Why regime change in libya

This service is more advanced with JavaScript available. Advertisement Hide. Chapter First Online: 07 August This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access. Alaaldin, R. Magri Eds. Milano: Ledizioni.

Google Scholar. Cavanagh Hodge, C. Journal of Transatlantic Studies, 11 4 , — CrossRef Google Scholar. Eljarh, M. Foreign Policy. European Commission. The question is of course rhetorical and the answer is obvious: like them Gaddafi is guilty of insubordination to the proverbial godfather of the world: US imperialism, and its allies.

This means that the criminal agenda of Messrs Obama, Cameron, Sarkozy, and their complicit allies to overthrow or kill Mr. While the form, the context and the means of destruction may be different, the thrust of the relentless attacks on the living standards of the Libyan, Iranian, Venezuelan or Cuban peoples are essentially the same as the equally brutal attacks on the living conditions of the poor and working people in the US, UK, France and other degenerate capitalist countries.

In their efforts to consolidate the reign of big capital worldwide, captains of global finance use a variety of methods. The preferred method is usually non-military, that is, the neoliberal strategies of Structural Adjustment Programs SAPs , carried out by representatives of big business disguised as elected officials, or by the multilateral institutions such as the IMF and the WTO.

This is what is currently happening in the debt and deficit ridden economies of the United States and Europe. The powerful interests of global capitalism do not seem to feel comfortable to dismantle New Deal economics, Social Democratic reforms and welfare state programs in the core capitalist countries while people in smaller, less-developed countries such as Libya, Venezuela or Cuba enjoy strong, state-sponsored social safety net programs such as free or heavily-subsidised education and health care benefits.

Before it was devastated by the imperialist-orchestrated civil war and destruction, Libya had the highest living standard in Africa. Such a treacherous act by Libya's leader Moummar Qaddafi would only sow the seeds for a future conflict down the road in Furthermore, by promoting trade, development and industrialisation projects on a local, national, regional or African level, Gaddafi was viewed as an obstacle to the Western powers' strategies of unhindered trade and development projects on a global level.

In , the United States toppled the Taliban in Afghanistan but gave little thought about how to stabilize the country. Nation-building is not our key strategic goal. A year later, in , there were just 10, U. Two years later, in , Washington again failed to prepare for the day after, or post-conflict stabilization.

The Bush administration was eager to overthrow Saddam Hussein, and equally determined to avoid getting bogged down in a prolonged nation-building mission in Iraq. There was little or no preparation for the possible collapse of Iraqi institutions, widespread looting, or an organized insurgency. The first U. The NATO campaign in Libya was initially aimed at saving civilians in Benghazi threatened by Libyan government forces, but the objective soon expanded to toppling Qaddafi.

The Obama administration was determined to avoid any hint of nation-building in Libya, especially involving sending in American troops. Tough questions about who would reconstruct Libya or provide jobs for the rebel militia members were left unanswered—or even unasked. Libya disintegrated as rival militias feuded for power, and ISIS seized the opportunity to establish a franchise operation. But these days, it seems, a billion dollars buys you a shit show.

In Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, Washington toppled regimes and then failed to plan for a new government or construct effective local forces—with the net result being over 7, dead U. So far none has apologized for its involvement.

It is a matter of Egyptian national security. When America and Europe decided to initiate regime change. Actually, he meant building , not rebuilding, societies without civic traditions that the West takes for granted. Washington spent years attempting the same without much better success in Iraq.

The mistake in Libya was intervening, not intervening more heavily and longer. The most realistic outcome is to recognize separate states. Cyrenaica, hosting Benghazi, in the east, long was hostile to Khadafy and spawned previous revolts against his rule.

It is partly because of infighting among the trainees — fueled by ideological, political and tribal differences — over events back in Libya. Libya is a continuing tragedy.

Thousands of Libyans have died. Tens of thousands have been injured or driven from their homes. Like Humpty Dumpty, the country is increasingly unlikely to emerge whole. And whatever results is likely to be influenced if not controlled from afar.

Libya is the malodorous gift that keeps on giving. Yet there is little evidence that American policymakers have learned anything from the ongoing disaster. Which means more innocent people around the world are likely to die in future bungled attempts by Washington to violently transform other nations.