In America it seems that the “Birthers” (who are among the ranks of the Tea Party movement) are the lone stand outs, withholding support for the Libyan people’s freedom. Citing our lack of involvement in earlier atrocities in such places as Sudan and elsewhere while echoing Gaddafi’s use of our fear of Al Qaeda as propaganda, they claim we have no right to be involved in Libya.
Conservatives seem overly concerned with Reality TV Star “the Toupee’s” (aka The Donald’s) bid for presidency, with all the support from the Fox in the hen-house entertainment channel that they can muster.
General Wesley Clark stated that the Bush Administration had plans to overthrow Libya as well as Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran by the year 2012. Those were extreme goals before the world monetary collapse at the hands of the International Bankers. Things have changed in Libya and the world since those plans were laid.
The age old division of Shia versus Sunni is tearing the Middle East apart. Factions are fighting for control of the future of the Arab world. In light of the war for oil, the war on terror and the geo-politics of the middle-east there is a need to be cautious about which side we support.
Instead of seeking to ramp up the divisions between Shia and Sunni, Israel and Palestine we need to focus on settling the local democratic changes the people are seeking to change. The Arab Awakening started from people seeking to improve their way of life in the context of a divisive and destructive environment.
The Arab Re-Awakening has included many democratic ideals, as well as frustration with the bombing of Churches, the desire to be free, and even Christians protecting Muslims. There are many things that we can find to support.
Do we need to try to influence their politics? Should we inject the ills of our society into theirs? Or should we just let this Awakening run its course? Is empire building and world governance really the way of the future?
Article comments
1 - Glenn Contrarian
Hm - I didn't know about Gen. Clark's revelation about Bush's aims. And there's one thing I'd add to the democratic ideals, that being how the Muslims in Egypt chose to bodily protect the Coptic Christians. That was something I had not expected to see.
2 - FEM4Eever
When you live in Egypt, you see that there's no true animosity between Christians and Muslims. Most crazed fanatics have spent quite a bit of time in the Gulf
3 - Catherine
Quite a few comments:
1. I don't understand what revival of the Arabic language you are talking about - Arabic has been spoken throughout the Middle East since before Islam. Are you talking about modern standard Arabic (Fushaa)? Also, I'm not sure which revival of Palestinian Christians you are referring to unless it is of Palestinian response to the colonization of its land?
2. I disagree strongly with your statement that these uprisings are similar to the American or French revolution. These uprisings are about two things - widespread, oppressive corruption and unemployment/lack of opportunity. Corruption is at the heart of almost every problem facing young people today in the Middle East. It's hard to start a business or keep a business because you have to pay bribes. You can't get into the best universities unless you're wealthy - which you often can't become unless you're corrupt.
3. Oil is certainly relevant to the geo-poltical situation, including the support/lack of support by Western powers for these revolutions, but in the case of Egypt and Tunisia was mostly irrelevant.
4. The church bombing in Alexandria also had little to do with the beginning of the Egyptian revolution - in fact, the revolution had been planned out long before that ever happened. There are also allegations that the old Minister of Interior planned the attack to insite sectarian violence in order to make a stronger argument for the old regime's legitimacy.
What many of these revolutions mean for U.S. interests is that we can no longer deal with Arab countries on the basis of a singular personality at the top, but rather with regards to the needs and wants of the populations. In many ways, these uprisings will force the U.S. to deal with these countries democratically rather then unilaterally.