The unanswered question to be raised is whether the west are eager to see democracy implemented in the Arab World. Seemingly, the answer is “YES” as this is clear from all statements released by many western officials at different levels as well as human rights organisations. The west claim that they have been making many sacrifices by fighting for the freedom of other nations. Accordingly, their involvement, in many wars on different fronts, has been to safeguard democracy and defend human rights against any state abuse of power
or otherwise. However, virtually the situation on the ground is complicated and it is indeed hard to digest. The Iraqi war was first justified under the pretext that Saddam Hussain possessed weapons of mass destruction, and he accordingly posed a serious threat to the international peace and security. The Iraqis then had the opportunity to overthrow a corrupt dictator of the worst type. So they generally supported any action that would take away the sheer tyranny that they had to tolerate for long years. Later, many facts became known. The fundamental aims for which the military campaign against Iraq was launched were far from being true. The consequences have been long-term suffering for all Iraqis. The problematic current situation is beyond the capability of the Iraqi government to deal with. The post-tyranny and -war legacies have overshadowed the Iraqi social, political and economic landscapes. The social texture of the nation is severely torn, the sectarian conflicts have turned into bloody clashes and suicide bombings, the power struggle leads to no public consensus and the Iraqi deteriorating economy can never recover effectively with the absence of all forms of security. The western nations seemed to be doing their best to help build a democratic and stable Iraq, but the situation went out of control. The Iraqi case has proven that the post-dictatorship stage is more difficult than the ouster of the brutal dictator himself. The Libyan scene is different from that of Iraq although both peoples went through the same experience. Both lived with tyranny for long and have had to endure its legacies. The Libyans, unlike the Iraqis, had to fight the Gaddafi brigades on the ground; that was backed by NATO air forces. In fact, the west offered protection for the Arab dictators and supported them to remain in power for so long by ignoring their autocratic behaviour. However, when the uprisings erupted in the Arab region, the west decided to support any democratic change. But the west seems to be influencing the change in the region and adapting it to their own interests. If the west are sincerely determined to help Libya recover from its deep wounds, they should take practical steps towards that. They have delayed unfreezing the Libyan assets in the western banks. Delivering fully the assets to Libya has not yet been completed. Unfreezing all assets can contribute to satisfying the growing demands of the Libyans and put the government plans into effect. Crises in different Arab states have not been similarly dealt with. The military intervention took place in Iraq and Libya has not been the option for Yemen, Tunisia, Egypt and Syria. Apart from the Syrian case, the revolts in these countries have not been as bloody as that in Libya. The international community must reach an agreement by means of which the bloodshed in Syria is immediately stopped. Some influential powers like China and Russia are blamed for their VETO against a UN Security Council resolution condemning what happens in Syria. However, the western nations do not seem enthusiastic about an urgent action against the Syrian regime. In Libya, right from the beginning of the uprising, all took strict measures extremely quickly: UN Security Council, Arab league, European Union…etc. The western support for the Syrians has taken the form of empty slogans with no practical actions.
or otherwise. However, virtually the situation on the ground is complicated and it is indeed hard to digest. The Iraqi war was first justified under the pretext that Saddam Hussain possessed weapons of mass destruction, and he accordingly posed a serious threat to the international peace and security. The Iraqis then had the opportunity to overthrow a corrupt dictator of the worst type. So they generally supported any action that would take away the sheer tyranny that they had to tolerate for long years. Later, many facts became known. The fundamental aims for which the military campaign against Iraq was launched were far from being true. The consequences have been long-term suffering for all Iraqis. The problematic current situation is beyond the capability of the Iraqi government to deal with. The post-tyranny and -war legacies have overshadowed the Iraqi social, political and economic landscapes. The social texture of the nation is severely torn, the sectarian conflicts have turned into bloody clashes and suicide bombings, the power struggle leads to no public consensus and the Iraqi deteriorating economy can never recover effectively with the absence of all forms of security. The western nations seemed to be doing their best to help build a democratic and stable Iraq, but the situation went out of control. The Iraqi case has proven that the post-dictatorship stage is more difficult than the ouster of the brutal dictator himself. The Libyan scene is different from that of Iraq although both peoples went through the same experience. Both lived with tyranny for long and have had to endure its legacies. The Libyans, unlike the Iraqis, had to fight the Gaddafi brigades on the ground; that was backed by NATO air forces. In fact, the west offered protection for the Arab dictators and supported them to remain in power for so long by ignoring their autocratic behaviour. However, when the uprisings erupted in the Arab region, the west decided to support any democratic change. But the west seems to be influencing the change in the region and adapting it to their own interests. If the west are sincerely determined to help Libya recover from its deep wounds, they should take practical steps towards that. They have delayed unfreezing the Libyan assets in the western banks. Delivering fully the assets to Libya has not yet been completed. Unfreezing all assets can contribute to satisfying the growing demands of the Libyans and put the government plans into effect. Crises in different Arab states have not been similarly dealt with. The military intervention took place in Iraq and Libya has not been the option for Yemen, Tunisia, Egypt and Syria. Apart from the Syrian case, the revolts in these countries have not been as bloody as that in Libya. The international community must reach an agreement by means of which the bloodshed in Syria is immediately stopped. Some influential powers like China and Russia are blamed for their VETO against a UN Security Council resolution condemning what happens in Syria. However, the western nations do not seem enthusiastic about an urgent action against the Syrian regime. In Libya, right from the beginning of the uprising, all took strict measures extremely quickly: UN Security Council, Arab league, European Union…etc. The western support for the Syrians has taken the form of empty slogans with no practical actions.
The way the west pushed for a tough action against the onetime Libyan regime seemed to be motivated by some western economic and security interests. First Libya is an oil-rich country, which is geographically close to the western industrial institutions. Second, for security reasons related to Islamist extremism and illegal immigration from Libya to Europe, the west have to closely observe the political change in Libya. Pressure from the international community on the Syrian regime has to promptly increase so as to put an end to any deliberate power abuse under the watchful eye of all nations. If the superpowers do not fight defensively to protect human rights against any abuse in Syria and elsewhere, their credibility is under suspicion. Will the dreams of the Arabs for democracy come true? The most important point to be raised is whether the outside influencing forces work for the real interest of the Arab World. Moreover, achieving those dreams depends basically on our awareness of the importance of practicing democracy.
(Hussain Kreiba is a staff member at the university of Al-Mergib, College of Education, Department of English, email: hussain.kreiba@yahoo.co.uk) 16/03/2012 16:01:00
Source TripoliPost
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق