Should foreign powers ever claim the right to intervene or should the people of a country overthrow their own dictators? Do interventionists not always have ulterior motives that could undermine the people's sovereignty over their struggle and it's outcomes?
Interviews conducted with European NATO delegations and NATO staffers concerned with nuclear planning and deployment reveal that there is sufficient political will to end the deployment of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons in Europe.
The possible domino-effect of the Arab Spring makes African dictators tremble in their boots. What are the parallels and what are the differences? Will an African Spring take place and how will it look?
Instead of focusing on the motives of the US and NATO, the opposition to the Libyan bombings needs to focus on the likely outcomes. Afghanistan and Iraq taught us there is still no way to bomb a country into democracy.
Dealings with Libya in recent years by Europe have been dictated by unprincipled politics and naked profiteering. The sudden discovery of a humanitarian imperative is not only deeply hypocritical, but also duplicitous.
Despite a terrible history with nuclear technology, corporate and state actors try to disconnect these mega disasters from the energy industry in order to "normalise" that which continues threatens our very existance.
The peoples of North Africa and the Middle East are looking for less, not greater militarisation of their countries. It is time for U.S. policy to recognize that reality and reject proposals for a 'no fly' zone.