I confess myself totally amazed by this. How is it possible that the UN could dawdle for nearly 20 years on the much more dangerous and cruel Saddam Hussein, and then act so quickly with respect to Ghaddafi? There's something going on here that I just don't understand.
The French leadership in the UN was notable, both for its difference from French anti-leadership with respect to Iraq, and for its clarity and principled basis compared to what the U.S. had on offer. The French had huge financial entanglements with Saddam's Iraq, and that may explain much of the former. The latter is simply shameful.
Now I wonder, like the rest of the world, what we are actually going to collectively do about Ghaddafi...
Well, Ghaddafi is playing them for fools. He announced a "cease fire". So now you can expect that there will be no attack. His forces will sit tight a bit letting the UN cool its heels... Then there will be some more attacking... possibly another resolution... another cease fire... He's seen this played out before. The UN is utterly useless. They sat for 31 days doing nothing for Libya, they ignored Rwanda, dragged their feet on Iraq, are letting North Korea and Iran build up nuclear arsenals.... Did they even help the several times Israel was attacked by Syria, Egypt etc.? Where have then been in the decades of the Palestinian problem? And not so long ago there were embezzlement scandals. BILLIONS of dollars are going to an institution that has no value.... except ambitions to be a world governing body... is that what we want? Is that the best we can do?
ReplyDeleteOne wonders if the perceived weakness of the US has the French making a bid to be the next top dog???
ReplyDelete