Posts by Russell Brown
-
Hard News: Libya, in reply to glennd,
Quite, and so the current coalition will clearly be going after Syria now, which is busy shooting civilians this week too.
Horrifyingly so. But I doubt you’ll see the same confluence of factors that led to the authorisation of the no-fly zone.
ETA: Specifically, the Arab League and African Union demanding it.
-
Hard News: Libya, in reply to Rosie,
It is a pity that the countries that are so keen to help enforce the no fly zone in Libya weren’t able to persuade their great friend and ally Saudi Arabia to stay the hell out of Bahrain.
Quite. Although firing on civilian demonstrators from warplanes and helicopters -- Libya's response to the pro-democracy protests a month ago -- seems objectively an order of magnitude worse.
-
Hard News: Arts and letters for Christchurch, in reply to James Caygill,
I’m not surprised you commented on the naming rights sponsor – but they have been great to us since Feb 22.
Good on them.
-
Hard News: Arts and letters for Christchurch, in reply to James Caygill,
What's the status of Southern Opera post-quake, James? Were you affected?
And I must say ...
Solid Energy Chorus
Sounds like a very now indie band. I'd certainly download their MP3s from Hype Machine.
-
Just a note that Media7 is a goodie tonight.
Garth talks about Japan, there there's CSI: Auckland (which you really have to see) and our very articulate panel.
9.05pm, TVNZ 7.
-
The CSM has an interesting interview with Ban Ki-Moon, who seems to have been a very significant player in this:
You have seen what has happened in Libya. We had many civilians being indiscriminately killed by government forces and even some mercenaries, according reports. This was a totally unacceptable situation, and the longer we wait, the more people would have been killed. That’s why, upon the strong recommendation of the Arab League, the Security Council has taken a swift action, decisive action. Now, if you look at the history of the United Nations, this swift action was very unprecedented.
-
Hard News: Libya, in reply to BenWilson,
But even so, you can’t ignore that a massacre in Libya is likely if Gaddaffi is not stopped.
The International Criminal Court has started an investigation into "crimes against humanity" allegedly already committed. Such prosecutions were a direct consequence of the intervention in Kosovo.
-
Hard News: Libya, in reply to Christiaan,
I don’t particularly have any answers to all this. I just find it disappointing that so many liberals seem to go to great lengths to convince themselves that a concern for ordinary people is the driving force behind these things.
It’s not. The leaders of U.S., Britain and France don’t give a shit about the people of Benghazi. Just as they don’t give a shit about the 1400 people massacred by Israel in 2009.
Why do you think Lebanon voted in favour of the Security Council resolution? Why did the Arab League and the Gulf Co-operation Council urge the no-fly zone? (Both making a clear demarcation between then and intervention on the ground, which they opposed.) Why does, according to the Guardian, Egyptian public opinion run ragingly in favour of the no-fly zone?
You say you don't have any answers, but it's more like you're not answering yourself any questions because you have the answers already. It's easy enough to roll out the boilerplate rhetoric, but a bit more complex to look at what's actually taken place here.
I'm not exactly cheerleading, personally. I have mixed feelings about this development and how it resolves. But it does seem clear that the resolution was possible because it was very widely supported in the region. There also seems to have been universal agreement -- not least from the Interim Transitional National Council in Benghazi -- that action should not extend to putting foreign troops on the ground. The League's statement also recognised the Interim Council as the legitimate political interlocutor in Libya, and declared that the Gaddafi regime had surrendered its legitimacy. So they've picked a side, even if you haven't.
-
Hard News: Libya, in reply to chris,
Based on this intervention, whatever is at stake in Libya could be perceived to be of more value to the UNSC than what Sudan had to offer. That Libya’s military is supplied by Brazil, China and Russia is surely relevant, as is the increase in gold and oil prices.
Brazil, China and Russia all abstained on the Security Council vote, so it's counter-intuitive to suggest they had an interest in intervention.
-
Hard News: Libya, in reply to chris,
I’m more than to happy to listen to other reasons/ theories for the UN’s selectivity in its interventions.
But here's the thing: the UN, even the Security Council, isn't some dark, conspiring bloc.
Here's the UN's own report on the security council resolution, which was carried by 10 votes with five abstensions.
Among the countries that spoke and voted in favour of the resolution were two that have already cropped up in this discussion: Lebanon and Bosnia-Hertzegovina.
On the other hand, China and Russia -- both arms-manufacturing nations -- abstained.