Andrew Solomon makes a good case for why Gaddafi can’t be given any benefit of the doubt, or any deal to let him stay in power. Solomon has lived in Libya. He knows the place and the leaders better than I do. But I still find his essay to be glib. Look at this:
Will accomplishing Qaddafi’s removal at this stage result in a quickly established democracy on the model of, say, Sweden? No. Chaos looms; the rebellion is coherently against something, and not coherently for anything. Even so, its first objective, removing the man, is a valid objective for them and for us.
People keep saying things like this. “Chaos looms, but let’s go!” It’s a little late now, but there will be another disturbance somewhere in the world some day soon, and we really need to stop taking leaps of faith.
That also includes any leap of faith that Gaddafi will leave power willingly, or that it is more humanitarian to arm-up a civil war than it is to stand by while rebels are defeated.
