By Brigitte L. Nacos
“Once again, an Arab dictator is employing criminal violence in a desperate effort to remain in power - and once again, the Obama administration has been slow to find its voice,” the Washington Post editorialized yesterday and concluded with the punch line, “Shouldn't the president of the United States be first to oppose the depravities of a tyrant such as Mr. Gaddafi? Apparently this one doesn't think so.”
Today, an editorial in the New York Times criticizes that “It took President Obama four days to condemn the violence. Even then, he spoke only vaguely about holding Libyan officials accountable for their crimes. Colonel Qaddafi was never mentioned by name.”
The truth is that Gaddafi doesn’t give a damn about what Obama or any other leader in the West or elsewhere says or fails to say as long as condemnations are not accompanied by deeds that assure his quick fall.
Repeating President Obama’s remark that ‘the entire world is watching’ the horror in Libya,” Eugene Robinson argues in his column today that “watching isn't nearly enough. There is much more that world leaders - beginning with Obama - urgently must say and do.”
When everything is said in these and similar opinion pieces, there are no suggestions for measures that would actually stop Gaddafi’s reign of terror in the only venue that counts at this point: on the ground in Libya and most of all in the dictator’s stronghold Tripoli.
Actions by international and multinational organizations and by individual countries, whether the freezing of assets abroad, stopping arms shipments, and the like, are fine. But such measures will not strengthen the opposition nor weaken the Gaddafi regime in what may well be the decisive showdown today, tomorrow, or the day thereafter. Nor will threats that Gaddafi and his crew will be brought to justice--eventually.
The establishment of a no-fly zone in Libyan air space would prevent Gaddafi’s remaining forces from attacking the opposition from the air via fighter planes and helicopters; but considering the long decision-making process within international organizations, this in unlikely to happen in time to influence the outcome. And if it would happen, it would not be enough either.
“After Bosnia, Kosovo and Rwanda, the United States and its allies vowed that they would work harder to stop mass atrocities,” the Times editorial reminds Western governments without spelling out what working harder would mean.
Nothing short of putting boots on the ground in support of the opposition--now--will stop further and perhaps more catastrophic bloodshed if Gaddafi gets a chance to stage an endgame.
Given that Arabs and Muslims in the region do not trust the U.S. and the West, it is time for Arab governments in the region to step to the plate.
Thank you for your incisive assessment of the WP article. It is so fashionable to criticize our Commander-in Chief, without the bother of having to present a workable alternative. I agree with your comments on Libya's troubles. I also wonder which country is next.
Tony
Posted by: Tony Facade | February 25, 2011 at 08:23 PM
I wonder, too, where the next shoe will drop. Moreover, things are still not sorted out in Tunisia and Egypt either.
This may well be just the beginning of a long explosion.
Posted by: brigitte | February 26, 2011 at 09:35 AM