Over the last few months the Middle East has been revolutionized by none other than...well revolutions. Having spent the last six years of my life engulfed in studying the Middle East, watching the recent revolutions unfolding throughout North Africa, the Levant, and the Arabian Peninsula have been both exciting and concerning. It's exciting that people have collectively decided to stand up for their beliefs and to challenge the systems of government that failed them due to autocracy, lack of transparency, and corruption. The challenge now is determining what role the United States should play in helping these countries through these exciting, but challenging times. The movement caught the world by surprise and as can be seen from various speeches and press releases from White House, State Department, and National Security representatives nobody is quite sure what the best approach should be at the moment.
The most concerning for me at the moment is the situation in Libya. Here Gaddafi has determined to fight to the bitter end and the U.S. has decided to engage in military action to weaken Gaddafi's military so it cannot carry out in unnecessary slaughter of civilians. At least that is the argument for military engagement. For me, I'm more concerned with the bigger picture of the U.S. getting involved in yet another military conflict in the Middle East which will cost more money (in the middle of a budget crisis) and may or may not be beneficial (depending on the goals and objectives--which are unclear at the moment). I am reading a lot of news articles, academic analysis, and other writings on what is happening in the Middle East and Libya and what the U.S. should/should not being doing. I read two articles recently that provide the best explanation of the situation, the challenges, and the importance of thinking and planning before jumping into yet another foreign interventionist situation.
Take some time and read George Friedman's article "Immaculate Intervention: The Wars of Humanitarianism," and Stephen M. Walt's "Is America Addicted to War?"
The most concerning for me at the moment is the situation in Libya. Here Gaddafi has determined to fight to the bitter end and the U.S. has decided to engage in military action to weaken Gaddafi's military so it cannot carry out in unnecessary slaughter of civilians. At least that is the argument for military engagement. For me, I'm more concerned with the bigger picture of the U.S. getting involved in yet another military conflict in the Middle East which will cost more money (in the middle of a budget crisis) and may or may not be beneficial (depending on the goals and objectives--which are unclear at the moment). I am reading a lot of news articles, academic analysis, and other writings on what is happening in the Middle East and Libya and what the U.S. should/should not being doing. I read two articles recently that provide the best explanation of the situation, the challenges, and the importance of thinking and planning before jumping into yet another foreign interventionist situation.
Take some time and read George Friedman's article "Immaculate Intervention: The Wars of Humanitarianism," and Stephen M. Walt's "Is America Addicted to War?"
