If you ask me about the situation in Libya, I think that this revolution that is taking place should be one against violence. They say that using guns is part of the culture of the Middle East. That may be true, but that is also the biggest excuse.
Gandhi’s example of protest against British India was totally non-violent. He even went into the middle of the sea collecting salt in order to protest the British salt laws and taxation. He also made sure that the protest did not become violent by other leaders. That is how non-violent movements should be. That is a genuine way of bringing democracy to the region and protesting tyrannical rules. Gandhi fought the British, Martin Luther King fought racism in America, Nelson Mandela fought apartheid in South Africa – all successfully and non-violently. H. H. Dalai Lama has also tried to achieve his goals without violence.
The U. S. supporting the opposition is great, but the U.S. needs to engage situations in a non-violent way. Killing is killing, whether it involves the opposition to Qaddafi’s rule or his supporters. From the perspective of karma, violence is violence no matter which political side you support. When protests are engaged with weapons, then it becomes violent. Life is the most precious thing for any person, family, group, and thereby country.
The United Nations was established in order to promote peace, therefore a peaceful solution of settling the Libyan matter is by Libyans only. The UN should provide the conditions for the Libyans to settle their differences non-violently, rather than taking a side in a civil war or even an internal struggle. What I don’t want to see is another Iraq, another Afghanistan, or another Vietnam. It is hard for us to see violence from our side, but the end cannot justify the means.
Posted on Friday, April 1st, 2011