Presentation Transcript

1. Double-standards interventionism as seen from India, Brazil, Germany, Russia and China Initiative for Humanitarian intervention in Libya came from the Gulf led by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, and NATO The rest of the world's reaction to NATO's decision to use the UN on behalf of anti-Gaddafi rebels ranged from quiet disgust - India and Brazil; Germany - to vocal opposition from China, Russia, South Africa, and the African Union (AU) The Middle East's ultimate autocracies, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and UAE, used this opportunity to turn the Arab regime's freedom-and-democracy anxiety to account against Libya
2. The 10-0 UNSC vote included five abstentions, from two permanent members - China and Russia, and three non-permanent members - Brazil, Germany and India. The other three permanent members backing the vote were Britain, France and the United States
3. India’s position The resolution that the Council has adopted today authorizes far reaching measures under Chapter VII of the UN Charter with relatively little credible information on the situation on the ground in Libya (No reports from UN special envoy or AU High Level Panel) No clarity about details of enforcement measures, including who and with what assets will participate and how these measures will be exactly carried out. It is, of course, very important that there is full respect for sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity of Libya Out of India’s consistently advocated policy of noninterference in other countries’ internal affairs and its own interest, India accused the Western coalition forces of deviating from the original intent of the resolution. India is also making efforts to try to settle this problem. "What is happening in a country, within their internal affairs, no external powers should interfere in it," PranabMukherjee, India's finance minister and leader of the lower house of parliament announced. "Nobody, not a couple of countries, can take that decision to change a particular regime," Mukherjee said. "Whether a regime will change or not will depend on the people of that particular country, not by any external forces”
4. Brazil’s position Brazil stands in solidarity with all movements in the Middle Eats and Magrebexpressing their legitimate demands for better governance…. Brazil believed that the resolution contemplated measures that went beyond that call.  “We are not convinced that the use of force as provided for in operative paragraph 4 of the present resolution will lead to the realization of our common objective — the immediate end of violence and the protection of civilians” …. Brazil was also concerned that the measures approved might have the unintended effect of exacerbating the current tensions on the ground and “causing more harm than good to the very same civilians we are committed to protecting”.  No military action alone would succeed in ending the conflict.  Protecting civilians, ensuring lasting settlement and addressing the legitimate demands of Libyan citizens demand a political process
5. Germany’s position GermanysidedwithRussia and China and was particularly concerned by the plight of the Libyan people and believed it was crucial to tighten existing sanctions to “cut [the Libyan regime] off” from the funds that had propped it up for so long Germany saw great risks, and the likelihood of large-scale loss of life should not be underestimated Those that participated in its implementation could be drawn into a protracted military conflict that could draw in the wider region Germany decided not to support the resolution and would not contribute its own forces to any military effort that arose from its implementation.  Germany had abstained from the vote
6. Russia’s position Russia abstained, although the country’s position opposing violence against civilians in Libya was clear Work on the resolution was not in keeping with Security Council practice, with many questions having remained unanswered, including how it would be enforced and by whom, and what the limits of engagement would be An immediate ceasefire was the best way to stop the loss of life Cautioning against unpredicted consequences…. there was a need to avoid further destabilization in the region Mr. Putin …. the United Nations resolution allowing airstrikes resembled “a medieval call for a crusade.” He launched into an extended, caustic attack on the NATO campaign, saying it violated the principle of sovereignty
7. China’s position The root of China’s abstention is Beijing’s stated, longstanding policy of noninterference in other countries’ internal affairs - later publicly condemning the Western military intervention, and it was the last permanent member of the U.N. Security Council to recognize the NTC The United Nations Charter must be respected and the current crisis must be ended through peaceful means…. against the use of force when negotiations were not exhausted…..Specific questions that failed to be answered China supported the efforts of the Secretary-General’s Envoy to resolve the situation by peaceful means
8. Beijing’s interests in Libya are relatively small; its relations with the former regime of Gadhafi were never close, and it owns no producing Libyan oilfields However, it receives 3.5 percent of its total crude imports from Libya, and it has invested an estimated $20 billion in the country, mostly through state-owned enterprises China is looking to improve relations with the NTC, both to see a return on those investments and to use its wealth to carve out a place in cash-poor post-GadhafiLibya -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- However, several NTC officials have warned it may freeze out countries that did not support the rebellion. The fact that several elements within the NTC are displaying hostility to China and the other countries that did not fully support the rebels during the war suggests the NTC’s willingness to use this perceived non-support in any future deals, meaning China’s goals in Libya may not be easily achievable
9. Pyrrhicvictory On the matter of Libya, the West appears on its way to a Pyrrhic victory. Success in Libya gives the West a chance to say it got regime change right after its disaster in Iraq /the Baghdad regime is pro Iran now) - and reassert its global moral relevance after it bungled the world economy into recession – but the new regime intend to rely on Sharia Law and The rising BRIC countries, on the other hand, find their mistrust of Western self-delusion, enabled by military force and insistence on a rule-based world in which only the Western democracies have the right to break the rules, confirmed
10. Michael Walzer (Foreign Affairs), insists that the idea of humanitarianism has become a central feature of world politics: “Humanitarianism is probably the most important ‘ism’ in the world today, given the collapse of communism, the discrediting of neoliberalism, and general distrust of large-scale ideologies.” Walzer appears to be suggesting that humanitarianism now eclipses realism and nationalism as an influential global force in the world of ideas and statecraft
11. True or not …….The most interesting and dangerous element in the no-fly-zone debate is the dawning awareness that ''Responsibility to Protect'' - R2P aka humanitarian intervention in do-gooder jargon - is not just a Western monopoly Once the intervention jinn is out of the bottle, there's no telling who will seize the R2P sword, or for what manner of end Saudi Arabia apparently believes in R2P when it comes to protecting a Sunni autocracy in neighboring Bahrain… …which raises the disturbing possibility that Iran has a R2P the Shi'ite majority in Bahrain… …and maybe the Arab world has a R2P the Palestinians next time Israel rampages into the Gaza strip…
12. Double-standards per excellence What about the protection of vulnerable states that are victimized by geopolitical maneuvers associated with resources, markets, and congenial ideology? It might be well to recall that it was a notorious tactic of Hitler’s expansionist foreign policy to intervene or threaten to do so for the sake of protecting German minorities being allegedly abused in neighboring countries
13. Noam Chomsky … ‘military humanism’ depicts as the grand strategy of hegemonic political actors being cleverly disguised as global public works projects In effect, humanitarianism is the pathetic fig leaf selected to hide the emperor’s nudity…. ‘double standards’ as proof positive show that whatever the explanation given for a particular intervention by the United States or NATO, the claimed humanitarian motivation is window dressing, and not the primary consideration Western silence about decades of brutal Turkish suppression of the Kurdish movement for human rights, Bahrain, Yemen etc is an illuminating example of geopolitical blinkering whenever it seems inconvenient to take action on behalf of a victimized minority The most extreme instance of double standards involves the failure of the UN System or ‘a coalition of the willing’ to take any action protective of the Palestinian population enduring an oppressive occupation for more than forty-four years, despite the direct UN and colonialist responsibility for the Palestinian ordeal
14. Geopolitics remains in control despite recourse to the framing of action by reference to R2P. If we want more principled and effective action in the future, it will require a great deal of pressure from global civil society in collaboration with middle powers, the sort of coalition that led to the surprising establishment of the International Criminal Court in 2002 over the opposition of such international stalwarts as the United States, China, Russia, and India
15. The trouble for Mr. Obama is that even as he was publicly proclaiming his backing at the United Nations for a new Libyan state, American officials were working furiously behind the scenes to make sure the United Nations did not bestow a similar recognition on a Palestinian state. The Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, has vowed to pursue statehood before the Security Council this week; American officials say the United States will veto that request, should it gain the broader Council’s approval Obama ……. Two days ago: “Today the world is saying, in one unmistakable voice, ‘We will stand with you as you seize this moment of promise; as you reach for the freedom, the dignity and the opportunity you deserve.’ But he was talking about Libyans, not Palestinians.