Thursday, March 3, 2011
Stability, Muammar Qaddafi and Oil
We are told that there are two kinds of international political relationship. The first is enunciated by the neocons. It expresses the desire to create a democratic state structure that will encourage freedom and equality. In theory, democratically elected nations are unlikely to sanction military adventurism as a means to resolving their conflicts. The second view is provided by the foreign policy realists. We should all ‘live and let live’. Culture, we are informed, is king. The clichés roll off the tongue like an insipid broth of chicken soup that slides down the gullet without ever touching the sides. So countries that stone to death its female child victims of rape, execute homosexuals, eat the liver of albinos and hang mothers who speak out against crimes committed in the name of the national deity (or the blasphemy laws) should be allowed their institutionalised slavery, child rape, torture and state legalised slaughter.
We are told that stability is paramount to the retention of international security and that without it we will always be fighting other nation’s wars for them. In the morally relativistic cesspool we now intellectually inhabit, flexibility has become our closest ally.
Of course the bombing in Bali (200 murdered), Madrid (also 200 murdered), on 911 (3,000 murdered) and in London (52 murdered) are simply aberrant and isolated chinks in the global armor of fortress hypocrite.
Europe has lectured Israel on the finer points of diplomacy. The State of Israel has been less than competent in framing a credible response to global threats of deligitimization. A people famed for their literacy have been barely literate in fighting off the narrative disinformation of their enemies. And Israel has scarcely addressed the supercessionist bigotry of the Kairos Document and the Methodist Church. Meanwhile the Arab world, convulsed by social and political upheaval kills its own people by the thousand and we intimate that we may consider proposing a possible strategy that could potentially include the threat of selective sanctions and maybe, perhaps even a wrap on the knuckles at the United Nations (for Libya’s president, Mr Qaddafi).
If we do not have a vision for the world in which we sojourn, we will be overwhelmed by the barbarians.
The West dealt with Libya as if Qaddafi’s forty year rule was not a dictatorship cemented in blood. Left and Right, liberal and conservative, the leadership of the West and not just the West, has sold its soul for the oil soaked sands of Arabia.