Friday, November 30, 2012

Situation In Libya


Brief: Situation in Libya
            In February of 2011, protestors took to the streets of Benghazi, demanding that the ruler of 42 years, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, make democratic reforms or step down. Gaddafi’s private security forces met these protests with force, and fired on the crowds. This situation escalated into a revolution in which NATO supplied the rebel forces with arms and set up a no-fly zone to protect them from aerial attacks. Member countries of NATO brought in aircraft carriers and jets to enforce the no-fly zone. In July 2011, Gaddafi and his son Saif al-Islam announced that they supported elections and could hold them within three months, but NATO rejected the offer. On September 16, the National Transitional Council (NTC) was recognized by the UN as the legal representative of Libya. On October 20, Colonel Gaddafi was killed during a battle in his hometown. On October 23, the NTC declared “the liberation of Libya” and the end of the war.
            In August 2012, the NTC handed power to the General National Congress. The 200 seat Congress was elected in July 2012, and it had more liberal, secular, and independent candidates elected than the Justice and Construction Party, which is aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood. The chairman of the Congress, Mohamed Magarief, is currently the interim head of state. The Prime Minister is Mustafa Abu Shagur, who has promised to make security a priority. The transition to a democratic government has not been seamless. The country is still fighting against Islamist militias scattered in various regions, and on September 12, 2012, the American embassy in Libya was stormed by a mob (and possibly trained military forces) and the ambassador, Christopher Stevens, as well as 3 aides, were killed. The violence coincided with protests following the release of a video, The Innocence of Islam, on YouTube, which mocked the prophet Muhammad. It was later released that protests related to the video had nothing to do with the attack. The attack was organized and sophisticated, according to the Libyan government.

Motion: THBT Libya is a failure

Pro:
1.      Western intervention led to more deaths
a.       From the time that NATO got involved in the Libya conflict until its resolution, approximately 30,000 more lives were lost. NATO’s weapons and air support only encouraged more violence and continued a conflict that had already taken thousands of lives.
b.      There is no reason to believe that this situation will be different from other countries that toppled authoritarian regimes. In Kosovo, we saw that the post-war regime is liable to be criminal and corrupt. After the liberation of Eritrea and Ethiopia from a brutal dictatorship 20 years ago, the countries soon degenerated into authoritarianism and war. A revolution like this will always lack stability, and those who are unhappy with the government will simply have another revolution, forcing those in power to get out of the way or to tighten security.
2.      The intervention in Libya sets a bad precedent
a.       The UN mandate that authorized action in Libya was supposed to be on the basis of protecting the people of Libya. What this turned into was full-blown Western interventionism, and the “responsibility to protect” was used as a pretext for toppling a vulnerable government. NATO countries overstepped their bounds, which makes future situations like Libya potentially dangerous and hard to control.
b.      Now there are two harms coming out of Libya:
                                                              i.      Nations that we may have attempted to negotiate with previously see Libya as evidence that the West will not negotiate and will instead jump to action. These nations will move away from negotiations and instead start to arm themselves to protect against an invasion
                                                            ii.      Since this conflict served no distinct Western interest, and due to the fact that it is viewed by some as a success, future administrations of the US and other nations are more likely to take the risk of sending in forces to topple a dictator, aside from UN protocol or international law
c.       In the US, Congress is supposed to be the one to declare a war, and the executive branch went around them to wage war in Libya. The executive declaring war without represented leaders approving it is not a good precedent to have for our country. It means future presidents can go to war wherever and whenever they want.
3.      Security Issues in Libya
a.       The killing of the U.S. ambassador and 3 aides in Benghazi shows that there is still much to be done in Libya. The new government has not found a way to control protests and opportunistic militant groups. If this continues to be the case, it is unlikely that Libya will become stable anytime in the near future.
b.      In recent weeks (Oct 2012) Salafists have attacked shrines in Tripoli (capital) and elsewhere. These shrines have been venerated for centuries by Sufis, who practice a more mystical form of Islam. Importantly, the Salafists were allowed to destroy these sites for over 48 hours without the ministry of interior or the police lifting a finger to stop them.
                                                              i.      This suggests that extreme Islamists (like the Salafists) have friends in high places protecting them or that the government’s security is to weak or disorganized to deal with them
Con:
1.      Libyans have a democratic, moderate government
a.       On September 12, 2012, the General National Congress elected Mustafa Abushagur, a secular-minded engineering professor, as prime minister. Another body will write a constitution, with the hopes of electing a parliament within 18 months.
b.      In the congressional election in July 2012, the Muslim Brotherhood only gained 17 out of 80 seats, whereas a coalition of secularists, liberals and milder Islamists won 39 seats. 120 of the 200
2.      This was an organic uprising with multilateral help
a.       Organic
                                                              i.      At its core, the revolution was always a Libyan struggle. The rebels truly wanted a change of power, and they were willing to make the sacrifices necessary to achieve success. This was always about Libyans fighting against an oppressive government, unlike Iraq, which had no organic uprising before the U.S. invasion
b.      International
                                                              i.      This was a multilateral effort of NATO countries. The U.S. took out Libya’s air defense system and provided the majority of the intelligence, and France and Britain provided air and naval assets which struck over 40% of all targets. Italy hosted hundreds of aircraft at seven airbases.
                                                            ii.      This was by no means a U.S. interventionist effort, which is a nice change from the actions in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last decade. The actions in Libya displayed international cooperation and the ability to support a human rights cause without attempting to obtain selfish gains.
3.      Libya’s economy looks hopeful
a.       One of the biggest concerns during and after the revolution was the state of the Libyan economy. Oil fields and pipelines had been damaged, and unemployment and growth were way down. A weak economy can add to political unrest and frustration. However, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in July 2012 estimated that Libya’s GDP (which fell by 60 percent during the fighting) will grow by more than 116 percent this year (2012), then settle down to growth of over 13 percent over the following two years.
b.      One of the reasons that Libya’s economy can grow so quickly has to do with its oil production. Libya has only 6.7 million people and about 47 billion barrels of proven oil reserves. This allows for a quick economic recovery, and gives a large cushion for bad politics that might make poor economic decisions.
Articles:

No comments:

Post a Comment