To
summarize, Ukraine gave up nuclear weapons and regrets it. The Syrian
regime used chemical weapons and benefited. As nations meet in The Hague
for a nuclear security summit, here is a recent lesson — lesson No. 1 —
on weapons of mass destruction: Get them. Keep them. Or use them to
gain leverage.
Which leads to lesson No. 2: In our wired,
connected, thoroughly videographed world, exposure does not mean
attention or sympathy. In the case of Syria — now in its fourth year of conflict
— it has been possible to follow the progression of mass atrocities on
hundreds of YouTube videos. But reaction in the United States and the
West has seldom risen even to the level of numbness, which requires
giving a damn in the first place.
end quote from:
In Syria, the United States is learning the lessons of inaction
However, in Libya we have the lessons of Action as opposed to Syria where we have the lessons of inaction. Which outcome is better in the short run? In the long run? We don't know yet because history will tell us that during the next 50 to 100 years.
However, one thing we do know for sure. There have been a whole lot less deaths and disrupted lives in Libya than there have been and will be in Syria. That is for sure. (At least for now).
I don't think there was enough organization and record keeping in place to calculate how many people died or were displaced in Libya during the civil war. But, in some ways the civil war might not be over because a really strong leader like Qaddaffi has not arisen as of yet. But, if there is to be a democracy that lasts there, a democratic leader is much different than a dictator like Qaddaffi. It is possible that Libya might not be ready long term for a democratically elected leader and might create another Qadhaffi like figure to lead once again. It depends upon many factors. We will see.
For example, democracy hasn't worked perfectly in Russia either so we have Putin who is a throwback to leader like Stalin, Bresnev and Krushchev.
No comments:
Post a Comment