It's clear that rebel groups in Syria are becoming more fractious and fractured than ever. So much so that even the Arab League doesn't know who to support.
Remember when Dear Leader was ready to go into Syria, guns and drones blazing like Shrub in Iraq? Remember how Putin saved him with the joint chemical weapons disposal plan? Remember how, like Iraq, exile and non-exile groups of Syrians had a falling out?
We're more fortunate than ever that Obama's red line was drawn in lands far more shifting than those that received William B. Travis' sword point at San Antonio de Bexar.
A skeptical leftist's, or post-capitalist's, or eco-socialist's blog, including skepticism about leftism (and related things under other labels), but even more about other issues of politics. Free of duopoly and minor party ties. Also, a skeptical look at Gnu Atheism, religion, social sciences, more.
Note: Labels can help describe people but should never be used to pin them to an anthill.
As seen at Washington Babylon and other fine establishments
Showing posts with label Arab League. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Arab League. Show all posts
March 26, 2014
Obama can thank Putin for one thing: Syria
Labels:
Arab League,
Syria
July 15, 2011
Obama's war sure to widen
With the U.S. and other major nations officially extending diplomatic recognition to rebels in Libya, the war there ought to widen, extend longer, etc.
But, but, but ... this Congress-free bout of adventurism is being led by Dear Leader, Barack Obama, and has the official imprimatur of the UN. So, Juan Cole should be happy.
And, here's the basics that both Juan and Dear Leader should have considered pre-fighting, and apparently have magically changed in some people's minds, though, I doubt, in reality:
But, but, but ... this Congress-free bout of adventurism is being led by Dear Leader, Barack Obama, and has the official imprimatur of the UN. So, Juan Cole should be happy.
And, here's the basics that both Juan and Dear Leader should have considered pre-fighting, and apparently have magically changed in some people's minds, though, I doubt, in reality:
For weeks, U.S. officials have stopped short of full diplomatic recognition even as they inched up support for the Libyan rebels’ cause. The main concern was over how capably and inclusively the rebel leaders would govern, said a senior U.S. state department official who was not authorized to speak by name. ...Wild card: Since he's got nothing to lose now, and Beijing wasn't one of the "recognizers," what's to stop Muammar Gadhafi from making a deal with Hu Jintao? Both China and Russia declined to attend the "recognition" meeting, so this isn't a totally unrealistic situation. China would, of course, walk the Arab League tightrope carefully.
The worry among U.S. and other foreign powers was that after Gaddafi falls, the oil-rich country could become embroiled in tribal conflicts or ethnic tensions. A British-led group planning for post-Gaddafi Libya is recommending that the Libyan army be left intact to avoid the tactical mistake made after the Iraq war, when U.S.-led forces dismantled Saddam Hussein’s army.
Labels:
Arab League,
China,
Gaddafi (Muammar),
Jintao (Hu),
Libya
March 22, 2011
Juan Cole at least part wrong on Libya
Juan Cole, in defense of President Barack Obama says Libya is not Iraq. It's not that Cole doesn't make some valid points, it's that some of them are irrelevant, or, per a Glenn Greenwald, could be applied to dozens of countries besides both Libya and Iraq. In short, Cole comes close to becoming a Wilsonian interventionist, if not embracing it fully.
Civilians massacred? Happens in many countries.
Arab League support? C'mon, Juan, they're trying to deflect attention away from their own nasty suppression of Shi'ites in the Gulf.
None of the UN anticipates putting boots on the ground? Well, France and the UK still are making noise about hoping to topple Gadhafi.
Libya 2011 more a threat than Iraq 2003? Please, Juan. Maybe it would be to Tunisia, but to Egypt?
Civilians massacred? Happens in many countries.
Arab League support? C'mon, Juan, they're trying to deflect attention away from their own nasty suppression of Shi'ites in the Gulf.
None of the UN anticipates putting boots on the ground? Well, France and the UK still are making noise about hoping to topple Gadhafi.
Libya 2011 more a threat than Iraq 2003? Please, Juan. Maybe it would be to Tunisia, but to Egypt?
Labels:
Arab League,
Cole (Juan),
Egypt,
Libya
War by committee in Libya a snafu in waiting
If the latest proposal to get NATO and the Arab League more involved with the action in Libya isn't a clusterfuck-in-waiting, I don't know what is.
Here's part of the problem:
That said, how many more U.S. journalists can Gadhafi hold hostage before Americans push for something, anything "more" to be done?
And, I have to say, I disagree with Juan Cole saying Libya is not Iraq. It's not that Cole doesn't make some valid points, it's that some of them are irrelevant, or, per a Glenn Greenwald, could be applied to dozens of countries besides both Libya and Iraq. In short, Cole comes close to becoming a Wilsonian interventionist, if not embracing it fully.
Earlier Tuesday, French President Nicolas Sarkozy proposed the creation of a wider political committee to run the operation, which would include the Arab League as well as NATO members.Once again, military action without an exit strategy rears its ugly head.
"For us, the intervention is firstly an operation wanted by the United Nations. ... It is run by a coalition of member states, all of whom are not members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization," said French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe in outlining the proposal.
"This is, therefore, not a NATO operation, even if it must be able to rely on military planning and intervention capacities of the Alliance," Juppe said.
He said the new body would bring together foreign ministers of participating states — including Britain, France and the U.S. — as well as Arab nations. It is expected to meet in coming days, either in Brussels, London or Paris.
Here's part of the problem:
While all the countries in the coalition share a political goal — Gadhafi's removal from power — "not everyone agrees whether this is the military aim," said Shashank Joshi, an analyst with London-based Royal United Services Institute.And we know the Arab League doesn't want military intervention.
"Britain and France want to keep this as an option, because they see it as feasible and viable ... while the policy of the U.S. is that they are absolutely not willing to take military action to further that end," Joshi said. "They want to set a clear limit to their enmeshment, for symbolic and practical reasons."
That said, how many more U.S. journalists can Gadhafi hold hostage before Americans push for something, anything "more" to be done?
And, I have to say, I disagree with Juan Cole saying Libya is not Iraq. It's not that Cole doesn't make some valid points, it's that some of them are irrelevant, or, per a Glenn Greenwald, could be applied to dozens of countries besides both Libya and Iraq. In short, Cole comes close to becoming a Wilsonian interventionist, if not embracing it fully.
Labels:
Arab League,
Cole (Juan),
Greenwald (Glenn),
Libya,
NATO
January 20, 2009
Arabs can’t agree on Gaza
So much so, in fact, that a two-day Arab summit has collapsed, in part over how hard a line to take with Israel over Gaza.
That said, the 2002 Saudi peace initiative remains on the table, despite a push by Syria, among others, to get it withdrawn.
That said, the 2002 Saudi peace initiative remains on the table, despite a push by Syria, among others, to get it withdrawn.
Labels:
Arab League,
Gaza Strip,
Israel
May 26, 2008
Schizoid Tom Dispatch article on Iraq
I agree that, as we all know, this has been the neocons’ clusterfuck. I strongly disagree with Michael Schwartz, though, that the rest of the world has any obligation to get involved.
Morally? To riff on Colin Powell’s Pottery Barn, neither the EU nor the Arab League “broke” Iraq. We did.
Realpolitik? Iraq ain’t that big on China’s radar screen other than to watch us waste money and help out their soft power drive here and in sub-Saharan Africa. Russia? Green light to do biz as usual in Chechnya. EU? They want to keep a 10-foot-pole distance between Euro foreign policy and ours.
Morally? To riff on Colin Powell’s Pottery Barn, neither the EU nor the Arab League “broke” Iraq. We did.
Realpolitik? Iraq ain’t that big on China’s radar screen other than to watch us waste money and help out their soft power drive here and in sub-Saharan Africa. Russia? Green light to do biz as usual in Chechnya. EU? They want to keep a 10-foot-pole distance between Euro foreign policy and ours.
Labels:
Arab League,
China,
European Union,
Iraq war,
Pottery Barn rule,
Realpolitik,
Russia,
soft power
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)