By Ryan Rogers
The Libyan conflict has captured the attention of the world as the United Nations recently voted to intervene in what has become civil war. France initially took a pivotal position in this intervention by officially recognizing the Libyan rebels.
The question I ask is ‘Why?’
Would it be far too cynical for one to assume France, the country which inspired the term “Freedom Fries” not so long ago (due to their opposition to Operation Iraqi Freedom), would now want to support a movement to overthrow a dictatorship?
It concerns me how soon this conflict began in correlation to the peaceful transition which occurred in Egypt, largely due to the will of youthful, educated protesters and social networking via the Internet. It would be far too easy for the public to associate these two instances as one in the same, even though the components appear to be visibly different.
The Libyan conflict is appearing to be more and more of a tribal conflict between members of the current government led by Muammar al-Gaddafi and the portion of the country which benefited before Gaddafi’s coup d’etat over King Idris I. In fact, the region has a history of tension for this precise reason.
Could France have seized an opportunity to gain a significant trading partner with oil reserves in mind? Could the United States be in the same position?
If we review the facts, Libya holds the largest supply of oil reserves in Africa and is conveniently located just across the Straight of Gibraltar, making Libya an ideal supplier for the European market. Combine this with the mixed emotions of the public following the Egyptian protests and the tendency to stereotype foreign conflicts and we have a recipe for intervention.
Maybe I’m being cynical. Overall, I prefer cynical analysis as opposed to impulse when it comes to resolutions authorizing our soldiers to go to war.