Violence continues (see Sam Alavi's coverage of the story,
here and
here) in Libya after the
deaths of US Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans in the US Consulate ten days ago, which the Obama administration is now referring to as terrorist attacks. To recap, Stevens, who was well respected by the people of Benghazi due to his involvement in the aforementioned removal, died from
asphyxiation, as the building he was in was set on fire by attackers, who were retaliating against an Islamophobic video themselves. The people of Benghazi (which, since Gaddafi's removal last year, has been considered "
the heartland of Libya's uprising") are becoming both more vocal and physical, as marchers in a protest against the Consulate attack are calling for the militias to be disarmed, and in fact, overtook various militia headquarters this Friday.
The protestors seem to be (at least in part) attempting to show the United States that they do not agree with the killings--one protestor even declared "I am sorry, America. This is The real Libya" meaning that those who were responsible for Stevens' death were not acting with their support or validation. Although it is unfortunate that the situation became so drastic, this effort was lauded by John McCain, who feels that this shows Libya's "freedom-loving" nature.
Does this suggest that Libya's troubles will soon be solved, or are they moving farther away from desired results? Is the protest another unfortunate and dangerous situation, or is it a sign that the people of Libya have a voice, and that that voice is calling for more freedom, as John McCain feels?
No comments:
Post a Comment