Tuesday, September 03, 2013

Absent Dictators

I didn’t learn much about the history or composition of Libya until fairly recently. But its current anarchic state seems almost inevitable in retrospect. Fiercely tribal and inheriting a giant arsenal, with a central state damaged by civil war and the purges:
Mutinying security men have taken over oil ports on the Mediterranean and are seeking to sell crude oil on the black market. Ali Zeidan, Libya’s Prime Minister, has threatened to “bomb from the air and the sea” any oil tanker trying to pick up the illicit oil from the oil terminal guards, who are mostly former rebels who overthrew Muammar Gaddafi and have been on strike over low pay and alleged government corruption since July.

Remember the standard accusation that the US always sided with dictators? Proof positive that the US didn’t care about anything but its own interests, or so it was always taken. And I’ll grant that the powers-that-be don’t care about anything but their own short-term interests, but it seems ironic that supporting dictators might sometimes be humane. A cowed Gaddafi was fairly harmless—he didn’t go in for quite as many foreign adventures after Bush put the fear of the US into him, and seemed (wonder of wonders) willing to cooperate on some things. And life is certainly worse for Libyans with multiple tyrants quarreling instead of one.

Who knows about the long term--maybe the fighters will converge on a new system that everybody gets used to and keeps the place running smoothly with a little liberty and pursuit of happiness. Or maybe it will break up into groups that fight each other for centuries.

As I've said before, I hold no love for Gaddafi--I knew people who'd be alive today if not for his meddling. But the "progressive march of democracy" through the world so in vogue in my earlier years seems to over-reach a little now and then.

"You may not make an end of them at once, lest the wild beasts grow too numerous for you."

No comments: