To Intervene or not to Intervene?

The Middle East is revolting against the authoritarian regimes. People want their leaders no more, who are some of the richest people in the world, while they live in poverty. Thus, it's time for the western countries, including the U.S., to oppose these autocrats and stop supporting regimes by buying their oil. However, why haven't they done anything yet? Actually, Britain and Switzerland froze Muammar Gaddafi's billions. These are billions of dollars paid by the U.S. and other western countries for Libya's oil. In the beginning, it looked like these countries didn't know what to do. They were afraid that they would lose their oil supplies and didn't make a move in the first few days of the revolt, when close to 300 people died. The economic interest has been leading the western countries' international politics toward Libya and the other Middle Eastern countries. Gaddafi has spent tons of money to create and cultivate these relationships, and since he had what they wanted, nothing else mattered. Libyans have been active by peacefully opposing the regime for the last two years, but no one knew, or didn't want to know. It looks like the western countries' motto, when dealing with Libya, was "keep your pumps open and oil prices low and do whatever you want with your country."

 

Gaddafi is the main stakeholder in the oil production companies in Libya, so what else could have the U.S. or Europe done. The U.S. has (or had) a strong relationship with this Middle Eastern country and receives a big portion of its oil import from there. Now, the United States is afraid of what will happen after Gaddafi's regime is overthrown. The White House spokesperson said that the President didn't speak out in the first days of the protest because they were afraid for the lives of the American citizens there. While this is probably true, foreigners in Libya have commented that embassies there did not know how to respond to the situation and weren't even sure of what exactly was happening.

The United States is now wondering how to react. Should they send troops to support the revolution for democracy? No, the President probably wouldn't do that, and shouldn't because American military forces in the Middle East are already seen as occupiers, not as peace forces. That is the popular opinion in the Middle East after the Iraq and Afghanistan interventions. Some people believe that America will make the same wrong move in order to support the democratic movement with military power. Nevertheless, we know the President won't repeat the mistake from the Bush-era.

 

The U.S. is afraid of the shifting powers in the Middle East because of their dependence on oil, and disturbing this relationship may again drag the American economy down. Yet, a military move will sure hit the American economy hard. Economists around the world agree on this and they advise their governments to be very careful when dealing with the Middle East now. Knowing the reliance on oil coming from the Middle East, we ought to be certain that the U.S. will surely be careful not to go ahead and make the mistake of ‘supporting' the democratic movement in the Middle East. However, some politicians and scholars said that Obama missed a chance to make a historical move. They did not elaborate though. Did he miss to send thousands of troops to Libya? We wouldn't know. In Libya, the situation is different because the U.S. does not have military bases to react and to leverage the situation. Maybe this is why it took Obama so long to speak out on the Libyan rebellion. Whatever the reason was, the fear was a factor and Obama demanded the violence to be stopped. The President condemned the violence in Libya without making the message personal by mentioning Gaddafi by name, and this was one more sign of the fear of what will come after the authoritarian regime fell. Actually, no leader has named Gaddafi, despite the fact that he has murdered people from around the world. After the Holocaust, countries around the world declared that no such thing should happen again. Now though they want to act wisely, because they don't know what will happen when the revolutions get rid of their despots.

 

And while Obama wonders what to do, people are dying overseas and the sick minded Gaddafi threatens his own nation and destroys his own cities. Moreover, U.S. politicians say that this was a surprising phenomenon. Imagine no one has known that the Libyan people, the nation of one of the richest leaders in Middle East, live oppressed and poorly, so no one expected it. Well, maybe it's true because the U.S. interest is the oil not how people live, yet boast their support of democracy. The U.S. should keep its nose out of other countries' business. Instead of thinking of taking the lead in this situation, as a great guardian of democracy, they should leave this to the United Nations and just follow their lead, otherwise, once again, they will be seen as a cold, oil interested intervener, and people around the world, and in America, are surely tired of that.