What about Benghazi?

[phildwyer]

outwith

Excellent.

 

[phildwyer]

Ah, Phil's blaming The Jews

Don't be a twat. Take the day off eh?

 

[TruXta]

I hope you're not talking to me Phil? Cuz my only reply is still, and will always be, F.O.D.

 

[dylans]

Leaving aside the fact that your definition of a nation sounds tautological, and that nationalism is by its very nature exclusionary, it seems to me your projecting ought onto is. Libya is by all accounts uniquely defined by its reliance on tribes as social shakers and movers. Of course I'm not saying that's the only source of fissure (city vs rural likely being one of them too).

What I'm arguing is that yes, there seemed for a moment to be a pan-Libyan movement early in the rebellion, but that didn't take off for whatever reason, and now things are as they are, and that's the reality one has to deal with. So what about Benghazi? FWIW I think the only realistic endgame is a split that mirrors the old east-west divide in the region. And that is possibly the most realistic in terms of the outcomes that this intervention might achieve as well. Short of massive ground troops entering it will still be up to the rebels to consolidate a territory outwith Gaddafi's reach.

When Nehru stood up and said " You are Hindu, Jain, Muslim, Christian, Sikh or Parsi but you are all Indian. He was using nationalism in a democratic inclusive manner.

When democracy activists stand with Coptic Christians and say Coptics and Muslims one hand. We are all Egyptian. They are using nationalism in a democratic inclusive manner.

When Jinnah said to India's Muslims. Hindus Sikhs and Muslims cannot live side by side. Muslims are a nation. He was using nationalism in a divisive sectarian separatist manner.

When Islamists bomb Coptic churches in Cairo and Alexandria and say Copts are not Egyptians. They are using nationalism in a divisive, undemocratic, separatist manner

Nationalism isn't necessarily exclusivist at all. It can be democratic and inclusive

( This is a bit of a derail but if you are interested in exploring the question of nationalism in general a little more I have a thread on it here http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/threads/342627-Nationalism)

 

[Spion]

I think Libya has much more chance of a stable capitalist democracy than either Iraq or Aghanistan. You are forgetting your Marxist dogma. States aren't meant to jump from autocracies to socialist paradises. They are meant to go via exploitative bourgiouse liberal capitalism first

You're a little ill-informed and out of date, to say the least. That idea was junked about 100 years ago - in theory by Trotsky then in practice in Russia in 1917.

Yeah, stable capitalist democracy in Libya. To get that you need a stable capitalist class, not a set of quasi-tribal pyramids of patron-client relations and virtually only one way of oiling that particular machine (pun unintended)

 

[phildwyer]

Very sound and clear OP, so cheers dylans. My question is: so what? If your analysis is correct, that this isn't a democratic insurrection, but rather a civil war between the old regime and a new one that wants in, what should the rest of the world do about it? Nothing?

The "rest of the world" as you so delicately put it, wants two things--and two things only--from Libya.

1: Cheap oil.
2: No threat to Israel.

The "rest of the world" cares about nothing else. The "rest of the world" would not care if Libya was ruled by the Mekon so long as they secured those two ends.

And as we are now seeing, yet again, the "rest of the world" is very good at getting what it wants.

 

[kyser_soze]

I think Libya has much more chance of a stable capitalist democracy than either Iraq or Aghanistan. You are forgetting your Marxist dogma. States aren't meant to jump from autocracies to socialist paradises. They are meant to go via exploitative bourgiouse liberal capitalism first

I don't know - what was the political situation pre-colonisation? Who sits on most of the oil? If you've got a situation whereby G & his regime have been keeping a lid on seething & very old ethnic tensions that are still felt as valid by Libyans, and that the oil is all, or predominantly, on one patch of their territory, you'd probably see a vicious civil war break out.

 

[TruXta]

When Nehru stood up and said " You are Hindu, Jain, Muslim, Christian, Sikh or Parsi but you are all Indian. He was using nationalism in a democratic inclusive manner.

As you inadvertently point out, Jinnah and his many allies and followers didn't quite agree with Nehru (or you) on that one. One man's inclusiveness can be another's exclusiveness.

E2A that a quote from Jinnah illustrates what I'm trying to get at:

There is no other solution. Now what shall we do? Now, if we want to make this great State of Pakistan happy and prosperous, we should wholly and solely concentrate on the well-being of the people, and especially of the masses and the poor. If you will work in co-operation, forgetting the past, burying the hatchet, you are bound to succeed.

If you change your past and work together in a spirit that everyone of you, no matter to what community he belongs, no matter what relations he had with you in the past, no matter what is his colour, caste or creed, is first, second and last a citizen of this State with equal rights, privileges, and obligations, there will be no end to the progress you will make. I cannot emphasize it too much.

We should begin to work in that spirit and in course of time all these angularities of the majority and minority communities, the Hindu community and the Muslim community, because even as regards Muslims you have Pathans, Punjabis, Shias, Sunnis and so on, and among the Hindus you have Brahmins, Vashnavas, Khatris, also Bengalis, Madrasis and so on, will vanish.

 

[chilango]

...swaying those who we want to win to an anti war position.

I'm a little concerned by this...

Is this, indeed should this be a priority right now?

Whilst, I pretty much agree with your opposition to the intervention, surely the best, most useful thing we can do is to continue to resist cuts, build grassroots organisation etc. etc. here rather than being diverted into yet another anti-war campaign?

Obviously the two are in not isolation from each other, an obvious point being the cost of the intervention as opposed to the so-called need for cuts...but

...but most of the people you talking about "winning to anti-war positions" are already "anti-cuts" surely limted energy should be used most effectively. The best support we can give the "Arab Revolutions" is to press on with our own fight...

I may be wrong, but it's just a thought.

 

[Spion]

And as we are now seeing, yet again, the "rest of the world" is very good at getting what it wants.

To get those things will require someone pretty similar to gadafi achieving power, but a more great power friendly one, like the sauds

 

[phildwyer]

To get those things will require someone pretty similar to gadafi achieving power, but a more great power friendly one, like the sauds

Yes. And I'm willing to bet that this is exactly what will happen. Except that this time he will enjoy the added benefit of a permanent Western military presence in his country.

 

[invisibleplanet]

FWIW I think the only realistic endgame is a split that mirrors the old east-west divide in the region. And that is possibly the most realistic in terms of the outcomes that this intervention might achieve as well. Short of massive ground troops entering it will still be up to the rebels to consolidate a territory outwith Gaddafi's reach.

Which ''old east-west divide'' is this, only most of my ancient maps (going back to 1600s) show relatively non-linear demarcations dictated by landscape features both anthropic and natural, whilst the historical boundaries have, for millennia, been split into three, not two.

 

[dylans]

Can I try to steer the thread back on topic. If I can remind people of the question I posed in the OP. What do those who support the uprising against Gaddafi but who oppose Western intervention say to those who ask "what about Benghazi?

 

[TruXta]

Which ''old east-west divide'' is this, only most of my ancient maps (going back to 1600s) show non-linear demarcations, and the historical boundaries have, for millennia, been split into three, not two.

I'm talking about the old Tripolitania-Cyrenaica divide. Fezzan is of course in the mix as well, but it's much smaller both in terms of population and resources, plus it's historically been oriented towards the south (Chad, Niger, Mali). I don't think what happens there will be very important in the long run.

 

[phildwyer]

What do those who support the uprising against Gaddafi but who oppose Western intervention say to those who ask "what about Benghazi?

"What about the Congo?"

 

[kyser_soze]

That's a very pertinent question, especially since you've already pointed out that the primary concern of the West is Libya's oil. Clearly the vast deposists of rare metals for use in computing & mobile phones aren't as big a pull as the black stuff.

 

[dylans]

"What about the Congo?"

Or what about Manama or Gaza or course. But I don't want to get into a discussion of the obvious outrageous hypocrisy of Western politicians picking and choosing their crocodile tears. As I said I think those of us who support the revolutionary overthrow of Gaddafi but who oppose Western intervention owe an answer to those who genuinely see no alternative to Western intervention in the face of the imminent defeat of the Rebellion and it is to that question that I have tried to address the OP

 

[phildwyer]

That's a very pertinent question, especially since you've already pointed out that the primary concern of the West is Libya's oil. Clearly the vast deposists of rare metals for use in computing & mobile phones aren't as big a pull as the black stuff.

And clearly the Congo has never had a government sworn to the destruction of Israel.

 

[Spion]

Can I try to steer the thread back on topic. If I can remind people of the question I posed in the OP. What do those who support the uprising against Gaddafi but who oppose Western intervention say to those who ask "what about Benghazi?

What about it?

I am against the NATO intervention. I'd happily use its cover if I was a rebel but I'd be under no illusions we'd be targetted next if we tried to do anything that the great powers don't like

 

[phildwyer]

Or what about Manama or Gaza or course. But I don't want to get into a discussion of the obvious outrageous hypocrisy of Western politicians picking and choosing their crocodile tears. As I said I think those of us who support the revolutionary overthrow of Gaddafi but who oppose Western intervention owe an answer to those who genuinely see no alternative to Western intervention in the face of the imminent defeat of the Rebellion and it is to that question that I have tried to address the OP

I don't think "intervention" by a power whose only interests are its own can benefit anybody. Such a power will not even bother saving the lives of the rebels, and it will consider the local populace fair game as "collateral damage." It will also permanently occupy the country and impose governments of its own choosing.

 

[Spion]

And clearly the Congo has never had a government sworn to the destruction of Israel.

What's that got to do with the price of gefilte fish?

 

[kyser_soze]

If they had perhaps a Coalition force would've invaded on humanitarian grounds.

 

[dylanredefined]

The "rest of the world" as you so delicately put it, wants two things--and two things only--from Libya.

1: Cheap oil.
2: No threat to Israel.

The "rest of the world" cares about nothing else. The "rest of the world" would not care if Libya was ruled by the Mekon so long as they secured those two ends.

And as we are now seeing, yet again, the "rest of the world" is very good at getting what it wants.

They already had that Libya was no threat to anyone outside its borders any more.The col had signed up to the west's idea of how the world worked when it looked like bush was going to town on anyone who had wmds and wasn't his bestist buddy.
So its more the chance to finally give a problem dictator a final kicking.imho.
Bombing stuff in a desert is a lot easier than chasing guerrilla's through a jungle which is what sorting out the congo would involve.

 

[phildwyer]

What's that got to do with the price of gefilte fish?

If I were Israel, I would make it a priority to ensure that countries previously sworn to my destruction would never again find themselves in that condition.

Wouldn't you?

 

[kyser_soze]

Bombing stuff in a desert is a lot easier than chasing guerrilla's through a jungle which is what sorting out the congo would involve.

This as well.

 

[invisibleplanet]

I'm talking about the old Tripolitania-Cyrenaica divide. Fezzan is of course in the mix as well, but it's much smaller both in terms of population and resources, plus it's historically been oriented towards the south (Chad, Niger, Mali). I don't think what happens there will be very important in the long run.

The split of two polities along an east-west axis was made by the Italian fascists, who united both of these into one Libya c.1934.

Libya used to be three distinct entities - Tripolitana, Cyrenaica, and Fezzan. Fezzan is larger than Tripolitania. You're mistaken as Fezzan is very important. Where do you think the uranium is ...

 

[kebabking]

"What about the Congo?"

its a long way away and too big to do anything about.

Libya is nearby, it impacts on us - even if Libya was completely ignored the situation there would have some effect on Europe - pretty much everyone in the region and affected region thinks that some kind of political or military action is required, its do-able in a cheap and casualty-light manner and the removal of Gaddaf is likely to make our (politicians) lives easier.

none of which is true in Congo.

 

[PFay]

Good find, that's a very interesting blog.

This posting on Obama exempting himself and US forces from ICC warcrimes trials is also worth reading.

Thanks for the compliment - I'll be adding to these articles soon.
-PFay

 

[Spion]

If I were Israel, I would make it a priority to ensure that countries previously sworn to my destruction would never again find themselves in that condition.

Wouldn't you?

It would indeed form part of my fevered imaginings, yes.

But then I'd wake up and realise they had no connection to the current situation, either cause or outcome (which could be worse for Israel).

 

[TruXta]

The split of two polities along an east-west axis was made by the Italian fascists, who united both of these into one Libya c.1934.

Libya used to be three distinct entities - Tripolitana, Cyrenaica, and Fezzan. Fezzan is larger than Tripolitania. You're mistaken Fezzan is very important. Where do you think the uranium is ...

I could well be wrong about Fezzan, in terms of importance altho not population and economic input, but the split between east and west has in various incarnations and versions been going since the Roman times. Anyhoo, this is getting so off-topic that I'm gonna leave this thread and get back to doing some work.