The Washington Post ran a story today discussing the ‘concerns’ of President Obama about the levels of violence currently taking place in Libya. Bearing this in mind the US will be sending an ‘aid’ mission to Libya to not only attempt to alleviate the suffering of the people, but also and quite possibly most importantly make contact with the opposition.
As with all US policy there is a caveat that Hilary Clinton made very clear, when discussing the ‘opposition’ in Libya she said
“because we know that there are some with whom we want to be allied and others with whom we would not”.
This statement blatantly shows that the aid of America comes only to those who are willing to play ball, the rest are firmly in the “we don’t want to talk to you” camp.
The Americans are not the only ones with high aspirations for the future of Libya. Despite the bungled SAS mission failing to make the kind of contact Clinton dreams of, the British foreign minister William Hague continues to want to get involved in the politics of Libya.
Speaking to the BBC he said “bombing attacks that the world could see and understand, and it could be verified, on civilian and populated areas . . . would massively strengthen the case for the introduction of a no-fly zone”.
What Hague is trying to say much like Clinton is that Western involvement comes only when they deem it necessary, and they only deem it necessary when there is something in it for them.
As the saying goes “you should be careful what you wish for”, wishing and hoping for an American led no-fly zone may seem necessary in the heat of the battle. However there is no doubt it will mean a lost revolution for years to come, the 42 year western support for Gaddafi is proof of that.
