It does appear that the Libyan civil war is about to end, sort of, with the rebel forces entering the capital, Tripoli. And they have met little if any resistance.
If this does indeed wind down the civil war, what will Libya look like a year from now. Six months from now. And most important, what will the new Libya be to the West and the United States. Will it be a friend or foe?
Part of the problem has been trying to figure out the rebels in the first place.
This recent article in The Christian Science Monitor sure does nothing to help. I would argue that because so many of the rebel leader are formerly of the Moammar Khadafi regime, it is hard to say what they will do once Khadafi falls. If he is still in the nation, will they find and kill him? Will they help Shepperd him off to another third-world dictatorship so he does not have to face the fury of his people? And what if they turn out to support an Islamist government in Tripoli?
Again, we do not know.
The linked article concludes thus:
Who are Libya's rebels? They're, well, Libya. Nationalistic, flawed, proud, inexperienced in government.
On balance, they're the best hope for a better Libya than what Qaddafi offered.
Hmm, I will question that balance. Not because I do not believe that the Libyan people want freedom. But many Iranians wanted that too and look what ousting the Shah of Iran did for them?
And what to make of the assassination of the rebel military commander,
General Abdul Fattah Younes? It appears that because the West and the United States support the Transitional Nation Council, as the rebels are now known, they are in line to get $30,000,000,000 of frozen Khadafi money. And if this report in Front Page magazine is correct, the money is just factionalizing the TNC more than it may have been. And it is a fact that there are al-Qaeda forces in the rebel coalition. And it is a fact that a faction if not al-Qaeda sympathetic are Islamist at heart.
If this does indeed wind down the civil war, what will Libya look like a year from now. Six months from now. And most important, what will the new Libya be to the West and the United States. Will it be a friend or foe?
Part of the problem has been trying to figure out the rebels in the first place.
This recent article in The Christian Science Monitor sure does nothing to help. I would argue that because so many of the rebel leader are formerly of the Moammar Khadafi regime, it is hard to say what they will do once Khadafi falls. If he is still in the nation, will they find and kill him? Will they help Shepperd him off to another third-world dictatorship so he does not have to face the fury of his people? And what if they turn out to support an Islamist government in Tripoli?
Again, we do not know.
The linked article concludes thus:
Who are Libya's rebels? They're, well, Libya. Nationalistic, flawed, proud, inexperienced in government.
On balance, they're the best hope for a better Libya than what Qaddafi offered.
Hmm, I will question that balance. Not because I do not believe that the Libyan people want freedom. But many Iranians wanted that too and look what ousting the Shah of Iran did for them?
And what to make of the assassination of the rebel military commander,
General Abdul Fattah Younes? It appears that because the West and the United States support the Transitional Nation Council, as the rebels are now known, they are in line to get $30,000,000,000 of frozen Khadafi money. And if this report in Front Page magazine is correct, the money is just factionalizing the TNC more than it may have been. And it is a fact that there are al-Qaeda forces in the rebel coalition. And it is a fact that a faction if not al-Qaeda sympathetic are Islamist at heart.
Again, a fundamental problem is exactly what hurt us in the Iranian revolution of 1978-79. We supported the wrong side.
Sure, the Shah was not a democrat. Yeah, he was not a paragon of freedom. Part of that was a paranoia that turned out to be correct. A paranoia about being ousted by backward-forces. And he was. Had he instituted true democratic reform, there may still be an Iranian monarchy. But, just supporting people that may be better than the devil we know did us no good. And thus the brutal dictatorial Islamic republic is now in control in Iran.
Sure, the Shah was not a democrat. Yeah, he was not a paragon of freedom. Part of that was a paranoia that turned out to be correct. A paranoia about being ousted by backward-forces. And he was. Had he instituted true democratic reform, there may still be an Iranian monarchy. But, just supporting people that may be better than the devil we know did us no good. And thus the brutal dictatorial Islamic republic is now in control in Iran.
If the Untied States does not figure out these rebels and how they will govern, it will be Iran all over again.
As the article in The Christian Science Monitor noted, because of Khadafi's form of rule, there really are no reliable institutions that the people will respect.
And that is a real and present danger.
I am glad that Khadafi is on his way out. But what will take over could be worse for the West and the United States. And having a hands-off attitude will not help matters either.
No comments:
Post a Comment