i never imputed good intentions to nato or the u.s.
i did say that the global system is geared to the benefit of the
dominant world players, and that after the fighting is over in libya,
the regime will have to work out its international relations within that
context.
i too wish a more aggressive au would regulate conflicts in africa. and
i wish the u.s. would not insinuate itself back into african affairs by
hiring ethiopia to do its dirty work in somalia, or deploy africom so as
to control as much of africa as possible.
given that, there are times when i have to applaud the overthrow of a
dictator when the revolt is led by his own oppressed people. this all
began with tunisia and then egypt,and france and the u.s. had to be
dragged kicking and screaming into these struggles since their own
favored subordinates were being ousted. so i suppose i should be happy
that something more than blind force arose in those moments. but in the
long run, the problem remains that we have national states, with
national economic interests, that trump other things like human rights
or democracy or self government. always.
ken
On 9/3/11 9:04 AM, Femi Kolapo wrote:
>
> My frustration was more against an effete AU, yours seems to be
> against what you consider to be lack of appreciation of the good
> intentions of NATO or the US in the Libyan crisis.
>
--
kenneth w. harrow
professor of english
michigan state university
department of english
east lansing, mi 48824-1036
ph. 517 803 8839
harrow@msu.edu
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
No comments:
Post a Comment