Libya a basket case but it's still Gaddafi's fault

A few days ago the New York Times had an op-ed that shows that the editorial writers have moved from from their initial cheerleading for the NATO war on Libya, through a period of cautious optimism to their current position, which might be called hedging their bets.

We are told that the NATO-decimated water supply doesn’t yet work properly, huge heaps of garbage line the streets, and thousands of heavily-armed young men lounge around with no meaningful work.

All of this, a year after the demise of the dictator, remains his fault, because he never allowed the country to build “strong state institutions or a civil society.”

How hard can it be to organize those thousands of unemployed young men to do something about those mountains of rubbish? Does it really take “strong state institutions?”

In a remarkably even-handed report the African Development Bank last June summarized the living standards that had been achieved under Gaddafi’s rule. These folks were no friends of the dictator, but nevertheless point out that progress made during the Gaddafi rule was unprecedented on the continent.

Universal health care, universal education for both boys and girls, generous social welfare benefits, subsidized housing. In many respects Libya more closely resembled a European welfare state than anything in Africa.

Today Al Jazeera brings us this story. Seems like we’ve heard it before; rival militias having it out in Tripoli’s city center with small arms and RPGs. And we have heard it before! It’s a story available on a weekly or even daily basis for anyone who wants to look for it.

The story quotes locals who claim they called the police but the police never show up. That’s because the militias are better armed than they are! As a result, whether law and order are present on any given street on any particular day depends on the whims of the local militia commanders.

A year on it’s time to stop making excuses. NATO transformed a stable and prosperous country into a  rudderless shambles. Talking patronizing twaddle about Libya’s  ”nascent democracy” doesn’t excuse NATO’s responsibility.

The Times notes that “chaos and corruption will breed widespread cynicism” or worse.

Worse?

The day may yet come when even America’s newspaper of record is forced to acknowledge that Libyans were better off under Gaddafi.