-
7/30/2019 The Great Libyan Distraction by Immanuel
Wallerstein
1/3
"The Great Libyan Distraction"April 01, 2011
By Immanuel Wallerstein
The entire Libyan conflict of the last month - the civil war in
Libya, the U.S.-led military action againstGaddafi - is neither
about humanitarian intervention nor about the immediate supply of
world oil. It isin fact one big distraction - a deliberate
distraction - from the principal political struggle in the
Arabworld. There is one thing on which Gaddafi and Western leaders
of all political views are in totalaccord. They all want to slow
down, channel, co-opt, limit the second Arab revolt and prevent it
from
changing the basic political realities of the Arab world and its
role in the geopolitics of the world-system.
To appreciate this, one has to follow what has been happening in
chronological sequence. Althoughpolitical rumblings in the various
Arab states and the attempts by various outside forces to
supportone or another element within various states have been a
constant for a long time, the suicide ofMohamed Bouazizi on Dec.
17, 2010 launched a very different process.
It was in my view the continuation of the spirit of the world
revolution of 1968. In 1968, as in the lastfew months in the Arab
world, the group that had the courage and the will to launch the
protestagainst instituted authority were young people. They were
motivated by many things: thearbitrariness and cruelty and
corruption of those in authority, their own worsening
economicsituation, and above all the insistence on their moral and
political right to be a major part of
determining their own political and cultural destiny. They have
also been protesting against thewhole structure of the world-system
and the ways in which their leaders have been subordinated tothe
pressures of outside forces.
These young people were not organized, at least at first. And
they were not always totally cognizantof the political scene. But
they have been courageous. And, as in 1968, their actions
werecontagious. Very soon, in virtually every Arab state, without
distinction as to foreign policy, they havethreatened the
established order. When they showed their strength in Egypt, still
the key Arab state,everyone began to take them seriously. There are
two ways of taking such a revolt seriously. One isto join it and
try thereby to control it. And one is to take strong measures to
quash it. Both havebeen tried.
There were three groups who joined it, underlined by Samir Amin
in his analysis of Egypt: thetraditional and revivified left, the
middle-class professionals, and the Islamists. The strength
andcharacter of these groups has varied in each of the Arab
countries. Amin saw the left and themiddle-class professionals (to
the extent that they were nationalist and not
transnationalneoliberals) as positive elements and the Islamists,
the last to get on the bandwagon, as negativeelements. And then
there is the army, always the bastion of order, which joined the
Egyptian revoltlate, precisely in order to limit its effect.
So, when the uprising began in Libya, it was the direct result
of the success of the revolts in the twoneighboring countries,
Tunisia and Egypt. Gaddafi is a particularly ruthless leader and
has beenmaking horrific statements about what he would do to
traitors. If, very soon, there were strongvoices in France, Great
Britain, and the United States to intervene militarily, it was
scarcely becauseGaddafi was an anti-imperialist thorn in their
side. He sold his oil willingly to the West and he boasted
-
7/30/2019 The Great Libyan Distraction by Immanuel
Wallerstein
2/3
of the fact that he helped Italy stem the tide of illegal
immigration. He offered lucrativearrangements for Western
business.
The intervention camp had two components: those for whom any and
all military interventions bythe West are irresistible, and those
who argued the case for humanitarian intervention. They wereopposed
very strongly in the United States by the military, who saw a
Libyan war as unwinnable andan enormous military strain on the
United States. The latter group seemed to be winning out,
whensuddenly the resolution of the Arab League changed the balance
of forces.
How did this happen? The Saudi government worked very hard and
effectively to get a resolutionpassed endorsing the institution of
a no-fly zone. In order to get unanimity among the Arab states,the
Saudis made two concessions. The demand was only for a no-fly zone
and a second resolutionwas adopted opposing the intrusion of any
Western land forces.
What led the Saudis to push this through? Did someone from the
United States telephone someonein Saudi Arabia and request this? I
think it was quite the opposite. This was an instance of the
Saudistrying to affect U.S. policy rather than the other way
around. And it worked. It tipped the balance.What the Saudis
wanted, and what they got, was a big distraction from what they
thought mosturgent, and what they were doing - a crackdown on the
Arab revolt, as it affected first of all SaudiArabia itself, then
the Gulf states, then elsewhere in the Arab world.
As in 1968, this kind of anti-authority revolt creates strange
splits in the countries affected, andcreates unexpected alliances.
The call for humanitarian intervention is particularly divisive.
Theproblem I have with humanitarian intervention is that I'm never
sure it is humanitarian. Advocatesalways point to the cases where
such intervention didn't occur, such as Rwanda. But they never
lookat the cases where it did occur. Yes, in the relatively short
run, it can prevent what would otherwisebe a slaughter of people.
But in the longer run, does it really do this? To prevent Saddam
Hussein'sshort-run slaughters, the United States invaded Iraq. Have
fewer people been slaughtered as aresult over a ten-year period? It
doesn't seem so.Advocates seem to have a quantitative criterion. If
a government kills ten protestors, this is"normal" if perhaps
worthy of verbal criticism. If it kills 10,000, this is criminal,
and requireshumanitarian intervention. How many people have to be
killed before what is normal becomescriminal? 100, 1000?
Today, the Western powers are launched on a Libyan war, with an
uncertain outcome. It will probablybe a morass. Has it succeeded in
distracting the world from the ongoing Arab revolt? Perhaps.
Wedon't know yet. Will it succeed in ousting Gaddafi? Perhaps. We
don't know yet. If Gaddafi goes, whatwill succeed him? Even U.S.
spokesmen are worrying about the possibility that he will be
replacedeither with his old cronies or with al-Qaeda, or with
both.
The U.S. military action in Libya is a mistake, even from the
narrow point of view of the UnitedStates, and even from the point
of view of being humanitarian. It wont end soon. President Obamahas
explained his actions in a very complicated, subtle way. What he
has said essentially is that if thepresident of the United States,
in his careful judgment, deems an intervention in the interests of
theUnited States and the world, he can and should do it. I do not
doubt that he agonized over hisdecision. But that is not good
enough. It's a terrible, ominous, and ultimately self-defeating
proposition.In the meantime, the best hope of everyone is that
the second Arab revolt renews steam - perhapsa long shot now - and
shakes first of all the Saudis.by Immanuel Wallerstein
[Copyright by Immanuel Wallerstein, distributed by Agence
Global. For rights and permissions,including translations and
posting to non-commercial sites, and contact:
[email protected],1.336.686.9002 or 1.336.286.6606.
Permission is granted to download, forward electronically, or
e-
mailto:[email protected]
-
7/30/2019 The Great Libyan Distraction by Immanuel
Wallerstein
3/3
mail to others, provided the essay remains intact and the
copyright note is displayed. To contactauthor, write:
[email protected].
These commentaries, published twice monthly, are intended to be
reflections on the contemporaryworld scene, as seen from the
perspective not of the immediate headlines but of the long
term.]
From: Z Net - The Spirit Of Resistance LivesURL:
http://www.zcommunications.org/the-great-libyan-distraction-by-immanuel-wallerstein
http://www.zcommunications.org/the-great-libyan-distraction-by-immanuel-wallersteinmailto:[email protected]
