I just returned from the 2011 National Model United Nations Conference in Washington, DC. These conferences are a great exercise in public speaking and diplomacy, but sadly they also show the weaknesses that exist in the world of international politics. Every time I return from a Model UN conference I wonder how useful the international system actually is in solving issues that matter to us. By no means is the UN a useless organization, but the flaws that exist when member-states are still not willing to cede some sovereignty to an organization promoting global governance cannot be ignored. Consensus voting as it is practiced by the General Assembly will never bring humanity to adhere to greater standards, simply because we always agree on the lowest common denominator when it comes to issues like poverty, famine, and human rights. What am I trying to say? Member-states of the UN should grant the organization more powers so that issues that plague humanity can be solved by the parliament that governs humanity.
Given the great weekend I had in DC, please do not expect this post to be intellectually stimulating in any kind of way. I am extremely exhausted, but wish to publish this post right now so that you don’t have to wait an extra day for your weekly post. This week I am going to focus on the circumstances of Gaddafi’s death and I am going to discuss the situation and future of Somalia. As always check the end of the post for articles I consider important as well.
The King is Dead! Long Live the Republic!
As I am sure you have already heard Colonel Gaddafi, the King of Kings of Africa, has finally met his end. After 42 years of rule, Gaddafi was supposedly shot in the head by one of the soldiers that led the attack on the autocrat’s convoy as he tried to escape his birthplace of Sirte. A bullet hole on the left side of his head marks the entrance point of the bullet that ended the longest rule of any man in all of Africa. His body is now on display in a storage freezer in the city of Misrata which had seen the fiercest fighting during the eight month long revolution.
What is wrong with all of this? Well seen from the point of view of the average Libyan, the Colonel probably got what he had coming in a more timely fashion without the delay of a justice system. The death of Gaddafi was brought about by a soldier who in the Battle of Sirte could have been carried away by the bloodlust and emotion that comes with being exposed to such gruesome scenes. The people of Libya wanted justice, and it was delivered by the pistol of a soldier instead of the gavel of a judge in The Hague. Seen in the broader picture though, the way Gaddafi was killed and the way he is on display to the masses now has some very serious implications in terms of international politics. The extrajudicial killing of the former leader of Libya means that the new Libyan Republic will be born out of blood with a stained human rights record. With the increased emphasis of the importance of human rights by developed states, it is crucial for states like Libya to have a spotless human rights record in order to start off on good terms with strong economic powers in the area (i.e. the member-states of the EU). The killing of Gaddafi also takes away from the legitimacy of the new government which can now be hardly seen as a regime that treats all equal, even bigger than life leaders. The display of Gaddafi’s body is furthermore against Islamic burial tradition which calls upon the burial of a deceased Muslim to take place as soon as possible. The new regime might very well take criticism for exposing the dead body of a Muslim for such a long time from fellow Arab states. Regardless, the people of Libya are celebrating that after eight months they have finally gained their complete independence.
Negotiating with the Bad Guys
I was reading through last week’s Economist today and came across an article that reminded my of a paper I wrote for my Terrorism in the Modern World class last year. The article I read dealt with the fact that it might be in the interest for Western powers to negotiate with dominant powers in this Eastern African country, even if those dominant powers have fundamentalist tendencies like the terrorist group Al-Shabaab. I figured I would publish my paper so you can get a better idea of how Al-Shabaab became to be and why I agree so much with the Economist’s point of view. A link to the paper is added at the end of this post. Please excuse the formatting. I am still trying to find a website with which I can upload and display my papers properly (so please let me know if you know one!) Here is also a link that gives you a little visual on how things are looking on the ground in Mogadishu, the capital of Somalia.
Other Links
