The Dilemma of the West

In a chaotic atmosphere; where the guns are running, the bombs are flying, the bullets are killing, mothers are crying, fathers are dying, children are hiding, blood is splitting, civilians are running. A plea for mercy, and a plea for intervention.

“From the look of things it’s like there are no civilians in Syria” Reynolds Agyapong retorted.  The international community went to Libya to protect them but what happens when a similar situation arises in Syria?

On February 15^th 2011 about 600 activists gathered at Benghazi to demonstrate against the arrest of Fathi Terbil, a human rights lawyer. Little were they prepared to fight and overrun the armoury of by then Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi. Barely a month after the attack, the international community had acted swiftly. By 26^th February the United Nations had passed a resolution for the assets of the Libyan leader and some members of his inner circle to be frozen. By 27^th June an international arrest warrant had been issued for him and some of the members of his inner circle. Most of all on 17^th March the United Nations had passed the Libyan no-fly zone in bid to protect civilians.

With France, Britain and Italy having a keen interest, David Cameron readily released some tornados war craft and Obama supported with some submarines. Berluscuni of Italy gladly gave away his military bases to make the no fly zone successful. Rumours if not facts, also had it that some military experts where deployed by the White House to Benghazi to help the revolutionaries succeed in their bid. With France also secretly giving weapons to Benghazi, there is no doubt that the interest of the West and the International community were very paramount.

In thinking about Reynolds Agyapong’s retort, I asked myself whether there are any differences between what happened in Libya and what is currently going on in Syria. What are the similarities and why is the USA and its allies adopting a different mechanism?

With Homes in disarray and civilians fleeing for safety, Why is the Camerons being so diplomatic in their approach? Are they giving Kofi Annan’s peace deal a try? The very deal for me I believe it’s as potent as the very paper on which they were printed. I have therefore tried to deduce some of what maybe the reason for the slow response of the West and the International community at large.

In the place, national interest may gradually be shifting. Though states like the USA have protection of human rights as one of their national interests, it is becoming very evident that Washington no longer wants to make the mistake they made in the case of Iraq and Afghanistan. Washington no longer wants to be actively involved in any Arab conflict. This was made evident when Washington refused to take command of NATO in the Libya No-fly zone edging Europe to take command.

Another factor to the slow response could also be that the Syrian revolution was probably so close to the political and electoral storms.  With Sarkozy preparing for his election and hence focusing on his campaign, Paris had lost much interest in saving the civilians of Syria. Not only Sarkozy facing election; with Washington also preparing for election later in 2012 therefore shifting the focus intervention to domestic politics. The Mayoral election in the UK may also have changed the sight of David Cameron whereas Mario Monti of Italy too new in office and busily finding a way out of the Italian economic crisis to interfere in Syria.

It is also possible that the international community have drained their coffers much enough that they do not want to add any extra cost to what they have already incurred. Although the actual true cost of the Libyan no fly zone may be known in monetary terms, the Reuters News Agency on 22^nd March reported that the Libyan no-fly zone could cost the coalition about 1 billion dollars. Although this may not be the actual figure of the cost of operation. I believe the figure may not be very far from this coat. The question therefore is whether or not the international community is willing to lose such a large amount of money at a time when key states are struggling with their Economic growth.

On the other hand the Arab league have not provided enough support for the West to do anything similar to that of Libya. This is seen as them not being as vibrant as they were in the Libyan revolution. In the latter they readily gave their blessings to the International community to intervene whereas in that of Syria they are much interested in sending numerous monitors and observers whose presence is as meaningful as nothing. Where is Qatar and Saudi Arabia who supported the international community to enter Libya?

Could it also be that the international community took revenge on Gaddafi’s Libya for his numerous acts against them? The Lockerbie bombing among others things may also be a reason to make the international community to run against him; whereas the international community may not have scar against Bashar al-Assad. It could be Tripoli had reconciled with the international world before Gaddafi’s fall. However it cannot be said that the international community had completely forgotten and forgiven him for his atrocities.

Though there may be other several reasons, these are what I can put out from my personal analysis. In spite of whatever the reasons may be it is my sincere prayer that Syrians come to enjoy the very freedom which all men ought to enjoy without pleading for it. As I have always maintained; the worse form of slavery is living under a dictator. A state never belongs to an individual it belongs to all citizens. All wisdom is not a residence of one’s head so every man has a right to have a say in government.

written by a Guest blogger