PHOTOS, PAGE 1

       Editor and prime reporter is Doug Terry, a veteran television and radio reporter in   Washington, DC, (details below)

AN OVERVIEW OF AMERICAN INVOLVEMENT IN LIBYA

Obama has taken three giant steps toward being a agent of change in the middle east, and in the U.S.: one, he intervened militarily on behalf a people seeking self determination and to free themselves from a certifiable mental case dictator. Monday night, he took two more steps: he invoked the American revolution and our revolutionary history as one of the reasons for the intervention, setting our country on a course to reunite with our own traditions and historical legacies, and, second, he rhetorically put us on the side of all of those in the middle east who seek a measure of human dignity and social justice. This last step might have seemed mere talk to most listeners, but to those who aspire to a greater degree of freedom in the Arab world, and coming from the most militarily powerful nation on earth, it was very significant.

The story of the 20th century in emerging nations was one of nationalism, of the assertion of national, separate identity around the world. It was an unstoppable force. In the end, it was greater than any ideology, especially those from the extremes of right and left, fascism and communism, though each had their long bloody day.

The story of the 21st century appears to be emerging now in the middle east as those denied the benefits of modernity by oppression and oligarchy rise and say, No more. It is somewhat narcissistic to think of these events primarily as they relate to our interests, our needs and our foreign policy. These are events beyond our starting and beyond our ability to stop. To believe we have significant influence, at certain times, might also be self centered.

It should be remembered that the oppression of common aspirations in that region dates back far longer than the autocrats helped to power by western colonialists. As the printing press spread knowledge and ideas in Europe in the 15th and 16th centuries, such innovations were locked out of the middle east. As Norman Davies pointed out in his sweeping history, Europe, no printing was allowed in the Islamic world until the 19th century. Davies rightly pointed out \"the consequences for both Islam and the spread of knowledge in general can hardly be exaggerated\". Oppression has been official policy for centuries. Could we say these are revolutions long over due?

While we clearly have strategic and economic interests in the region, the first thing we have to do, I think, is to step away from the notion that these nations are somehow or another toys of the western powers. We cannot and should not resist their efforts at self determination. The chips will have to fall where they may. Let's hope the people of the region are lucky and worry about our own luck as the situation develops.

By making a bold move on Libya in the interest of preventing a mass slaughter. Part of the inherent arrogance of American power, something  that often eludes our own judgments because we see matters from the inside out, is the idea that we have to control the outcome of a situation entirely or we shouldn’t get involved at all. Why? In part, to assert the idea of American power. Yet, the world knows differently, the world knows that America can influence some situations and control others,  and the know that this country cannot control everything, all the time. If Libya turns out to be more than we bargained for (when has an intervention not been thus?), we will have to deal with it down the road.

Doug Terry

4.4.11

CONTACT THE TERRYREPORT

       HOME PAGE

end