"Choosing not to act is to act"
When the west failed to act: Budapest, 1956
Tihomir Kukolja in The Huffington Post, today:
“In the words of Dietrich Bonheoffer, the powers that matter in the world have come to the point when choosing “not to act is to act”.
Eventually, whatever the others do, the US government will have no choice left but to intervene one way or another.
For there will be no greater embarrassment for America, and the European Union too, to see Gaddafi’s regime survive after so many reassuring promises given to the Libyan people, such as: “We will provide whatever assistance they need.”
The US has only a short time, measured in days rather than weeks, to assert itself as the world leader. At this moment its moral strength and legitimacy are being tested by whatever it does in regard to the Libyan nightmare.
A very much-needed focus on the earthquake and tsunami caused disaster will not take away from its responsibility towards the Libyan people. For whatever the outcome of the Libyan drama, it will dramatically shape the things to come not only in the neighborhood of the Middle East, but the world as a whole.
The stakes have never been as high as they are now. Every new day of bargaining costs, not only the lives of the systematically slaughtered Libyans, but the American international credibility too. Unless done soon and with determination, introducing the no-fly zone over Libya too late my easily appear not only patronizing and manipulative, but counterproductive as well.
There is a huge moral difference between whether the US and its international partners act now and help save many Libyan lives, while there is still something to save, or if they do it too late in the role of international undertakers.”
13 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Read the article here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tihomir-kukolja/choosing-not-to-act-is-to_b_835563.html
http://bigpondnews.com/articles/Politics/2011/03/16/Illegal_journalists_abandoned_in_Libya_589452.html
‘Illegal’ journalists abandoned in Libya
Wednesday, March 16, 2011 » 07:43am
Libyan authorities have warned ‘illegal entering’ journalists they will not responsible for their security.
The Libyan authorities have warned journalists who had entered the country ‘illegally’ that it would not be responsible for their security.
Libya ‘assumes no responsibility, legal or moral, for the danger that could threaten the personal security of journalists who have broken the rules’ of entry into the country, a statement distributed to reporters in Tripoli said.
The statement came from the general committee for the foreign press, which reports to the interior ministry.
Sadly, we are approaching the end of this first phase of Libya’s revolution. Libya will never be the same, whether Gaddafi stays (as it seems likely now) or is removed.
Short term, Gaddafi has the upper hand, but from next week onwards the world will still have all options open, except, of course, the one of a swift approach on to Tripoli from the ground. To me this all shows that unless the US of A moves, nothing and nobody moves.
The guilt of abandoning the Libyan freedom fighters is to be shared by the whole rest of the world. Not sure who is to blame most, but Libya is much closer to the EU than it is to America and this should primarily have been an EU issue first, before anything else.
Libya is the closest country to the south of the EU and its inaction will cost the EU dearly.
The press that hounds every national leader that goes in to oust a dictator has been labelled a warmonger with blood on his hands. Now all politicians are more sensitive to such press and this is what has probably kept everybody back in taking a quick stand. Reagan was the joke of the press in the 80s, being called all sorts of names, from cowboy to failed actor during his time.
Now most of the world agrees that Reagan was one of the best presidents the US has had since Washington. Same thing with Bush junior. The world will come to appreciate his job in ousting once and for all another dictator and for taking the fight to Al Qaeda rather than waiting for them to attack.
Compare the mentioned two presidents with the present one and it becomes crystal clear how slow and weak the present presidency is. Time and again it faultered in addressing the Egyptian crises and in the Libyan crisis it faultered even more.
McCain just told Obama that unless he acts fast his presidency will be solely remembered for extinguishing the Arab freedom flame, because no other Arab nation will rise if Gaddafi stays.
It seems to me that the Americans are damned if they do and damned if they don’t. Till recently everyone was condemning the US for its involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. I felt and still feel uneasy.
They rid us of two very problematic governments and with a lot of sacrifice are trying to bring these two countries into the international fold. And yet the criticism they get is incredible.
Now, because they are trying to stay a step back they are being criticised as well. Till a couple of days most were saying that if the west get involved they will ruin the work of the people. Now its the opposite. If America went in head on they would have been accused of doing so because of the oil. .
Lemons and oranges, Claude. The US hasn’t rid the world of the problems in Iraq and Afghanistan. The corruption and instability is growing and is dragging Pakistan into anarchy. We can conveniently blame this on Bush belligerency, Cheney’s greed and Rumsfeld’s gross ineptitude.
Bush even lost a window where Iran’s progressives had the government and proposed a workable compromise on the nuclear issue. Instead he took to grandstanding, ushering in the fundamentalists…
Libya is a different kettle of fish. I expect Europe to act without waiting for the US’ green light. I expect Germany to break from its shackles and work with France and England on this one. England and Germany have suffered attacks on their territory and France had to engage them on the southern border with Chad. Enough with this clown!
On the other hand intervention has to be judicious and calculated. The reason to intervene should be judged more on the effect intervention will have to Libya then on how it will effect domestic opinion polls.
I agree.
The rebels themselves may be partly to blame. They should not have declared themselves against militiary intervention when they thought that they had the upper hand and even arrested that SAS team that the UK had sent to offer help.
Amen to that.
I have posed the question three times in this website, with no reply: How exactly do you propose to “act”?
Is it through “surgical bombing” – like the ones witnessed in the Balkans that left hundreds dead?
Is it through political / economic isolation?
What about countries that don’t give a hoot about the UN Sanctions e.g. China / Russia … and see this pogrom as a golden opportunity to make good oil business, are we to sanction / boycott these countries as well…?
Ahh diplomacy… so much talk..
Moral and practical support to people opposing Gaddafi by supplying arms and intelligence information and taking a definitive stand in their favour.
Political and economic isolation that is exactly that – no waffling and dancing on the sidelines, no fretting about data protection and offshore companies, no turning of blind eyes because of personal interests.
Flood Libya with humanitarian aid in the form of goods and services.
Prise Gaddafi’s cronies away from him by reversing the means and mechanisms that everyone has used to suck up to them so far.
Put a bounty on Gaddafi’s head and those of his sons and cronies too.
Yes, bomb Gaddafi loyalists too. The hundreds left dead will be fewer than the immediate and slow, tortured death of that will accompany Gaddafi’s survival.
Precision bombing would indeed solve the problem, just as it would have twenty years ago if they had used the right equipment (or if KMB hadn’t been around).
Keep in mind that there is a very strong opposition force and all they need is a ‘leveling of the playing field’. Precision bombing can do more than leveling it – it can tip it significantly in favour of the rebels.
As with any military operation there will be a cost in innocent lives and it is indeed a dilemma how to balance these against the lives that would be saved. I do not envy the people who have to make such decisions.
In any case the real problem is the lack of political will to do anything. They can easily achieve the results. The question is whether they want to.
The more I read the more my stomach turns.
The USA would only have acted if it had Reagan or Bush and not this President without balls.