1; Unity

In the half-century following the conclusion of the Peloponnesian War, the city-states of Hellas remained embroiled in incessant quarrels over the most of petty matters, despite the best attempts of those who had once hoped to unite all Hellenes under a common banner. Though the leaders in power had never solved any issues of great importance, they still walked with pride and held their heads high, concerning themselves with little matters fit only to enhance their own reputations. These leaders made often treaties of peace between themselves, but in vain and perhaps in ill-conscience from the outset. The treaties themselves did not settle hostilities, but served only to defer wars to the moment that one such leader perceived that he could inflict some grievous wound upon another.

It is in this environment that we are counseled by Isocrates, that the more narrow-minded and cowardly our leaders prove to be, the more vigorously the rest of us must work to find a solution in order to end our apparent enmity. Our duty is to rise above these petty plots and endeavour to establish a greater sense of security at home, and to install greater confidence among neighbors and between each other.

The specifics, however, may be more difficult to swallow in modern times. Isocrates presents a simple solution to forging a lasting peace: war with Persia, which would turn the mutual enmity of the Hellenes away from each other and towards a common enemy.

Yet has America not been forged by the very same process? We have been united by war, and our member states have long ago sacrificed much of their independent identities and sovereignties to become integrated as parts of the whole. Our enemy was no derivative Achaemenid king, guardian of a realm long bereft of their former glory and hegemony, but one of the most powerful and far-flung empires that has ever graced the surface of this Earth, and it was still yet in its prime.

It took a foreign army to conquer the city-states of Hellas and impose unity upon them. Isocrates would no doubt look upon the creation of the United States as a demonstration of the natural tendency to form bonds against all adversity. The colonies, which were established with vastly different motivations and creeds, had virtually no mutual ties but were able to create common cause nonetheless.

The United States has advanced innumerable steps since then, but our political climate has suffered to the point that it is comparable to that of Hellas. Long gone are the days that any single politician can be elected to the office of the Presidency on a unanimous vote. Politicians today stand on what they call “principle” in order to appeal to their voter base, instead of compromising with opposing factions to create more balanced legislation. They do and say not what is required for the betterment of country, but what will cement their reelection. One faction’s triumph is now automatically regarded as another’s scourge. The recent battle over the 2011 budget is exemplary of the tendency to pass temporary treaties so that all parties involved can probe for another chance at the killing blow: several “stopgap” funding measures were passed that funded the government for 3 weeks at a time, postponing the inevitable confrontation and giving politicians more time to maneuver. However, I am not here to judge the guilty party, but only to observe that all sides are worthy of praise and deserving of condemnation.

It is time that we left behind these petty, childish power plays that have yet again divided our country into squabbling factions. But who are we to unite against? Enemies that we face now are much more insidious than the looming threat of a foreign invader. The true threats are diminishing natural resources, global overpopulation, and rising extremism on all sides of the political spectrum. These are enemies that shed no blood and conscript no hosts, and cannot be solved by a broken and disjointed effort. No, what can spur a nation to great heights other than the sentiment that it is being outdone by another? Like those before me, I propose a simple solution. We have been complacent for too much time while we surmised that our country was preeminent in all affairs: science, law, medicine, literature, and invention. Such designations are far from permanent and are ultimately worthless to our motivations; other nations have been spurred by the desire to match and surpass our accomplishments, and they are getting ever closer. Let the spirit of competition among nations dictate to us an identity and purpose that all can rally behind. If we are to endure the real challenges that lie ahead of us, our banners must first be unfurled.

To that effect, let us bask in our mutual accomplishments instead of our ideological differences, and allow all our myriad parts to come together as a functioning whole once more. After all, we hardly boast that that a single state was responsible for the civil rights movement or that the Democratic Party defeated the Third Reich in World War II; such deeds are what the nation is capable of only if it chooses to come together.

On Libya and the International Response

Libya, once home to the far-flung Phoenicians and exalted Cyrene, has devolved into a crisis of revolutionary conflict in the last few months, with neither side offering diplomatic resolution or brokered compromise. The political turmoil that spurred the onset of revolution did not originate within the Libyan state, but rather, it was derivative of a series of ongoing clashes between the populace and the ruling class in neighboring Middle Eastern and North African countries. The conflagration had erupted in Tunisia, toppling yet another king of Carthage, with the so-called “Last Pharaoh” of Egypt following on his heels. Libya, situated directly between the two, could not escape the wildfire. This time, in spite of the numerous calls for his resignation, the ruling autocrat opted to militarily suppress the would-be rebels with every last ounce of his diminishing influence.

The international response to this crackdown has been neither slow nor reserved in forthcoming, and as of yet I believe it to be one of the only heartening consequences of this crisis. Supranational organizations that represent regional powers, such as the Arab League, the African Union, and the European Union, were quick to condemn the disproportionate use of force against Libyan civilians by mercenaries and military detachments loyal to the state. The conflict garnered enough controversy to warrant the attention of the United Nations (UN), the assembly of all sovereign nations, which proceeded to deliberate on whether or not action should be taken to staunch the crackdown. The UN passed a series of resolutions sanctioning the top officials of the Libyan cadre, and approved the use of extraordinary measures to protect the well-being of civilians. Not long hence, a coalition of 10 nations began an aerial and naval military operation to ground Libyan forces and disable armored artillery.

These events are quite significant to the legitimacy of international law, the viability of multinational interest, and the establishment of a “Pangaeaic” or human-centric identity, for the reasons I have listed below.

Foremost, it established a clear-cut precedent for the prosecution of international law against a rogue state. The primary accusers of the regime’s illegality originated not from within the body of the UN or a nation divested from Libya’s best interests, but from its neighboring states and various regional organizations whose membership and mutual support Libya had previously enjoyed. Their summons beckoned the attention of the international community, and their demands provide the ius ad bello and the ius in bello for the coalition’s subsequent military intervention.

Secondly, the level of caution and restraint affected by the individual nations of the coalition is to be commended. No actions that would violate Libya’s sovereignty were attempted prior to the establishment of a legal sanction. This basis was ultimately provided by UN Resolution 1973, which passed with ten member nations in favor and five abstaining. The five nations in abstention indicated that they believed the resolution overstepped the legal authority of the UN. However, the two nations possessing a veto noted that the desires of the Arab League and other such organizations were in accordance with the UN, and hence did not exercise their right to veto even though the resolution conflicted with their individual interests. The processing of this resolution demonstrates that these international organizations are capable of producing multinational interests, even in a volatile political community in which each member nation is an unknown variable.

Finally, we can easily see that the prosecution of law would ultimately be useless without the presence of enforcement, regardless of just cause or the rendered verdict. A large coalition of states formed with alacrity to enforce the UN resolution, and still many others have offered assistance should it be desired.

The outcome of the crisis in Libya and the other nations beset by turmoil is far from determined, but the international community has taken many precautions and satisfied many demands with its response. I can now only watch and wait as new developments invariably manifest.

The obstacles are still multitudinous, but these few glimmers among the gloom of unfolded events offer me hope that humanity can unite under a single identity with common interests. The complication will always lie in the world’s vast diversity and the tendency for diffidence among those that are unacquainted. We view our peers not in light of our many similar desires, but we focus on the few petty differences that facilitate suspicion and enforce a sense of variability for those that do not bear our banners. However, variables are the only constants in this cosmos, and we cannot wish away or ignore their existence simply because it is convenient. Through continued education, we can gradually push back the veil of ignorance that has kept the people of this world at odds with one another. I long for the day that this Earth can stand united, capable of dealing with common adversaries, arming ourselves foremost with caution, restraint, and reason. Until then, I will continue to peddle this long road to the Pangaeaic identity, enlisting all that I can to my cause.