West must be cautious about celebrating victory; post-conflict
stabilisation and reconstruction has traditionally been tougher than
conventional war
By Gordon Robison
It is equally true that there have recently been some scenes of grotesque eagerness on the part of western companies and governments seeking to secure their respective ‘pieces' of Libya's oil and reconstruction pies (AP)
Regular
readers of this column will know that I have been sceptical of the
international operation in Libya since its outset. Sceptical, but not opposed.
So,
on the one hand, it was pleasing to see the 60-nation Friends of Libya group
gather in Paris last week to help the sort-of-ruling National Transitional
Council (NTC) unblock frozen financial assets and chart the country's future
course.
On
the other hand, it was a bit chilling to listen to the foreign leaders'
rhetoric. It is far too soon for anyone to be taking a victory lap in Libya.
The self-satisfied tone of the Paris meeting was an indication of where the
next set of dangers in Libya lie.
My
reservations about the international intervention in Libya have always focused
on staying power rather than motivation. To be sure, the Nato alliance's
operations over the last six months have been motivated in large part by
self-interest: that is how international affairs work.
It
is equally true that there have recently been some scenes of grotesque
eagerness on the part of western companies and governments seeking to secure
their respective ‘pieces' of Libya's oil and reconstruction pies.
I
take no pleasure in reminding everyone that getting indignant about all this
accomplishes nothing. Again, this, for better or worse, is how the world works.
But
let us also be clear: anyone who thinks that the US, Britain or France are
trying to ‘colonise' Libya and ‘steal its oil' is living in a fantasy world of
Cold War-era ideology. Some western and/or Asian companies are going to make a
lot of money in Libya over the next decade or so, but from that fact to
colonialism is a long road indeed.
Even
if western leaders wished to ‘recolonise' Libya (and, again, let's be clear:
they don't) the Libyan revolutionaries would surely represent the biggest
obstacle to that plan. Unfortunately, the same revolutionaries also represent
the biggest obstacle to a peaceful future for the country.
Messy affairs
On
one level it has been inspiring to see so much of Libyan society rise up in the
name of throwing off a tyrant's yoke. Revolutions, however, are messy things
and it is very premature for anyone to contend that this particular one is
over.
The
Libyan revolutionaries are a broad coalition. Among their senior figures one
finds expatriate university professors, former (in a few cases, recent) Muammar
Gaddafi's cabinet ministers and hardened Al Qaida fighters. It is hard to
imagine all of these people continuing to get along now that the immediate
enemy — Gaddafi — has been removed.
This
fact represents the greatest challenge to the success of Libya's revolution,
and it is also the area in which the international community most obviously has
a positive role to play.
Make
no mistake: there is a real danger that in the months to come Libya will
dissolve into a state of nature. Preventing this (or, at least, trying) is one
of the most important services the international community must offer Libya in
the weeks and months to come.
Blowing
a country apart is easy. Putting it back together with power sharing, some
semblance of popular government and the rule of law is far, far harder.
The
question is whether the international community will have the nerve to stay the
course. Post-conflict stabilisation and reconstruction (to use the formal,
wonky, term) is, in many ways, tougher than conventional war.
Getting
rid of Gaddafi was always going to be the easy part of the West's mission in
Libya. The really hard part begins now.
Going
forward, real engagement in Libya will require a commitment of years, not
months. The West in general, and America in particular, have made a hash of
this sort of thing in the past. From Somalia to Bosnia to Iraq the record is
not good. Which is not to say that it cannot get better. One of the West's
saving graces is the ability to (sometimes) learn from its mistakes.
The
question is less what the West will back in terms of change than what it is
willing to do to help positive change happen. In this regard the West's problem
over the last generation has never been power itself but, rather, staying
power.
Succeeding
in Libya is going to involve far more than mere rhetoric, which is why last
week's self-congratulatory words from Paris rang hollow.
-This commentary was published in The Gulf News on 07/09/2011
-Gordon Robison teaches political science at the University of Vermont
-Gordon Robison teaches political science at the University of Vermont
No comments:
Post a Comment