movements to the jihadists like a gift, the way we handed those earlier uprisings over to the Soviets.
The wrong side of history??
You pick a side, the other side is your enemy, and as you note, more often than not the side picked ain’t anything to write home about. We’re expert at getting ourselves in the middle of pissing contests between two skunks.
We’ve spent close to $1 billion on Libya revolution… and that $1 billion may well be paving the way for Sharia Law for all we know. We have made enemies of the current power structure’s supporters, and if we fight sharia law, we’ll sow the seeds of more volunteers to blow up our planes.
Wrong side of history? Or heads up our Butts for sticking our nose into every GD thing?
As for the rest of the Arab Spring, we’ve militarized half the mid east supporting one side or another to keep the lid on the people. Our constant involvement and meddling / killing in the Mid East does more to radicalize the locals than Khadaffi or Saddam could ever do. And when they subdued the radicals, at least they became the focus of the blowback.
Heck, under Saddam you actually had Christians and Jews living in the country. Now they’re getting all run off and killed because we made the nation safe for democracy. Good Job USA!
I’m in sympathy with your points, but you sound like a nut-job Herman Cain-wannabe with your obsession with Shariah Law. And, no, there were no Jews living in Iraq prior to our invasion. Okay, maybe there were a a very small handful.
Skunks?
These guys: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CBwQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nt
clibya.org%2Fenglish%2Flibya%2F&ei=H7RTTuSTIsT10gGX7PzqBQ&usg=AFQjCNE0dd4z6uOn7NIUeccUflVoA1
LbOw
are skunks?
Don’t give me this Borderesque “both sides are just the same” bs. If you want to demonstrate moral obtuseness by pretending that the oil dictator and the democratic forces trying to oust him are the same (I’ll bet you didn’t have any trouble figuring out who the good guys were in February), then you can do that, but don’t expect those of us who have values beyond kneejerk oppositionalism to treat your position as a respectable one.
It all depends on what you see the “mission” as being.
Protection of civilians finally came down to removal of Gaddafi from power. Even China and Russia knew this when they abstained. But that is not something that you can diplomatically come out and say.
When Gadaffi’s rump forces no longer have have the use of Grad rockets, tanks, artillery, and mortars, the NATO mission will be over. The country now has sufficient personnel, small arms and training to handle basic security–provided that the TNC can maintain the loyalty and discipline of the brigades that it fielded. Because of the way that those brigades supported each other’s efforts, this coherence is highly likely.
The wild card is how will the new government ensure accountability for the oil money that will be flowing into the economy. And what will it use it for? If there is going to be division, it will be in this area. Will the revolutionary activism of the youth be sufficient to challenge a return to the bad old system.
In a perverse way, Gaddafi’s organization of society helps democratic rule. He depended on an organization of local councils to get things done that he wanted done. The TNC is a federation of local councils that defected early in the conflict and worked to speak with one voice. Integrating the Misrata and Nablus Mountain councils into this structure will not be difficult. Indeed, this is part of the roadmap to a constitutional referendum.
The problems that Libya faces are more like those faced by Romania after the fall of Ceauscescu than the problems faced by the dissolution of Yugoslavia or the Soviet Union.
Whatever the exact circumstances under which it came about, it wasn’t what it seemed. And that’s the point, it meant a hell of a lot less than it was represented to mean. It did not reflect the actual situation.
it ain’t over till it’s over.