Thursday, April 07, 2011


Libya And The Bloody Roads To Peace Ahead

NATO, once again, has recently proven its efficacy on the world stage with its recent gains in efforts to topple Qaddafi's brutal dictatorship. The response from NATO with its pending objective to oust the despot should act as a sea changing template in how global organizations might approach many global flash points that loom ahead. NATO now needs to morph into GATO, (Global Alliance Treaty Organization). It seems that a clear evaluation of history makes it imperative that the form and structure of intervention at the global level should be the highest priority for the community of nations to consider. The new game changer nations in the near future should include China, India, Brazil and Russia- but also symbolically, every nation that believes global solidarity protects their own security interests as well. NATO should undergo a radical paradigm change. This change and how it is conducted will determine whether or not humanity progresses or precipitously falls back into a retrograde devolution.The form and structure (global coalitions) and their joint decision to go into Libya far outweighs the justifying content for the action.

This article now jukes into a philosophical digression, but will meander back to tie into the Libyan crisis..

It is becoming increasingly apparent that if the superpowers of the developed world do not begin to dispossess ourselves of this concept of “National Interest” as the prime mover in all our domestic and foreign policy decisions, then we are marking ourselves as a species for an early exit; that the very concept of the “Nation State,” (a relatively recent liberal upstart model in the historical calendar)needs to be understood in its contextual necessity, and from this understanding, realize the paradigm shift needs to recognize a new global model.

The global model must begin to see that the vital work ahead involves a keen insight that sees the profound differences in the rates of civilizational maturity co-existing on the planet at the same time. We still have pockets of hunter gatherers animating their primal survival rituals through moon dances that ensure the gods continue to bless their harvests and their hunts. At the same time, within the same species, we have astronauts that have actually danced on that same moon the primitives dance and sing and chant to.
We have the whole range in between these 2 extremes. From cultures that barely survive in abject poverty , still informed by dark age religious fervor, and are ruled by dictators and theocrats who oppress by fear and coercion, to we democrats who have no want of our next meal, and have little regard or knowledge that this abject hunger and want still stirs in the belly of a near majority of the people on the planet.

We have institutions of great learning and technologies that devise the physics to get us to the moon by harnessing the force that holds stars together. We need to understand that we are still competing with those other modern civilizations that are either our near equals or gaining quickly on the curve of material living standard, and that this very competition is killing the fragile veil of atmosphere that we breathe and is destroying the mother womb of the earth and all her life giving waters. But that the real threat in the long run will come from this exponentially populating other world still snagged desperately back there in time, but who might get their hands on the dark tools that we moderns have unleashed through the centers of higher learning referred to above. And they will be compelled from this want in their bellies, the fervor of their gods and the humiliation of their lot in life to unleash the power that holds stars together. It is this gap, this very dark and deep gulf, that threatens all of humanity; from the primitives yawping at the moon to the astrophysicist who devises space engines that may get us to Alpha Centauri sometime soon. That old isolationist and geographical separations no longer can insure our security.

It seems to me that 10 year’ plans have to give way to 100 year plans. It seems to me that for this reason it is supremely necessary that some new emphasis on ”Global Interest” -where what fits the needs of one, fits the needs of all in the future. This new mental ideation graft needs to be radically ramped up. The models of the UN and NATO are already there but must undergo a massive upscale program that changes the lexicon from “wars” to development and humanitarian missions. That the great Kennedyesque goals of making the moon by the end of the decade to “beat the Russians” does not apply today. In fact it fatally threatens.

It is from this premise that we should see the incumbency for the developed nations to begin to evolve a conscious awareness that the only way to close this enormous gulf of disparity, and thus to protect their own interests concomitant w/ the developing world, is to begin the project of these humanitarian/nation assisting missions. Libya is one such project.

from the fbook discussion.... [Your argument is that we do not have a game plan over all that addresses the aims of the mission, who we support, the brutal realities of a long simmering and intractable civil war and what’ outcomes we can expect seem local issues as compared to the task at hand over the next 100 years.]

Francis Fukuyama’s ‘end of history” notion is actually a very telling analysis of the great ideological struggles between the great superpowers and the nation states they hail from. The mutual understanding in the near aftermath of nuclear “moment” at Trinity, at Nagasaki,at Hiroshima, compels an existential re-evaluation that these old failed attempts at diplomacy in extremis (world wars) no longer can be remotely considered in strategic terms between behemoth powers, and can only lead to the rapid descent of man in the long run, and it is for this reason that we, meaning the world community, both developed and developing, must begin the long haul humanitarian missions like Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, Afghanistan, etc., and the many that loom dark on the horizon over the next half century. That the old term “war” should be rendered obsolete in the lexicon of the developed countries, and that a new term be put into place when coalitions go into countries with the idea that to do good for one is to do good for all.


Post a Comment

<< Home