MarkBenjamin

What Kind of Crackdown Warrants Humanitarian Intervention?

President Obama argues that the Unites States was compelled to act in Libya because of Col. Muammar Gaddafi’s brutality against civilians in his own country. Speaking in El Salvador on Tuesday, Obama blasted Gaddafi as a brutal dictator who is “threatening his people.” The President said the Unites States acted, in part, to “make sure that the changes that are sweeping through that region are occurring in a peaceful, nonviolent fashion.”

That argument has become muddied as the protests against Gaddafi have morphed into a civil war; it’s hard to determine exactly who the “civilians” are in Libya, since many of them have taken up arms.

When asked to clarify Obama’s position, the White House e-mailed TIME a series of reports on Libya from human rights groups.

The reports, from organizations like Human Rights Watch, do indeed document Gaddafi’s brutal treatment of apparently peaceful protesters last month, before civil war broke out. By February 20, Human Rights Watch said at least 233 Libyan protesters had been killed. The group documented, for example, how security forces opened fire at protesters on Feb. 19 as they chanted anti-Gaddafi slogans outside the dictator’s residence in Benghazi. A nearby hospital reportedly received the dead bodies of 23 protesters later that day.

Human Rights Watch called for Gaddafi to “stop the unlawful killing of protestors (sic).”

But the same human rights organizations have documented similar abuses by other autocratic governments in the region, including Yemen and Bahrain, and the United States has so far shown no interest in military action to defend citizens there.

On March 18, Amnesty International documented how security forces of the government of President Ali Abdullah Saleh in Yemen, a U.S. partner in combating terrorism, carried out a “coordinated sniper attack of protestors (sic) in Sana’a” that left at least 40 people dead and more than 200 wounded. The group said government forces had killed at least 80 people there since February.

Last week, Amnesty International condemned the killing of eight protesters by Bahraini and Saudi security forces brought into Bahrain, home to a major Navy base that houses the U.S. Fifth Fleet, to help quash protests there. The group said those forces were firing at protesters using “live ammunition at close range.” Amnesty said the government used tanks and teargas against the protesters.

The White House says that military action in Libya, under broad international support, has already averted 100,000 deaths. But if one only considers the lives already claimed in autocratic crackdowns across the region, it’s hard to see a significant gap between Gaddafi’s actions and those of governments like Yemen and Bahrain that have historically been friendlier to U.S. interests.

Related Topics: Mideast
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / The White House via Getty Images

    Political Picures of the Week, May 18-25

    TIME’s photo editors bring you the best pictures of the past week from the Beltway and beyond.

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    From left: AP; ABACAUSA

    The Phony War: Obama and Romney Are Debating Character, Not Policy

    More than five months from Election Day, the back-and-forth about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain already feels played out. Unfortunately, there’s good reason to expect the campaign continues in this vein indefinitely. Neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney are terribly interested in dwelling on policy platforms. Romney’s plan to slash spending and keep taxes low on the wealthy isn’t especially popular, at least not at any level of detail beyond a blithe promise to shrink the deficit. Meanwhile, Obama’s signature first-term achievements, like health care, the stimulus and Wall Street reform, are all unpopular or tricky to sell. (The Dodd-Frank bill is the most popular of these, but hyping it means offending wealthy donors.) So what we’re getting instead is a superficial duel about character–and, worse, one that’s based on the largely false premise that the better man can better “manage” the economy back to health.

  • http://elvisberg.wordpress.com Elvis Elvisberg

    Yemen & Bahrain (& Ivory Coast & Zimbabwe) lack clear battle lines. There, it’s protests like in Tunisia and Egypt. In Libya, we saw clear geographical lines of control, a declared intent by the head of state to go “house to house” to “cleanse” the country of protestors, and an ongoing military operation against an underequipped & helpless group of mostly civilians.
    -
    Effective intervention, short of an Iraq-style likely counterproductive invasion & occupation, is only possible in Libya, of the states you list.

  • http://ericychan.wordpress.com ericychan

    I fail to see why this comparison is so popular. This is nothing but the Perfect Solution Fallacy:
    .
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy
    .
    IE The US shouldn’t intervene in Libya, because we’re not doing anything about Bahrain or Yemen.
    .
    Why should this be an all or nothing situation? For that matter, I have my doubts that people would exactly be supportive if we intervened in all three countries.

  • shepherdwong

    But the same human rights organizations have documented similar abuses by other autocratic governments in the region, including Yemen and Bahrain, and the United States has so far shown no interest in military action to defend citizens there.
    .
    Gaddafi was threatening and preparing to commit genocide on his own populace.
    .
    FYI, as long as you keep taking your talking points from Republicans, you’ll continue to sound like an idiot.

  • allthingsinaname

    “But if one only considers the lives already claimed in autocratic crackdowns across the region, it’s hard to see a significant gap between Gaddafi’s actions and those of governments like Yemen and Bahrain that have historically been friendlier to U.S. interests.”
    .
    Really? This is Gawd awful reporting. You can’t tell the difference between a full scale revolt and protesting, and the scale of human destruction entailed to keep power, and the revenge that Gadhafi promised?

  • americanwithabrain

    Historically, the slaughter of 100,000-500,000 in Cambodia did not qualify. http://www.historyplace.com/worldhistory/genocide/pol-pot.htm

    Nor did the slaughter of 800,000 in Rwanda. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_Genocide

  • http://shortplaysaboutrealpeople.wordpress.com Michael Maiello

    The whole “what’s a civilian?” thing is starting to get a little absurd. Look at the situation: if you protest the dictator, the dictator will try to kill you for it. At that point, apparently, you are a civilian and eligible for protection, assuming you don’t get killed before help arrives. But if you arm yourself and try to do something to stop the person trying to kill you, you’re now a rebel and so, you don’t get help? I don’t get it.

    I oppose U.S. involvement in Libya because I’m generally a pacifist and I think the U.S. should tread lightly outside of its own borders. But all of this “who’s a civilian?” stuff is seeming to me like semantic nagging and bellyaching.

    It’s okay to just be honest about what we’re doing. We’re saying it’s not okay for Gadhafi to kill his own people whether or not they are participating in a rebellion against him, okay?

  • David

    I didn’t see anyone commenting on the irony of the US president speaking in EL SALVADOR, a nation whose human rights abuses are largely funded and taught by the United States government.

  • http://shortplaysaboutrealpeople.wordpress.com Michael Maiello

    Nobody ever talks about the U.S. history with Central and South America anymore. Wonder why?

  • pintortwo

    For a different point of view…
    .
    A Wafer-Thin No-Fly Zone (link)
    -Jeff Huber, US Navy Cmdr, retired
    .
    “The Pentarchy’s media suck ups.. are helping Team Obama sell its farcical reality by hyping our strikes on Libya as “humanitarian intervention.” I’m wondering if there’s a neocon pundit in the world.. who would claim that any of our military interventions of the New American Century did anything other than create humanitarian crises or make existing ones worse. By anybody’s count, we’ve caused more injury, displacement and death of innocents than any ten supposed bad guys we’re blowing the globe to smithereens to keep it safe from.
    (…)
    .. It’s feeding season for War Inc., and mongrels on both sides of the chasm—from state secretary and AIPAC hag Cruella Clinton to John McCain’s poofter-hawk paramour Lindsey Graham—are downright giddy about their shiny new war of opportunity. Kerry’s minty no-fly zone has turned into a full bore air campaign against Gadhafi’s forces and their infrastructure, and don’t think the involvement is going to stop with air power.
    .
    Obama is still playing the tape about “days rather than weeks,” but we’re not likely to get out of Libya any sooner than we’ll leave Iraq or the Bananastans. Even Mullen, our military’s most senior bull feather merchant, doesn’t give false hopes for a swift exit. “I wouldn’t speculate in terms of length at this particular point in time,” he told ABC’s Christiane Amanpour in his own sweet convoluted way during his rounds of the big brainwash broadcast last Sunday. Translated into wise-acre-ese, Mullen is telling us that the last plane out of Tripoli will take off when brown cows give chocolate milk.
    .
    And who gave Obama permission to get us follicle deep in yet another quagmire? Not the Constitution. Not Congress. Hell, congressional democrats are wringing their hands over whether or not to ask Obama to ask them for permission to start the war in Libya he already started without their permission. And congressional Republicans.. (don’t) think Obama is doing enough.”

  • fhmadvocat

    Ah, oh how I remember those glory days of the 1980s when I was a college youth and marched in protest to U.S. support of Rebels in Nicaragua. I remember getting my picture being taken by FBI agents and always remembering I was blowing my chance to getting a job with the federal government in later years.

    I was rather unique in that I supported the U.S. government support of the El Salvadorean government. I remembered their president was a “reformer”, whose name I can’t remember today.

    Those days are long past. Most of Latin America has some form of quasi-democratic government. While abuse still exists, the death squads of the past are history.

  • liberalmeltdown

    Obama speaks in El Salvador about the Libyan government threatening its people. El Salvador and its neighbors, in particular Mexico, don’t have the greatest record on Human rights. In fact, you could say the same of most the nations around the world. That’s why most people are thankful to live in the United States.
    .
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8647252.stm
    .
    Amnesty cited statistics from the Mexican National Human Rights Commission, which showed that nearly 10,000 migrants had been abducted, mainly for ransom, over a period of six months in 2009.
    Grupo Beta workers (Copyright: Ricardo Ramirez Arriola)
    Grupo Beta offers help to migrants

    It said that almost half of those interviewed said public officials had played a direct role in their kidnap.

    The report also said that an estimated six out of 10 migrant women and girls have experienced sexual violence at the hands of criminals, other migrants or corrupt public officials.
    .
    .
    Many of the migrants traveling through Mexico come from El Salvador. Yet, Mexico criticizes AZ as do the liberals as if Arizona is the Human rights violator.
    .
    Continuing on with the alternate universe of liberalism, Obama also criticizes AZ, but praises Mexico. He’s very consistent, consistently wrong.
    .
    http://colombiareports.com/colombia-news/news/11773-obama-mexico-drugs.html
    .
    “Mexico is a vast and progressive democracy, with a growing economy, and as a result you cannot compare what is happening in Mexico with what happened in Colombia 20 years ago.”
    .
    .
    Mexico is a progressive democracy? Only in liberal la la land.

  • shepherdwong

    I’m wondering if there’s a neocon pundit in the world.. who would claim that any of our military interventions of the New American Century did anything other than create humanitarian crises or make existing ones worse.
    .
    This is very troubling. I’m finding it very hard these days to find anyone who doesn’t sound like a babbling fool on this issue. I think we’ve all been rendered nearly brain-dead by thirty years of “conservative” movement dogma, elite failure across the board and Republican shock doctrine policies. So let me say this straight out: Libya isn’t Iraq, Barack Obama isn’t George Bush and Bob Gates isn’t Donald Rumsfeld.
    .
    How this military intervention turns out will be determined by the sanity of the mission and the competence of the people executing it. So far, we haven’t been scare-mongered into sending our army into a country that didn’t ask for us to be there, set up our own government based upon failed “conservative” dogma, built a torture program to elicit false intelligence for political purposes and kill 100,000 civilian non-combatants, and maim and displace millions more. There are plenty of legitimate criticisms one can make about this administration but, unlike the people in charge “of our military interventions of the New American Century,” they’re not a bunch of incompetent psychopaths.

  • pintortwo

    Barack Obama isn’t George Bush and Bob Gates isn’t Donald Rumsfeld
    .
    Tell that to someone living in Kandahar.
    .
    Having said that, the last administration was hell-bent on getting bases in Iraq and Afghanistan, so yes the brutality and dishonesty levels were epic. I’ll also add that playing on our collective anger over 911 and then asking our soldiers to fight under false pretenses.. it’s difficult to imagine any future admin stooping to this level.
    .
    We can’t, however, give this admin a free-pass because it’s democrat and/or there is no Cheney, Wolfie, Rummy, etc. Far too many of their atrocities are continued today, many having essentially been institutionalized. Further, it was Bushies that picked Gates, Mullen, Petraeus, McChrystal, Ordiero, etc to fulfill their mission. If Obama intended to truly be “different”, his first order of business would have been to send them all back to civilian command, considering what we know now.

  • shepherdwong

    We can’t, however, give this admin a free-pass because it’s democrat and/or there is no Cheney, Wolfie, Rummy, etc.
    .
    Ha! At this point, I’m reluctant to even give them the benefit of the doubt. But that’s really what’s called-for here.
    .
    .
    If Obama intended to truly be “different”…
    .
    Obviously, he decided that would be political suicide with the Village and independent voters. I don’t see where that was incorrect.

blog comments powered by Disqus