Hm. I thought the protests were scheduled for tomorrow. (See here.) Guess they got impatient.
Just how stable/popular is Qaddafi’s regime, these days?
I hear real horror stories from people doing business in Libya. This from experienced emerging markets hands. If half of what I hear is true - no idea really, but there is a great deal of consistency - I’d think the population must be constantly angry.
Wake me when it happens in Syria.
I had been wondering if this might start up in Libya. Anyone have an idea how widespread internet access or access to social media is in Libya? I guess my assumption is Gadhafi would have kept a pretty tight lid on that since seems to have been a key element for organizers in other places.
I wonder when this will all stop, or if it even can be stopped. Whatever, the middle East will be a very different place in the years to come. Who would have thought it was possible?
I thought it was ‘Tippy Canoe and Tyler too!’. (and I know it’s actually ‘Tippecanoe’, but it sounds better the other way)
I wouldn’t be surprised if Libya joins the seemingly growing ranks of countries with mass protests erupting in the streets. The Middle East has been a powder keg for decades (hell, centuries) and perhaps it’s fuse is nearly burned down to the nub and ready to go off.
It will be interesting to see what emerges in the years to come, or if there is any substantial change to the people…or if it’s more like trading the Shah for an Islamic theocracy in a sort of ‘meet the new boss, same as the old one’ type thingy.
-XT
I would submit that a theocratic government installed in a free and fair election is probably better than a despot installed by birth, so not really “same as the old boss”.
You would have to make the assumption that the ‘free and fair elections’ were actually free and fair. To me, that’s like saying that the Castro government in Cuba was free and fair…I mean, they had elections and he was always elected, right?
Also, while the president is a quasi-elected position in Iran, I hadn’t noticed that the theocracy is part of the election process…while, from everything I’ve read, the president is more a figurehead with little real power and mostly acts as a lightning rod both domestically and foreign policy wise. The REAL power in Iraq is not something subject to even the farcical election process…which is why a lot of Iranians aren’t too happy these days either.
-XT
Well, that’s why I specified free and fair elections and not just any old elections. I imagine that should any of these Middle Eastern revolutions lead to elections, it won’t be hard to tell if they’re fair or not. That’s what foreign observers are for.
It depends on whether it allows the next free and fair election. IMHO, a nation can’t be called a true democracy until the party in power loses an election and leaves office peacefully.
Even if it doesn’t, it’s still better. Clearly, not ideal, or even close. But better.
I don’t want to side track too much, but I’d say that elections, in and of themselves don’t make the situation ‘better’. It’s really about the quality of life, whether under a dictator, king, theocracy or elected or quasi-elected officials. From what I’ve read, the quality of life hasn’t substantially increased for the average Iranian from the time of the Shah to today. There is a reason that there is so much unrest in Iran today, and a reason that those in power are using similar iron fisted methods to keep that protest element in check.
I suppose if you are a fundamentalist Islamic type (or in the theocracy or the ruling classes) then Iran today is ‘better’ than it was under the Shah. Obviously if you were one of the Shah’s supporters things would be ‘worse’ (mostly because being dead tends to suck). For those not in either group I’d say it’s a toss up as to whether it was better before under the Shah or today under an Islamic theocracy with a few trappings of democracy (and even then, what limited election choices one has being circumvented as in the last election).
Anyway, I don’t think anyone is really surprised with protests in Libya.
-XT
If they overthrow Gaddafi where’s he going to go? The west wouldn’t take him, the Saudis and the Gulf emirates hate him. He’d have to bung some African despot a load of dough. Wmfellows, any idea who might take Gaddafi for a pile of cash?
And Libyans really do hate the guy, there’s no nice end for him if they get hold of him. Gotta admire the guy’s style though :
http://www.vanityfair.com/images/politics/2009/08/qaddafi-0908-ps01.jpg
You know, we said the same thing about the Soviets 20 years ago. Sometimes events overtake perception.
As long as you aren’t the one being beaten to death for trying to maintain what few rights females had been granted under the old boss. coughAfghanistancough
Gaddafi, like Iranian leaders, promoted the idea of protest in other countries. You’d think they would learn to keep their mouths shut.
Huh? I don’t know what American TV has been saying, but BBC, Guardian and Telegraph all had him bewailing the events in Tunisia and Egypt as some kind of western plot. I seem to recall Guardian reporting him saying something like if there has to be a revolution in Tunisia, after the fall of Ben Ali, they should at least copy him, but he praised Ben Ali up and down.
I think the Palestinians have reached the point where (1) they’ve figured out that never works, not in their case and (2) if they rebel against anybody, it’s going to be Abbas.