Quote:
Originally Posted by Isbjørn
At the time of the Western intervention in Libya, the African Union was desperately trying to find a peaceful solution, Gaddafi had accepted to hold democratic elections under international observation, and the General Secretary of the UN demanded an immediate ceasefire. The idea that the intervention was about saving civilian lives and introducing democracy, is dubious.
|
Exactly, Gaddafi was on tenuous ground at this point. The west saw an opportunity to remove an anti western dictator and did,
but they did it for ideology not imperialism.
If you want to say it was an imperialistic oil grab than you would have to prove that the removal of Gaddafi significantly benefited Europe, but it has not, oil production and exports to Europe have been cut in half do to the instability of the country now.
Likewise, the United States doesn't control the oil reserves in Iraq right now, its geopolitical rivals (China & Iran) have moved in and taken things over with the Iraqi government.
The problem with the west isn't that there is too much imperialism, it is that there is not enough. NATO removes the strong men under the belief they can establish a democratic system, but it doesn't have the guts to occupy that nation for long periods of time to ensure its stability, largely because they know their general public can't stomach body bags coming home in the name of nation building.
The West is in decline, it no longer has a surplus population to put troops on the ground like it did during the heyday of the British Empire, which is why we have to dump this "Wilsonian" virus of trying to make the world safe for democracy, by establishing them everywhere, because its turned the Middle East into a quagmire.
There is nothing stronger in the world than a current of political ideology, not even the most powerful multinational corporations on the planet can contend with them, they will simply get swept away.