The Bush administration’s dithering over whether to send troops to Liberia stands in stark contrast with the zealousness with which it sent American forces into Iraq. The U.N., other African governments and Liberian citizens themselves are begging the United States to help stop the bloodshed.
After weeks of indecision, Bush finally sent 4,500 troops steaming towards the Liberian coast, although there are no plans as yet to send them ashore.
The Pentagon brass have argued that the U.S. has no national interest in Liberia, dredging up memories of America’s failed peacekeeping mission in Somalia. Secretary of State Colin Powell says we need to help, but we must have a clear mission and, of course, a definitive exit strategy.
Bush says that the Africans need to take the lead on this one.
In other words, when it matters to us, we’ll defy the world and invade whatever country we deem necessary. But when we don’t really care, when the killings are only killings and not tied to some worldwide terrorist network, we want others to clean up the mess.
Bush can’t have it both ways. He claims that America is the protector of freedom and democracy, but he refuses to act when human rights are grossly violated, when nations are begging for American help, when Liberians are placing the dead bodies of their loved ones at the gates of the American embassy.
The U.S. may be acting according to its strategic interests, but Bush’s rhetoric suggests that the mighty, benevolent America does otherwise.
There’s something wrong with a world that can’t protect human beings from mass carnage. America may not be able to solve the problem, but as the self-proclaimed leader of the “free world”, but it is our duty to take the leadership to try.
