I don't know if the Middle East will ever have a type of democracy that resembles ours, but it isn't for the lack of trying. Protests are sweeping across a region that has never exactly been the model of stability and despotic leaders are scrambling to maintain their grip on power. The region has always been one of contradiction when it comes to human and/or equal rights because of their tribal culture. But, we certainly understand the desires of people wanting to be free from the oppressive whims of maniacal despots and/or constitutional monarchs. Still, when everything is said and done, will forced change to existing power structures of the region result in any significant changes of attitudes? Now, that is something I am not so sure of. The Allied Coalition would probably like to have us believe that this intervention is about Democracy, but isn't it really about the oil?
Libya, for the most part, is easy pickings right now. For the Libyans, well, they have tired of Moammar Gadhafi and have been emboldened by the pro-democracy movements in the region, particularly in the neighboring countries of Tunisia and Algeria. As for the coalition, well, this is a good time to use their uprising, as a cause célèbre.
Sure, there is an element of humanitarianism, but I also believe that they would like to have a helping hand in installing a more favorable leader in a country that has vast reserves of oil, considering much of it is still untapped. Libya has a lot of upside for the West when it comes to oil as opposed to, say a Saudi Arabia which has a rapidly dwindling reserve.
I have to wonder that if there were a popular uprising in Saudi Arabia, would there be an eager coalition to quell a civil war in that sovereign nation? Well, given the coziness of the Allies with the Royal Family, I highly doubt if they would raise an eyebrow if "similar retaliations against insurgents" would illicit the same response seen in Libya.
So what is this really about anyhow? It is about Gadhafi! Not only is he despised, but he hasn't been a willing partner of the Western World nor has he played nice. Don't get me wrong here, I do not condone Gadhafi's treatment of his people or his fondness for supporting terrorism around the world. But what makes him different than some other despots in the region?
Saudi Arabia, for instance, is our ally but have they not covertly supported terrorism or attempted to spread their Wahhabism and hate for the Infidals? Wahhabism, for those who are unfamiliar is a form of Sunni which Muslims themselves consider extremist and/or heretical. What good is an ally that preaches hate for the West? Still,
the coalition would never go after them like they have gone after Moammar Gadhafi.
Democracy makes for a good story line in the media, but what is forgotten is that Western Democracy is rooted in the rule of law, which at least in theory, protects all its citizens on an equal basis. Will our type of governance ever be adaptable with Islam? Perhaps in some shape or form, but it won't be Jeffersonian, that is for sure.
Middle East society and culture has always been shaped by a tribal system where loyalties are predetermined by birth into a particular sect or clan. Individual freedoms and gender equality stand in direct conflict with what we view as a democratic society.
As I see it Democracy is the the furthest thing from reality in this conflict.
Too bad American refineries aren't set up to use Libyan Oil.