Wednesday, March 23, 2011

One Answer to My Question

I found an answer to the question I posed in yesterday's post, "Now What?".  The writer is a "veteran American journalist" and his POV, in this post, makes sense to me.  Herewith in its entirety:
Libya: A Goal?-Yes, A Way Out?-Yes, Naivety?-Yes

by Dan Ehrlich   Hard Truths...

Those opposed to the UN sanctioned US-EU attack on Libya claim there is no clear goal or exit strategy. Wrong! Our goal has been obvious since the rebellion got rolling last month…to help the rebels overthrow Gaddafi…a man who has long outlived his usefulness to the West.

Unfortunately we seem to imbued with naive liberal style wish fulfillment to initially think the rebels would kick the long-lived potentate out on their own. Once Gaddafi mobilized his forces and began taking back towns won by the rebels two things became evident.

First, he has a lot of popular support, which brings into question the validity of the rebellion and second, once Gaddafi's forces began fighting back, the rebels didn’t have a chance in what has been revealed to be a genuine civil war, with large pro and anti government sentiment.

Enter the US, UK, France and even Qatar, anxious to prove it being chosen as a World Cup venue was a smart decision by FIFA. Realizing the rebels were going to get the shit kicked out of them, and also facing the reality if having continue dealing with Gaddafi, who they had been rooting against, the major oil users figured “in for a penny in for a pound” and attacked Libya.

Remember Libya is the biggest oil producer in Africa and the wealthiest Arab country west of Suez, according to UN stats. It’s important to the stability of the galaxy that this country remains in the Western sphere of influence. Before the chaos enveloping most of the Arab world the West was satisfied dealing with guys such as Gaddafi who offered stability as they raked in the billions to their Swiss bank accounts.
Now, however, a void is growing in the region with no indication who will take over in Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen and other counties where unrest is growing. In Libya’s case, if this is indeed a civil war, what right do the major powers have to intervene? The reason has been humanitarian concerns for the safety of the population threatened by madman Gaddafi. Of course the real reason is safeguarding the oil for the West.
Our naivety again is revealed in thinking popular revolutions or even civil wars indicate democracy and humanitarian governments forming. We conveniently forget the tribal and religious nature of largely rural landscapes such as Libya and even Egypt where the Infidel has long been the enemy of the true faith.
What leaders in the US and EU must now be trying to figure out is what will come after Gaddafi. The last thing they would hope for is another Iran, something that’s possible but not likely. Iran’s anti Western obsession is based largely on its Shiite faith being a hard-line minority Muslim sect and its somewhat one-sided colonial history with Britain and the USA.
So, our exit strategy will simply be stopping the bombing and seeing if the rebels can unseat Gaddafi, after which being so grateful the new dictator will pledge his love and oil to the West.



injaynesworld said...

Interesting piece. Thanks for pointing it out to me. I really hope we get this "happily ever after" ending but I fear the writer is more accurate when he talks about our never ending naivete in this region.

Glad to see the topic being discussed.

DJan said...

I am wishing I could stick my head in the sand and pretend, like an ostrich, that none of this is happening. Alas, my keester will be scorched along with all the rest even if my head is covered...

Susan said...

Once again our neverending thirst for oil gets us involved in something in which we have no business interfering. Gaddafi, Mubarak...they were useful tools, until they weren't. The sliminess of it all gives me the willies.


by Cole Scott