Wednesday, April 25, 2012

Libya: Cost of U.S. Participation


The United States was clearly not a hero in this article, having again made the offense of overreaching in intervention into foreign affairs. In this occasion, the Arab League, wanted to protect Libyan civilians, by requesting NATO for a “no-fly” zone over Libya, but instead “NATO starting its bombing of Qadhafi forces”, which they did not ask for. The nations comprising the Arab League had to agree in order to seek this assistance, and their agreement was unprecedented. However, the United States used this request to “justify a policy of regime change” through military action, under the guise of having approval from the U.N Security Council and not Congress. According to the author, Bannerman, not only did the United States provide assistance that was undesired, but also damaged future cooperation amongst the Arab League in the future and undermined U.S. democracy, by setting an regrettable precedent.

Although the author, makes a great reiteration for why the United States should not overstate itself in foreign affairs, which I wholeheartedly agree with especially after reading about the damage done by that course of action, I don’t agree with the idea that “victory” could even be in the title. I believe that Libya, the country whom should be the principal decision maker in this problem, should have had the first say in deciding course of action taken. The damage the U.S. has created will take some time to fix. This just makes me think of Orientalism and how civilized West wants to fix the uncivilized East. In my opinion, this article points out again that we should just let the host country try to handle their own internal issues before we  try to control and dictate solutions (that make things worse). As the title of Jay’s article stated (in relation to this example)- Libya: It’s not our Fight.

No comments:

Post a Comment