We should all resist trying to predict what will happen next in the Middle East because so much of what happens makes no sense at all in advance of it actually happening.
Who would have thought two months ago that France would lead a Western military coalition, that the United Nations would pass a Chapter VII resolution authorizing the use of force against a country that was elected to its own Human Rights Commission, that Barack Obama would fire missiles at an Arab country when less than thirty percent of Americans approve, and that Qaddafi loyalists would burn Lebanese rather than American or Israeli flags in the capital?
No one could have predicted any of this. It’s too weird. Don’t ask me what happens next. I give up.
UPDATE: So Qaddafi writes a letter to Barack Obama. It opens thusly:
To our son, his excellency, Mr Barack Hussein Obama. I have said to you before, that even if Libya and the United States of America enter into a war, god forbid, you will always remain a son. Your picture will not be changed.
Like I said. Weird.
Crikey Michael, you can’t give up! Back in 2006 you produced the mini-books titled “Everything could explode at any moment” –nu still true, and definitely exploding all over the Middle East now.
These things are utterly unsurprising to anyone not bound by PC. France and Sarkozy are scared spitless of millions of Libyans washing ashore in Italy and being sent on their way to wealthier France, under Schengen Zone rules. This is already happening via Greece btw. Europe is rich and White, North Africa poor, Muslim, and non-White. The latter covet everything the former got, and the former knows it, and fears it.
Obama is driven by events, and the fear of losing Libyan oil production and further poll erosion. The revolts in North Africa are entirely predictable results of skyrocketing food prices driven by Chinese demand and high oil prices feeding into food.
PC makes you stupid. Europe is a big fat target for the seething, mostly Jihadi, dirt-poor and illiterate Muslim masses in North Africa. Which due to being Muslim, can’t provide even a humane living for their skyrocketing population under the least economic stress. Muslim failure, in pretty much everything but population growth, coupled with Europe’s failure to reproduce and China’s rise is the root cause of almost everything here. [Khadaffi's survival has been that he's fighting his own people, who are a Muslim rabble with the typical faults of such.]
whiskey: These things are utterly unsurprising to anyone not bound by PC.
You did not see this coming in January.
Yes, “predictions” after the fact are unimpressive. 20×20 hindsight is easy. Over at Scott Sumner’s “Money Illusion” blog there are regular discussions of the inability to predict new information. It is a principle of economics (particularly asset price and business cycles) that applies equally to politics. The trick is not having a specific foresight that is usually impossible. The trick is to have a framework which allows you to respond to events. The speed and extent of communications in our wired world makes that more necessary, not less, because decision loops have to be so much quicker to signal and respond.
One of those key unknowable questions: will NATO encourage further efforts by Libyans to eject Qaddafi or lead to an expectation of outside saviours? We will now find out.
I agree with you, Michael. This year so far has been one of suprise.
My question is…where do we, the USA, start or stop? Why aid Libya rebels and not Bahrain rebels? I’m torn on this. I agree the Qaddafi is a tyrant and an oppresser of people. He is a murderer and thug. But so are alot of world rulers. I am baffled at the leaders of America, be they Democrat or Republican. How on earth do they choose?
Daff Vader to Barak Lightworker:
“Barak! I am your FATHER!”
Providence (or whatever you’d like to call it) has a sense of humour:
0603: The BBC’s Paul Adams in Washington says: “Eight years to the day after his predecessor launched the first air strikes against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, President Barack Obama announced that American forces were once again attacking an Arab country. ”
BBC News – Live: Libya Crisis 20/3
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12776418
Predicting these events at this time? No.
But I think whiskey’s first paragraph may well have entered into the calculations: Europe trying to head off The Camp of the Saints by force.
And speaking of the Chapter VII resolution, Omri Ceren had something interesting to say:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/03/20/responsibility-to-protect-not-remotely-new/
Which is itself a comment on an interesting Foreign Policy piece:
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/03/18/how_obama_turned_on_a_dime_toward_war
6. Salamantis at March 20, 2011 – 3:19 am
Excellent. Thank you.
“My question is…where do we, the USA, start or stop? Why aid Libya rebels and not Bahrain rebels? I’m torn on this. I agree the Qaddafi is a tyrant and an oppresser of people. He is a murderer and thug. But so are alot of world rulers. I am baffled at the leaders of America, be they Democrat or Republican. How on earth do they choose?”
Totalitarian vs authoritarian. The first is a lot more dangerous and unhinged. There’s always going to be more than one problem in the world at a time. You pick a target and stick with it.
Notice that Germany and Turkey are both against war in Libya. There are so many Turks living in Germany, that Germany is already a puppet of Turkey.
@ 10
USA did not target Libya. Sarkozy/France did. USA just went along.
Gadaffi is trying to create an African Empire.
Sarkozy is trying to create a European-Arabian Empire.
There can be only one.
For what it is worth, I emailed the following comments to Senator Kerry’s (D-MA) office on Friday maorning, before overt war broke out. I hope I’m totally wrong-headed about this, but I fear that our very, very, odd and adventurist leadership is going to get people I actually care about killed.
“Senator Kerry:
I fear that the US administration has ineptly stumbled into an extraordinarily dangerous policy response to the situation in Libya. The US
administration’s support for and now UN Security Council approval of a “no fly zone” over Libya has put the US on an inexorable path to violent confrontation with the Qaddafi regime. I believe it was Emerson who wrote, ‘When you strike at a king, you must kill him’. The Libyan rebels and their armchair supporters can perhaps be forgiven for not appreciating Emerson’s wisdom. Not so, the US administration.
I believe it highly likely that the Qaddafi regime views the current situation as an existential threat. As such, the regime has every incentive to strike at the source of that threat, decisively and preemptively, before the regime’s capability to do so is itself destroyed. Qaddafi knows that no
state can or will act decisively against him without the US and that therefore the US’s will to act is the center of gravity against which he must strike. He must convince US public opinion that the price of US support for the Libyan rebels against the Qaddafi regime is too high. Since the Qaddafi regime has nothing to lose by acting and he must use or lose any capacity that he has, a mass casualty strike against a US homeland population center is a plausible Qaddafi regime course of action.
Targets and modalities of a Qaddafi regime attack against the US homeland would necessarily employ existing networks and resources. Therefore, Libya’s
Latin American and Caribbean presence and alliances warrant close scrutiny. Venezuela, Guyana, and Trinidad and Tobago have produced non-state actors
willing to employ violence. In 1990, the Islamist Jamaat al Muslimeen (JAM) attempted a deadly coup against the government of Trinidad and Tobago. The
JAM is known to have ties to the Qaddafi regime and was approached for support by plotters of a 2007 plan to bomb fuel supplies at JFK International
Airport. The Chavez regime in Venezuela has allied itself with the Qaddafi regime and is a nexus of alliance and support to Iran and its Hezbollah proxy
- itself at war with the West and the US for over thirty years now – and likely has significant finance and logistical support apparatus in place that
could facilitate an attack. Regular seaborne shipping between Trinidad and o and Boston Inner Harbor is just one potential vector of attack.
The recent conduct of US policy toward Libya seems oblivious to the genuine risks posed by a terrorist regime threatened with extinction. It is said
that the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. I believe this is true for the Qaddafi regime and hope that it is not true of the US administration. Disbelief in the magnitude of the threat and the lack of political will and leadership to deal effectively with it resulted in over
3,000 civilian dead in 2001. We continue a necessary but costly military campaign to this day. Let’s not repeat the mistakes of the 1990′s.
In light of the above considerations, the US policy must now be to immediately strike, without reservation, to annihilate the Qaddafi regime and any potential successor leadership. This is the only course of action that can insure that the Qaddafi regime and its strategic allies cannot strike our homeland first.”
Onslo, yesterday the DOD said US planes would not be flying over Libya: “Nineteen U.S. warplanes, including stealth bombers and fighter jets, conducted strike operations in Libya on Sunday morning, officials said.” BBC
I think some care was given to make the US look like it has done less than it actually has. Obama was going to loose KSA and the Gulf States if he did nothing. His buddies Rice and Power have very strong ideas about “humanitarian action” (usually when it does not involve our worst adversaries).
While I did not predict Qaddafi was susceptible to the Arab Spring, once this started to unfold and the bitterness exploded between Sarkozy and Qaddafi, the present mess was predictable. I was surprised that having made up their minds to attack, they waited until Qaddafi had entered Benghazi. http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/03/19/2124078/for-libyans-fleeing-benghazi-un.html Remember, Obama said last week “Qaddafi must go”, but reports now indicate only last minute pressure by Rice and Clinton made Obama turn his empty threat into action. This is not strength.
This morning its reported a military convoy was taken out by allied forces and as I said US stealth fighters involved. I am disappointed that our President is in SA where he escapes questions about the contradictions and delivers talking points likely written for him. Make no mistake.
Hizb’Allah hates Qaddafi and so do moderate Sunnis, so I’m not surprised Qaddafi blasts Lebanon who pushed the resolution. Now how can Egypt refuse the Arab League it hosts in Cairo by not making air fields available?
The outcome in Egypt will make a larger wave than Libya. http://af.reuters.com/article/cameroonNews/idAFLDE72J06620110320 Iran switches sides…..
Aren’t the analysts claiming that it was only the support of the Arab league that changed Obama’s mind?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12798568
“What is happening in Libya differs from the aim of imposing a no-fly zone, and what we want is the protection of civilians and not the bombardment of more civilians,” said Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa.
So, what now?
Mr. Totten:
Thanks for your insight into the current events. I am very interested to hear your commentary on the reported unrest now taking place in Syria.
Regards,
TW
Whiskey @2,
France and Sarkozy are scared spitless of millions of Libyans washing ashore in Italy and being sent on their way to wealthier France, under Schengen Zone rules.
Main problem with that analysis is that it’s wrong. The economic refugees trying to get to Europe from North Africa come from Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, and Mauritania. Libya is the ONE country in North Africa where nobody is leaving due to economic hardships. Why? Well, check this out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index
You see how Libya is the only country in Africa that is colored in green on that chart? It’s the only country in Africa rated as “high” in human development. The only other Muslim country with the same rating is Saudi Arabia. So, if what you say is true then why would France be attacking the one country in North Africa that is advanced enough that people aren’t interested in emigrating to live someplace else for economic reasons?
Sorry, Micheal, but it’s the truth and no amount of wishful thinking will change Tunisia into the most prosperous country in Africa and Libya into one of the most backwards. You’ve got that inverted and all of the economic data shows the same thing. I have no idea what that “competitiveness” thing Hitchens was talking about is, but I suspect it has more to do with how attractive a country is for foreign investment than it is to do with domestic prosperity.
Obama is driven by events, and the fear of losing Libyan oil production and further poll erosion.
It’s the Europeans who are dependent on Libyan oil.
PC makes you stupid.
You’d be more convincing if you had the facts straight before you said that
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/21/world/africa/21benghazi.html?src=twrhp
Seems administration said the Arab League must vote. Clinton secured that vote, but the Gates and Mullen had more reservations. I’m sure the memoirs will explain….
Yes, Craig, we’ll see a lot of squirming around. Really, WTF did the Arab League think had to be done at this point? Another 12 hrs and Benghazi was lost.
Michael,
…that Barack Obama would fire missiles at an Arab country when less than thirty percent of Americans approve…
Approval for military action is barely double digits. Nowhere near 30%. He’s got less justification of this attack on Libya than Bush did in Iraq, and he doesn’t have the support of the voters for it. Whereas Bush did. And he ran AGAINST Bush’s intervention in Iraq. This is madness. I can’t think of any other way to describe it. If the French and the British wanted this so bad they were willing to extort it out of us we should have done what the Germans did and abstained. That’s better than what the French did for us when we sought to get UN approval for the invasion of Iraq. The French aren’t in any position to be complaining the US doesn’t support them in the UN.
Who would have thought two months ago that France would lead a Western military coalition…
French leadership:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmu5sRIizdw
You said in another post that you were better able to understand my position than most on this blog, Michael. What did you mean by that? I’ve got the vast majority of the American people on my side. My position is the majority position. And even on this blog it seems that there are at least a few of your regulars who have similar views when it comes to this intervention. Also, the top military brass is on my side, though they don’t really have a whole lot of options when the President gives them orders.
‘Amr Moussa says the military operations have gone beyond what the Arab League backed. Mr. Moussa has told reporters Sunday that “what happened differs from the no-fly zone objectives.” He says “what we want is civilians’ protection not shelling more civilians.” ‘
——————————————————————————————-
From the backstabbing, pandering, immoral, Arab League just today. You know that group that ‘called for’ an Intervention because they were too spineless and useless to do anything themselves. I would laugh but it’s not funny.
Did I say that I TOTALLY oppose this feel-good folly ? Because I do and I’m a BIG Hawk with regard to the use of absolute force. Here’s another quote just for context —- “Forget it, Jake. It’s Chinatown.”
Same thingy exactly. This is not Iraq it is true. Iraq at the least promised and perhaps still promises a big ROI in the long-term. This involvement in the Libyan hell-hole promises nothing good at all.
And it will deliver every bit of that promise.
Craig,
Not defending Whisky@2′s arguments, but you’d be more convincing if you had your facts straight. You didn’t look very deeply into the wikipedia info on HDI. Libya’s data isn’t adjusted for inequality. Thus their oil wealth (which Quddafi has plundered) may be skewing their current HDI number. Check out the following link regarding inequality-adjusted hdi:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_inequality-adjusted_HDI
The service Totten has provided his readers is that although we could never have predicted the details of what is happening it isn’t a surprise that it is happening.
So, when do the Arab “partners” start participating?
?
I fear that, once again, we’re being played by those who’d like to see us prevail, but have put themselves in a position where – if we do not prevail -they can criticize us for any disasters that (will inevitably) result.
#1213: Defence Secretary Liam Fox says early indications suggest Saturday’s operation by UK pilots was “very successful”. He said there would be further air strikes, if necessary, to prevent the Gaddafi regime from attacking Libyan civilians.
Really? So the UN objectives are just to protect civilians, as the UN resolution says?
#1224: Meanwhile, the UK defence secretary says he hopes the military intervention will be over as “quickly as possible” but this depends on Col Gaddafi recognising that the “game is up” and relinquishing power.
Oh. Wait. No. Actually, the objective is to topple Qadafi.
This is the UK’s Secretary of Defense, stating two completely different objectives in the very same statement. One compliant with the UN resolution, and one not. It’s been glaringly obvious that the real objective of the UK was to topple Qadafi (and not to protect Libyans) for weeks, but how’s about we outside of the UK at least demand that they get honest about what it is we’re actually helping them do? All this blah blah blah about innocent civilians has been a deception from the start and I don’t think I’m the only one who doesn’t like being lied to.
As for the French, I think the fact they offered to send French troops to help put down the protesters in Tunisia tells us all we need to know about French altruism in North Africa.
John Lynch: The service Totten has provided his readers is that although we could never have predicted the details of what is happening it isn’t a surprise that it is happening.
I don’t understand that comment. I don’t think MJT thought there’d be any uprising in Libya back in January. I know I didn’t. I don’t know of any Libyans who saw this coming, either. I’m halfway thinking the British were behind this from the start, because their the only ones who seem to have had a plan for what how they could benefit from it.
The Arab world is full of unstable dictatorships and restive masses. The particular timing of which Arab state would revolt and when was unpredictable. It wasn’t a surprise that it did happen. Reading Totten we know that Arab governments are unpopular and that any change is likely to be violent.
It’s also not a surprise that Western intervention in the Middle East happened. It’s been happening for a long time. The Arabs export their problems along with their oil. Totten and Lee Smith write about this a lot.
Craig: You said in another post that you were better able to understand my position than most on this blog, Michael. What did you mean by that?
I said I better understand how you feel than most other people here because you have a good friend in a city that’s being bombed by the West. If you count Israel as the West (I do), I know exactly how that feels. I would love to see Hezbollah gone, but I also have many friends in Beirut, so you can imagine better than most people here how I felt when the IAF bombed Lebanon.
Craig: And even on this blog it seems that there are at least a few of your regulars who have similar views when it comes to this intervention.
Yes, I know. That’s fine. I’m in the minority. I don’t expect everyone here to agree with me.
And I don’t like how this is playing out anyway, at least not so far, so I’m not exactly cheerleading this operation.
The last thing I want to see right now is Qaddafi getting bombed enough to piss him off and re-radicalize him but not enough to get rid of him. At the same time, though, Reagan bombed him briefly and got good results, so maybe that will happen again. I have no idea.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704433904576212661478557154.html?mod=googlenews_wsj I didn’t think Syrians had the balls and who predicted the Iranians would risk death too?
UK hopes that NATO can take over and no one really thought this was about a static status quo. Yes, Craig, I felt there were two option should the Europeans and Arabs have the nerve 1. US does not put ground troops and 2. Solidarity in objective had better extend to US predicaments in AFPAK and Iran. We will see about 1 soon enough and we will see 2 what quid pro quo Obama won from our “partners”. The fuzziness and the executive decisions would have run into the media grinder were this Bush.
I don’t agree with everything Craig says, but there are some points which the record shows I agree with him about. I don’t think its surprising that those who were against removing Saddam should have problems with removing Qaddafi. Faced with US ground troop intervention and who the rebels are, I would lobby for taking Qaddafi out and ending this crap. And the history here with France denying overflights to hit Qaddafi during the Reagan years and the French objection to help with removing Saddam is not lost. Sarkozy couldn’t wait to sell Qaddafi a nuclear plant.
Finally, who would not have a comment about the “Obama Doctrine”? How does that work with our existing allies?
So no, I am not surprised about the arguments here which are healthy. No matter the emotions over Libya, the outcomes in Egypt, Lebanon, Pakistan and Turkey are more serious than when we flatten Qaddafi at this point. Apart from that asshole, there should be much discussion of how this unfolded and the strategic smarts of this administration. Rice succeeded in having the UN declare war for the American people no matter the good intentions.
Michael: “The last thing I want to see right now is Qaddafi getting bombed enough to piss him off and re-radicalize him but not enough to get rid of him.”
Exactly, and no matter what happens, Qaddafi must go at this point. I think Craig understands that from purely a strategic situation he did not want us to have anything to do with.
We must remember some remarks are said “given the situation”. These might contradict what we would a have preferred to see as “given”.
Yes how surprising, that France and England who were anti Iraq, are so pro Libya, I guess the fact that US had oil interests in Iraq and Britain has oil interest in Libya are not playing into the equation, noooo oil has nothing to do with.
Aslo convient that the Arabs have been conveniently quiet about this one. Waiting to see if this no fly zone is a success or ready to jump on the anti west band wagon.
Its always nice to see your friends sitting on the side line allowing your troops to lead the fight. Didn’t we just sell the Saudi Kingdom 6 billion or something worth of military hard ware? Have them send their fighter jets to enforce it. I mean they wanted the west out of the region so bad, I see no reason to get tangled into another long drawn out war with no end in sight. I support a no fly zone, that is enforced, by other people.
We are already stretched thin, if other people feel so strongly about this let the Arab League send their planes, troops, and tanks into war. It annoys me that the oil rich nations of the middle east never seem to be able to send troops in, simply sit back and do humanitarian missions. It appears this is going to be a long drawn out war, much like Sudan where anyone stationing troops is going to have them there for a long time.
The rebels are poorly equipped and under trained. The government are far more organized and with out the no fly zone would probably have crushed the rebellion.
Finally I don’t like Obama saying they are willing to do anything it takes to stop gaddafi. That implies he is willing to send in ground forces or to place US forces in foreign soil for a extended period of time. Also stupid Obama failed to act swiftly, when the rebels were advancing un checked toward the capital that is when it would have been useful to put a no fly zone, but now the government forces have pushed them all the way back, seems like anything its going to be a loooong war.
I see no reason why we should send troops of any kind. Lets the Arab League and Europe deal with this mess since they hold the oil rights to Libya
Craig,
Comparing the economic situations in Libya and Tunisia is difficult because they are radically different.
The majority of Tunisians are middle class, which is almost unheard of in Africa and the Arab world. And because Tunisia has a more or less free market economy, the country is more or less “Western” economically. (Tunisia’s middle class and its broadly middle class style education system is what I think will save it.)
Libya has almost no economy at all except oil. Qaddafi spreads the wealth around enough that Libyans get four walls, a roof, and three meals a day, but they don’t get a lot else. The kind of middle class you and I would recognize is very small. Imagine a country where everyone is on the dole and lives in shabby public housing blocks. It’s basically a communist economy that plods along thanks to oil, and the quality of absolutely everything is, predictably, crap.
Libya’s Soviet-style economy may look good on paper, but it looks absolutely horrendous in person.
Snippet
So, when do the Arab “partners” start participating?
?
It does need to be evaluated why the arab states are not visibly active here. Is it that they don’t want to openly war among muslims? They want the west to carry the water while they drink? While the populations of all these countries are calling for the west to help them overthrow their leaders.
I would agree with Craig in this instance that we need to tread carefully. Although imo, qadafi needs to go. The quickest way to move on is to kill him and let the pieces fall where they may. but the consciousness of libya is not changed at all, the next person in charge can be just as bad. A better libya can probably only be achieved by UN oversight until the players can manage themselves better.
I don’t think it is a wise policy to leave qadafi with access to oil money. He needs to be moved to poverty status by expulsion or by death. He creates his mischief when he has money to buy actors.
jd: So, when do the Arab “partners” start participating?
The Arab states are entirely incapable of projecting conventional military power outside their borders. That’s why those that have an ambitious foreign policy use assymmetrical forces instead.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/arab-league-condemns-broad-bombing-campaign-in-libya/2011/03/20/AB1pSg1_story.html
This is predictable as Qatar and the UAE ready their “forces” to enter the fray. Now imagine allied ground troops chasing Qaddafi around Libya as the Arab League starts accusing the very nations they “begged to do something” of being the villains.
http://nation.foxnews.com/libya/2011/03/20/house-democrats-freak-out-after-obama-takes-military-action-libya Something Galrahn left out as the reason fro Obama being in SA at the moment.
hxxp://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/150881-mullen-we-have-treat-every-country-differenty
And how does this logic explain US pressure to remove Mubarak?
“When told that he couldn’t speak because of Brazilian protests, Obama asked “how much is a brazillion?”" by a commentator named FUNNY
Obama dodges questions in Brazil…
http://www.informationdissemination.net/2011/03/no-fly-zone-in-name-only.html
a point Craig was arguing….
My theory is that France is leading the charge to establish a “No Fly Zone” because the U.N. Resolution was translated into the French not as “Pas de Voler” but as “Pas de Mouche.”
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3aa4bb3d5f-354c-4214-99eb-8141ee21406f&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest
US air assets attacking Libya. I rather doubt if the use of F-22s will be reported until after the conflict is over.
@ #11 regarding Germany
Since WWII Germany doesn’t want to fight for anything, or anyone anymore. Yes, that’s the wrong lesson we learned.
During Cold War, we were right at the front and we became a member of NATO.
Although our politicians always said, we would stand with Israel, in 1967 we pledged our alegiance but did nothing (except private engagement).
In 1973 Chancellor Willy Brandt pledged allegiance to Israel again, but still he stopped US weapon shipments from Hamburg to Israel.
In 2003 Germany Chancellor Schröder said “njet” regarding direct engagement in Iraq.
Since Germany’s current engagement in Afghanistan is largely unpopular with the public, Westerwelle abstained. It doesn’t have anything to do with Turkey.
BBC: #1845: Questions are being raised over the emergence of a possible division between Washington and London on the use of ground troops in Libya, according to Benedict Brogan’s blog in the Daily Telegraph.
Gee. It only took one day for the British to insist that ground troops should be sent in. And I saw Obama on the news just this morning swearing that no ground troops would be used. Meanwhile, the US military says the French are off doing their own thing and they have no idea what they intend.
This fucker is unraveling in record time. Obama: The US military brass says it has successfully cleared the way for a no-fly zone to be put in place. That’s more than enough, and more than we should have done. Time for the US to end it’s military participation in this coalition.
MJT@32, that was the UN’s “Human Development Index” that I threw up a link to earlier. It’s the measure by which the UN determines how developed (overall) nations are. It takes into account all those factors you mentioned. The UN considers Libya highly developed. It’s the only country in Africa that gets that rating. The only other Muslim country – anywhere in the world – that gets that rating is Saudi Arabia. That’s not me saying it. It’s the United Nations. If that’s not good enough for you there are a variety of other economic indexes you can refer to. I don’t really want to argue about it, as I don’t think it’s really up for debate.
I realize these stats don’t match your perceptions of Libya. One of your Libyan readers offered to be your guide when you went to Libya and you declined that offer. If you hadn’t you might have seen the Libya being described by the UN Human Development Index, instead of the Libya that looks like a stalinist ghetto. Tunisia is an economy based on tourism so it makes sense that a visitor would be pleased by what they see. Libya has no tourism industry to speak of (it was just getting started when all this shit happened) so you’re much likely to be impressed by what’s on the surface.
“Finally I don’t like Obama saying they are willing to do anything it takes to stop gaddafi”
I don’t like Obama condemning Qaddafi and going all the way out with military force after doing absolutely nothing about Iran. Qaddafii is a scumbag, but he’s not nearly as gross as the mullahs in Qom. I have yet to see Qaddafi go on TV to praise protesters in other Arab countries while killing those taking part in his own insurrection.
Also, I must add that Libya today is more irrelevant than ever in terms of the international stage. Obama is coming off as a hypocrite of Ahmadinejad proportions by bombing Libya after so many speeches about how unnecessary the Iraq War was.
Jim @32, I didn’t see Libya on that list but I did notice Tunisia (which was on the list) slipped another 6 places further down on the “adjusted” list.
In any case, it doesn’t take a list to identify what countries in North Africa are producing economic migrants and refugees. Libya isn’t one of them. In fact, Libya is one of the countries people from Egypt and North Africa migrate to looking for work. Which can easily be seen by looking at the UN’s stats for whose been trying to get out of Libya the last month and a half
http://formerspook.blogspot.com/
Former spook writes on the no fly zone
Craig: One of your Libyan readers offered to be your guide when you went to Libya and you declined that offer.
I didn’t have any choice. I had to use the guides that were given to me. Libya is not the kind of place where the government will let Americans just show up and do what they want.
It’s the only country in Africa that gets that rating. The only other Muslim country – anywhere in the world – that gets that rating is Saudi Arabia.
If the UN insists Libya is more developed than Turkey, Kuwait, and the UAE, well, that’s as pathetic as putting Libya on the Human Rights Commission. The oil money is throwing everything off, but that only works on paper. You can find this or that bullshit analysis saying the Soviet Union was advanced, too, but in most everyday ways it was not.
MJT, you’re right that the oil money throws everything off. But you haven’t given Q any credit at all for making sure Libyans get a good education, that they make a decent living, that they can house and feed themselves and still have enough money left over to employ live-in help (many from Tunisia by the way) and a variety of other things that improve quality of life. In addition to all that, until recently Libyans had completely un-filtered access to the internet, widespread and unblocked access to cell phones, access to any satellite TV programs you could imagine. That’s not to say that Q is a great guy or that his wacky economic model works. As you suggest, if it wasn’t for the oil it WOULD NOT work. But other countries have oil and have not used the oil wealth to elevate their people the way Q has. So even crazy, violent and pro-terrorism as he’s been, he has done some good for his people. And Libyans aren’t as backwards and out of touch as you think they are
Craig: So even crazy, violent and pro-terrorism as he’s been, he has done some good for his people.
Compared to Sudan, which also has oil money, sure. Fine. But giving him credit for this is a bit like giving Fidel Castro credit for universal health care. Don’t get carried away.
And Libyans aren’t as backwards and out of touch as you think they are
It depends on who we’re comparing them with. Compared with Afghanistan, Libya is the space age, but it’s painfully backward compared with Tunisia and Lebanon.
Another thing to think about: Tunisia’s per capita GNP is only 9,500 dollars a year, but goods and services are dirt cheap and high quality. That money goes a very long way. I got more bang for my buck in Tunisia than in any other country I have ever visited in my life.
Goods and services in Libya are extremely low quality. These things matter, and they don’t show up in statistics.
I took a very quick breeze this morning through the UN’s Human Development Indexes and some other data and came to the conclusion that the HDI indices are of very limited value. All of the figures below are off the top of my head, as I best remember them.
For one thing, I am going to assume that all base data for each country is self-reported. They come up with numbers in different ways and with different levels of honesty. For only one example, Libya self-reports an unemployment rate of about 10% but the CIA or State Department (can’t remember which) estimates it at about 30%.
Countries self-report report infant mortality and average life spans in very different ways, too. For example, there are countries that report a lower infant mortality than that of the U.S., but if they reported in the same way as the U.S., they would have a have a higher infant mortality rate. (The differences between countries largely are about whether a non-live birth counts and at what age infancy ends.)
Education levels are certainly a positive indicator but they, too, can be misleading. For one example, Russia, at least during the Soviet period, had a very well educated population. However, because of Russia’s inefficient state-run economy, average Russians had a relative low standard of living. (Of course, Russia self-reported a higher standard of living.)
I don’t know how each country calculates and reports GDP and GNI and PPP (all indicators of national production or income or “purchasing parity income”). But even good numbers can be misleading. Let me try a simple illustration. Let’s suppose that I make $99 an hour and Michael makes $1 and hour. Our reported average hourly income would be $50 per hour. But you can’t assume that Michael is doing fine. And the same is true for GDP and other goods produced or income indices per capita.
Bottom line is that the Human Development Indexes don’t account for such inequity distributions. I do know that in some countries inequities in incomes are drastic. Especially in authoritarian or totalitarian countries – largely due to simple corruption.
Now, the first thing I noticed when looking at the HDI world map was that Libya and Mexico are in the same bracket (same green color). That means that, like Libya, the UN ranks Mexico, too, as “highly developed.” (Yes, according to the UN, Mexico is “highly developed.)
Mexico ranks #56 on the list. Libya ranks #53. Mexico *self-reports* about a 30% poverty rate. Everyone is at least somewhat aware of the number of Mexicans who try to leave Mexico for economic reasons. Why would it surprise anyone that similar numbers of Libyans would want to escape Libya for economic reasons?
I also trust Michael more than I trust UN bureaucrats.
The sites I visited for the above included Wikipedia, the State Department and the CIA. I also visited sites that summarize Pew and CNN polls on what Americans did and did not approve regarding military action in Libya. (Approval for military “no-fly zone” was 44% at Pew and 56% at CNN. Other military action, such as bombing Libyan air defenses, was very low.) Anyway, if anyone wants those sites, let me know and I will post them in another comment.
–
Ah, catching up on the comments now. I also read this morning that about 20% of Libyan’s work in other countries – because they can’t find decent jobs in Libya.
I also read earlier in the week that the Libyan government was asking foreign companies with operations in Libya (mostly oil companies) to return their workers to Libya. The *impression* I got was that most of the people fleeing Libya were foreign workers, not Libyans.
Let me give you all just one example:
I forgot to pack AA batteries for my digital camera when I went to Libya. All I could find in stores were pathetically weak batteries that died after I took only one or two photographs. So the tour company that organized my trip sent an employee scouring Tripoli for real Duracell or Energizer batteries. It took him eight hours to find them. I would never have found them on my own. Never.
Now imagine if you had a similar problem if you wanted to buy anything other than couscous or cigarettes. I don’t care what the numbers say. That’s what you get with a Soviet-style economy.
I got more bang for my buck in Tunisia than in any other country I have ever visited in my life.
For me, it was the Philippines. I rented an air conditioned apartment for a month for $20 US even though I knew I’d only be able to spend a few nights there just because it was cheaper than cab fair to and from base. But that doesn’t change the fact people were damn poor in the PI.
Goods and services in Libya are extremely low quality. These things matter, and they don’t show up in statistics.
Well, sure. The fact that Libya had been under sanctions for 15 years that had just been lifted when you got there doesn’t show up in statistics, either.
In any case, it doesn’t really matter anymore. Whatever happens now, that Libya is gone. The international community is destroying it as we speak. To protect Libyans.
You guys are talking ranks in some Human Development Indexes or what ever, all while western airforces are bombing Tripoli. Get real for Christ sake!
V
Now imagine if you had a similar problem if you wanted to buy anything other than couscous or cigarettes. I don’t care what the numbers say. That’s what you get with a Soviet-style economy.
Dunno about couscous but when I was in PI the Marlboro Reds I got out in town tasted like rolled up horse manure, and the Jack Daniels tasted like shoe polish, and they didn’t have a soviet style economy
Dikehopper @50,
Why would it surprise anyone that similar numbers of Libyans would want to escape Libya for economic reasons?
The thing is that they don’t. Nor has Michael claimed that they do. That was somebody else. Libyans leave for political reasons not economic ones. And we all get to see them on BBC now talking about how all Libyans support the Benghazi rebels and blah blah blah. Tomorrow’s discredited Iraqi expats, today. I wonder who the next Chalabi is gonna be?
I also trust Michael more than I trust UN bureaucrats.
Well, so do I. But I think Michale was only there for a week or two. I spent 2 weeks in Hong Kong. I wouldn’t claim I had any particular insights into Hong Kong even on cultural matters, let alone economic conditions. And I lived in Germany for 6 months. I’ve got a lot to say about their 3 or 4 hour lunch breaks and their 3 months of paid annual vacation, and the way they import Turks and Irish to do all their low paying manual labor. But after even 6 months I couldn’t say much more than that other than that Germans are a lot friendlier than I expected them to be, and French tourists mistook me for a German a lot and when they realized I was American they stuck their big French noses up in the air and walked off in a snit.
“I’ve got a lot to say about their 3 or 4 hour lunch breaks and their 3 months of paid annual vacation, and the way they import Turks and Irish to do all their low paying manual labor.”
You are lying and you know it.
V
About their lunchbreaks and vacations I mean.
V
“That’s what you get with a Soviet-style economy.”
Which is why reporters visiting Soviet-era Moscow late in a month; that is, after monthly quotas had been met, took that extra bag to hold the cartons of cigarettes needed to bribe cab drivers, and other “service providers.” The number of scientists and engineers your universities may be producing can’t hide or offset realities on the street. Remember Kyle’s trip to Cuba, reported here, when educated Cubans were begging for a dollar?
Self-reported statistics are like product descriptions from manufacturers I move past to get to the user reviews.
Visionara @55,
You are lying and you know it.
About their lunchbreaks and vacations I mean.
Nope. That’s what I saw. Lunch from 10AM to 2PM, and months of paid vacation per year. An example of the flaws of superficial observations, perhaps?
Of course, that was also 15 years ago. Maybe things are different now. But MJT visited Libya quite some time ago too, and as I recall it was shortly after sanctions had been lifted so there’s an issue there as well.
Craig: But MJT visited Libya quite some time ago too, and as I recall it was shortly after sanctions had been lifted so there’s an issue there as well.
Yes, that’s true, but Moynihan was there recently and saw the same things I saw.
I noticed the Latin American Gang of Four—Venezuela, Cuba, Bolivia and Nicaragua—were quick to jump on the invasion-for-oil bandwagon, conveniently ignoring where America’s petroleum comes from. Their citizens being kept in the dark is understandable, so maybe the bluster was for domestic consumption.
Speaking of being in the dark, am I the only one who missed the price plunge at American pumps from the theft of Iraqi oil? Maybe my neighborhood is the one exception.
Insert foot in mouth, Hugo. Now, bite down hard.
HUMOR
HEALS
Or humorous heels.
Or are they humorous heels?
I know incomplete sentences bug Michael.
On the subject of being bugged, as another commenter mentioned recently, PJ’s Daily Digest should be opt IN, not opt out.
Paul @60, I’m jumping on the “invasion for oil” bandwagon too, because I can’t think of any other valid reason we’re getting involved in this civil war. Particularly to this extent where we’re going to completely obliterate Libya’s infrastructure and then send in occupation troops. Only thing is, I’m not blaming the US. I’m blaming France and Britain. I’m only blaming the US for going along with it.
Chop Sui’s #31 sums up accurately these shifting-hypocrite-sand-dune-positions. Let us Americans do the international coat-holding….for a change.
I take some consolation that those billions of US dollars the Saudi’s paid us for those nice shiny new aircraft (or whatever) were originally our own dollars we paid the Saudi’s for their ‘effing’ oil products at our local gas stations. Our aircraft assembly line job positions are still employed in this circular traffic. That part of this is a Good Thing. Remember always that these Arabs need our dollars.
What I see now as an emerging Bad Thing is that the Brits seem now to be angling for all of this effort to come under the NATO umbrella. I saw something to that effect here on th’ Google News earlier today. I do not claim prescience in shadowy, smokey-mirrored international machinations. What/Who to believe? This is part of the trained Intelligence Professionals dilemma. No one can know anything with certainty.
This leaning towards a NATO umbrella reads to me like an attempted spreading of the responsibility in case the emerging criticism customarily aimed at us Americans begins to fall on the Brits….or….French….for a change. I carefully omit here any confident thought about these two governments because only they themselves can divine anything via their own tea leaf sediment.
What should bother us Americans is that the U.N.’s and N.A.T.O.’s military actions are ultimately funded and young-manned mostly by us Americans, so indirectly or directly, we stand to ultimately bear the brunt of these emerging ‘effing’ Arab/Islamist messes….Sunni/Shiite messes…..on and on throughout all of their subtle variations.
I applauded the French and British initiatives; but I hope we don’t permit ourselves to be snookered by them, via our feckless “Administration”.
This is partly why it is so smirk-inducing to read pretentious predictions based solely upon what we hapless media consumers try to absorb.
Craig @58
“Of course, that was also 15 years ago.”
Are you sure it wasn’t 25 years ago and that you visited a privileged partymember in the old DDR. In that case your assertions about lunch breaks and vacaitions would make sense.
V
Visionara: Are you sure it wasn’t 25 years ago and that you visited a privileged partymember in the old DDR. In that case your assertions about lunch breaks and vacaitions would make sense.
Yes, I’m sure! And I was near the border with the Netherlands. And don’t get me started on how German products cost more in Germany back then than they did in the US! Or the ridiculous VAT tax
@ Craig #54
“I’ve got a lot to say about their 3 or 4 hour lunch breaks and their 3 months of paid annual vacation, and the way they import Turks and Irish to do all their low paying manual labor.”
Sorry, but that’s not quite right.
I’d like to have 3 months of paid annual vacation.
This applies for teachers only. Not for any other profession.
“3-4 hour lunchbreaks”? In the army, perhaps. But NOT in any other place.
Black @68, it’s pretty close to right, the way I remember it. And you seem to be admitting it’s “right” for at least some germans. Or was then, at any rate
I’d like to have 3 months of paid annual vacation.
Maybe it’s not technically “vacation”. Maybe people just go on leave from their jobs and collect their social benefits while they are away. I can’t recall exactly how the scam works but it was very widespread, and every German I spoke to literally disbelieved me when I told them that most Americans only get 2 weeks of vacation per year.
“3-4 hour lunchbreaks”? In the army, perhaps. But NOT in any other place.
If that’s true, it doesn’t speak highly of the dedication and professionalism of the German Army! But I was thinking more of administrative types, bank employees, clerical workers, shop keepers and other Germans I interacted with on a daily basis.
@ Craig
“it doesn’t speak highly of the dedication and professionalism of the German Army.”
Sorry, I was referring to the clerks and civil employees of the German Army (Bundeswehr), not the soldiers.
You know, we ain’t an economic powerhouse for nothing.
So there’s no one who has 3-4 months of paid vacation, except those who work at schools or universities.
A German employee has at least 28 days of paid vacation per year. Most have 30 days. In addition there are some official holidays like Christmas, Easter, New Year.
Lunch breaks are usually half an hour up to a whole hour. Some people, like self employed doctors, may have varying times.
Exemptions are marginal.
Oh, it could have been predicted. It would not have been believed in the U.S., however. France, that’s another story: always eager to go to war for oil, extremely sensitive in areas within and bordering its ex-colonial domains, and with Sarkozy impatient with the U.S. when it comes to asserting human rights if not Western interests, I strongly suspect Gaddafi was a glimmer in the French eye as soon as unrest spread from Tunisia.
Black @70, it seems to me you are describing the way things work on paper. I’m describing my observations. No matter how much you explain how things “really” work, it won’t change what I saw and no matter how much I tell you what I saw it won’t change the way things “really” work
I’ve had similar discussions with Americans about how our welfare system working in the US back in the 1980s. One argument with my uncle was particularly memorable. He worked in social services at that time and he knew in painful detail exactly how all their processes worked, but I went to school with a lot of people from welfare families because forced busing of kids from poor neighborhoods to attend middle-class public schools was very popular in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Some of my friends from school came from families where they’d been on welfare for 3 generations. I knew girls who deliberately got pregnant so that they could start collecting their own welfare, even though they were already living with their mothers and their grandmothers too(who were also on welfare). He didn’t believe me until I actually introduced him to one of those friends. And then he started going on and on about how they were all engaged in welfare fraud. And then we had a big argument about whether or not when everybody is abusing the system in the same way, whether that’s a fault of the people abusing the system or the fault of the people running the government bureaucracy who knowingly allow the system to be abused.
Anyway! The only Germans I saw who were working hard (by American standards) were low level employees, like the young people staffing the hotel where I was staying. Most the others, I’d describe it more like “hardly working”. But I’m using American standards for that assessment. And despite what people say about Americans, we have a damn good work ethic. We aren’t an economic powerhouse for nothing
@ Craig #72
I am German, and I’m living and working in Germany, so I DO know what I’m talking about. No offense meant.
You’re saying Germany has lots of holidays. OK, that’s true, but not 3-4 months of PAID holidays. Employees have 28-32 days of paid vacation per year. It depends on age and how long you’ve been working at the same company.
Please don’t tell tales about 3-4 hours of lunchbreaks being the norm. This might be true for only very few people. Not for me, and not for all the employees I know.
When we’re talking about self-employed people, I know a few of them who never take more than 2 weeks of holidays per year. I know the other extreme, too. But these are all self-employed and therefore don’t have a single day of PAID vacation at all.