Ivory Coast - is this hypocrisy?

Originally Posted by TheNorm

So why do we put up with it?

Who is doing the putting up?Not us.
The denizens of the dark continent have been abused and used by Europeans for at least two/three centuries.

There have been very many interventions both by individual countries(all complete failures) and by the international communities(none of which worked)
Frankly much as I want to help all the people of Africa to all achieve full democracy and freedom from famine, disease and war we cannot impose it from the outside. We have to work with them diplomatically and with offers of aid where necessary.

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

...Frankly much as I want to help all the people of Africa to all achieve full democracy and freedom from famine, disease and war we cannot impose it from the outside. We have to work with them diplomatically and with offers of aid where necessary.

I agree with you.

But why are we treating Libya differently?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12951990

The UN secretary general has urged Ivory Coast's internationally-backed president to investigate hundreds of deaths blamed partly on his supporters.

---------- Post added at 20:20 ---------- Previous post was at 20:08 ----------

Originally Posted by TheNorm

I agree with you.

But why are we treating Libya differently?

Well you should be pleased that they are doing something for one African state(you do realise where Libya is?) for once.

The problem with sorting out all of Africa's problems is that it is a huge continent and I doubt anyone has all the resources necessary to sort out every country in that continent that needs sorting out.Plus we then have any number of other troublespots elsewhere that again we don't have the resources to deal with all of them. Plus we would never be off the continent and there is a real danger that the UN could end up being sucked into a conflict that is never ending.Just think how long the Sudan troubles have been ongoing.

Then there is the UN itself..as someone once said getting the UN Security Council to agree to anything is like herding cats.

[Osem]

Hypocrisy yes, but the sad reality is that we can't intervene everywhere there's a humanitarian crisis and I suppose it boils down to what's deemed to be in the UK's interests. That's what all countries usually do isn't it?

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

...The problem with sorting out all of Africa's problems is that it is a huge continent and I doubt anyone has all the resources necessary to sort out every country in that continent that needs sorting out.....

Again, I agree. But why treat one African country (Libya) differently from another (Ivory Coast)?

[Osem]

Originally Posted by TheNorm

Again, I agree. But why treat one African country (Libya) differently from another (Ivory Coast)?

Because in the minds of those at the top, Libya going pear shaped poses a far greater risk to our interests and international stability than the Ivory Coast does. Unpalatable I know but then, on a personal level, how many of us give all our spare cash to relieve the suffering of the world's starving and oppressed as opposed to having that holiday or new TV?....

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by Osem

...I suppose it boils down to what's deemed to be in the UK's interests. That's what all countries usually do isn't it?

I suspect you are right. If this is the case, why don't the government tell us exactly how certain actions will be in our interest? After all, it's our money they are spending.

---------- Post added at 20:37 ---------- Previous post was at 20:36 ----------

Originally Posted by Osem

Because in the minds of those at the top, Libya going pear shaped poses a far greater risk to our interests and international stability than the Ivory Coast does. ....

You are referring to oil?

[Osem]

Originally Posted by TheNorm

I suspect you are right. If this is the case, why don't the government tell us exactly how certain actions will be in our interest? After all, it's our money they are spending.

---------- Post added at 20:37 ---------- Previous post was at 20:36 ----------



You are referring to oil?

Yes, but of course there have been examples of intervention when oil wasn't directly an issue such as in Kosovo (although the potential for serious instability in Europe was probably an equally powerful motivator for the Nato countries). Very few countries risk the lives of their people and spend vast amounts of money for no return. Foreign aid is an example - there are usually strings attached. I suspect if the oil taps were turned off, the lights went out and the UK ground to a halt, many of those who bleat on about how wrong it is to 'fight for oil' might change their minds but I'm only guessing....

As I already pointed out the UN is notorious for not getting anything done mainly because the group that matter IE the Security Council do not all march to the same drum beat.They invariably abstain(if we are lucky) or they veto any action.

So self interest tends to raise it's head where one or more of the council have vested interests in an area and a veto is inevitable.

[G UK]

Arn't UN and French troops already in the Ivory Coast?

The legal UN backed president appears to also have the superior firepower and control most of the country and his supporters are likely to finish off his opposition by themselves. The issue is that the legal UN backed president's supporters have been implicated in the murder of civilians, as have the supporters of his rival.

What exactly would we do? Air power is useless in urban areas where the bulk of fighting is and ground troops (which are already there to some degree) can't do much without UN backing or fighting the UN backed presidents forces.

Now tell me the situation is the same as Libya!!

[dazzer89]

Originally Posted by TheNorm

There is unrest in the Ivory Coast. Apparently the guy who has been in charge lost a recent election, but doesn't want to let go of power.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12096075

This is causing "unrest". So far, 500 people have been killed and a million made homeless.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-11916590

My question is: where is the UN resolution? There are UN troops in place, but where are the tomahawk missiles?

Is this hypocrisy? Or is it government policy to leave countries alone if their biggest export is cocoa beans?

No Oil.

Originally Posted by dazzer89

No Oil.

Strange - one of their biggest exports is oil and related products......

According to Ivorian Government figures, exports of crude oil and refined oil products totaled $2.97 billion (f.o.b.) in 2008

Link

While i would be happy if we could sort out the problems of every nation on the planet when they hit trouble we cannot and in some cases we should not. Africa is such a cauldron of problems and solving one even short term is difficult unless any intervening nation is prepared to commit a lot of time and hell of a lot of resources. Right now the UK is as over committed as it gets even if we wanted to intervene here we are simply in no position to do so. Whats happening in the Ivory Coast is a tradegy but being practical it isn't one of our making and shouldn't be one of our fixing we have to draw the line somewhere. Look at Libya as the straw that is breaking the UK militarys back and ask "arn't we asking enough of our forces right now".

Originally Posted by TheNorm

My question is: where is the UN resolution? There are UN troops in place, but where are the tomahawk missiles?

Is this hypocrisy? Or is it government policy to leave countries alone if their biggest export is cocoa beans?

UN and French armed forces have been pummelling Laurent Gbagbo's refuge since some time yesterday.

Does this development go some way towards reassuring you that there's more to Western foreign policy than concerns about oil?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...oast-live.html

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by Chris

...Does this development go some way towards reassuring you that there's more to Western foreign policy than concerns about oil?...

Not after reading Hugh's link in post 23.

In fact, I'm more convinced than ever that the "humanitarian" card is nothing but a joker, the only reason to send in troops is to maintain the flow of the black stuff (and no I'm not talking about chocolate).