Friday, April 1, 2011
LIBYAN UPHEAVAL, A REVOLUTION OR AN INTERVENTION?
Icheoku asks is the lingering Libyan crisis still an organic revolution of and by the people of Libya or has it been hijacked by some external forces:- terrorists and al-quieda being assisted by a naive international coalition with remnants of the decimated Libyan military trying to earn their payday? It gets complicated even further because some members of the so called coalition of the willing are now re-interpreting the specific mandate given to prevent possible civilian massacre to include arming the rebels. They sure want to sell weapons as a boost to their home economies and their defense-industries are doing over-drive lobby to have thousands of death-agents parachuted into eastern Libya Benghazi. They just want to sell and it does not matter who these weapons are finally trained on or whose hands they eventually find themselves.
Icheoku says never in the history of international gang-ups against a sovereign nation has fallacy of intent been so blatant like the current attack on Libya's Gaddafi. If as claimed by these coalition of the willing, the primary purpose of "Operation New Dawn" is to prevent civilian massacre and protect civilians, what then is meant to be achieved by saturating Libya with arms and ammunition that has the same potential and capabilities as was meant to be prevented by the no fly zone - killing, injuring, wounding and maiming the same civilians the world was sold as being the reason for the attack on Libya? They want to arm the rebels yet they tell the world that Libyan civilians are protesting and demanding democracy? Who are these rebels and where did they train or which civilians are we even talking about, since big guns, missiles and rockets are not toys that civilians should play with. Let the truth be told, something is going on that triggered the attack on Libya's Gaddafi which no one wants to tell the world about; and borrowing the word of one so called revolutionary, may be we should all assume that "we are waiting but we do not know what we are waiting for."
If there is a revolution and the army still sides with the government, then it is not total or organic and it might as well pass for an attempted insurrection by some dissidents and any government worth its name cannot sit by and watch the security situation of its territory become compromised without doing something about it. Icheoku is not a fan of Gaddafi nor in anyway trying to understand his continued over-stay in power since 1968; but let the truth be told, if the Libyan people desire a revolution they should pay the price for freedom and not coerce the international community led by the United States of America to do their dirty works for them. That way they would value and appreciate it when finally it becomes a new dawn in Libya; but to instigate hostilities on a newly repentant Gaddafi is just outside the rational template; otherwise what then is the benefits of being a friend of the West or maintaining a cool head and not being obstinate like Kim Jong-iL of North Korea or Amandinejad of Iran or even the Chinese or the Russians. Mubarak was a friend of the West and he is gone? Ben Ali was a friend of the West and he has gone? Now Gaddafi who just repented from his old ways and is warming himself back to the West is now being bombarded by the same West and you wonder if such cuddling of the West is of any beneficial use indeed when they will so easily throw you under the bus at the slightest opportunity? Icheoku expected the West to stay out of the Libyan crisis and instead advise and support the revolutionaries from outside and not to in such blatant manner take sides in a supposedly internal revolution. Just for the heck of discussion, if Gaddafi goes today, would it be okay to still term what took place in Libya as a revolution or more properly called, an intervention? Also would the people of Libya have the face and be proud to celebrate their incompetence and inability to do it by themselves, an intervention by coalition of the willing which removed Gaddafi?
The only good thing out of this Libyan crisis is the futility and uselessness of all those military weaponry procured with billions of dollars that the government could have used to improve the lives of Libyans, which could not aid, protect Libya or repel the attack of the coalition of the willing. Icheoku asks what then is the use of these weapons when the same country that procured them cannot effectively use them to defend itself from attacks by the coalition partners, who freely made a mince meat of them and without much of any resistance. May be these African governments should stop or reconsider buying these weapons from these Western manufacturers or any other person and instead use their billions to improve the lives of their people, building infrastructures and capabilities. That way the peoples lives would become so much improved they won't care a hoot about who rules them. But when money that would have been used for peoples orientated projects are diverted for procurement of weaponry and those weapons in turn could not defend the country in its hour of need, faced with coalition partners attack, then it becomes "double wahallah for dead body" - a peoples revolution and an unanswered attack from the coalition of the willing. So tell Icheoku what use are these weapons when they are not merchantable since they cannot defend a territory?.
Further, Icheoku is miffed at the incessant dictating by the West for Africans on who should rule them and who should not, particularly because they usually do not mean well. They usually abhor any strong African leader and instead support and prop up a somewhat weakling who would protect their resource interest in the continent. Yet no one tells the West what to do and only asks how high do they want them to jump each time they command African so called leaders to jump up. Moummar Gaddafi is not a saint but at least he is a great African patriot who is passionate about Africa and does not take dictation from any Western country or their minions. The West saw him as a threat, an arrogant African who has refused to know his place and now their dogs of war has been unleashed to humble Gaddafi and cut him to size. Icheoku asks where is the African Union to protest the manner of this foreign intervention by a coalition of the willing who only coalesces when an African or Arab leader is concerned but gladly looks the other way as China decimates Falang Gong, Tibet and other ethnic minorities of Ungurs including those democracy-marchers in Tienanmen Square. Not to be forgotten, the 2010 Nobel Prize winner is still jailed by the communist China for his democracy activism, yet no coalition of the willing has been assembled against China. Iran killed several thousands during their suppression of democracy yet no coalition of the willing went to protect those innocent civilians? Russia has some other peoples freedom emasculated, yet no coalition of the willing in Moscow.
The fact that Moummar Gaddafi is the "King of kings in Africa" should have provided an impetus for a strong objection by the AU over the fate which befell him. But being also illegitimate themselves, they lack the moral fortitude to question a gang-up against a fellow African country, especially one ruled by the "King of all Kings in Africa?" Where are those African warriors of the yore to race up to Libya and protect the honor of their "King of Kings?" It is a complicated world and this coalition of the willing do not seem to have a one-size fits all policy thrust for every country or its leader and this is where the cookie crumbled. Anyway, until the final resolution of the impasse in Libya, Icheoku maintains that an insurrection is not the same as a revolution and therefore should neither be supported nor condoned. These AK-47 wielding bearded men are not revolutionaries, assuming they are even Libyans and the West should assist them at their own risk; but must approach them with caution in their aid in order not to be eventually swallowed by their own created quick-sand. Sanctions and sabotage of the government would have been the preferred option but definitely not bombing from thousands of feet up in the dark skies of Libya. To make matters more sinister, when a devastated Japan on bended knees could use all the help it could get, this coalition of the willing is busy gleefully destroying another country and you call that being responsible?