United States Relations With Libya

Libya is a country east of Egypt with just over 6,000,000 people. Libya’s first ruler was King Idris I, he was elected after World War II when the people were looking for a new leader. He was Libya's only King. He established embassies with many large countries such as the U.S. and also allowed U.S. military to come in to restore and maintain the rights of the Libyan people in his first decade as a king. After King Idris I died in 1969, Libya fell apart. A new ruler, Gaddafi, began destroying Libya and its government. In 1972 tensions increased so much between the American and Libyan governments the American ambassador was removed from the embassy in Tripoli. In 1979 all American embassy workers were removed after an attack. In 2011 the people

For the United States, the Gulf region remains one of the most geo-strategically important locations in the world for diplomatic, intelligence cooperation, and business opportunities such as hydrocarbons and arms. This strategic cooperation has provided the region some stability, particularly with the rise of Iran and the Shi’a crescent and the chaotic outcome of the war in Iraq. The council members have also relied on the United State to fend off some of the domestic challenges to the existing regimes that are both internally and regionally rooted.

The United States launched cruise missiles against Gadhafi’s military forces. Missile strikes as well as Gadhafi’s own land attacks have halted Libya’s oil production and exportation. “The International Energy Agency (IEA) said that while the rebellion against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi continues, "what is becoming clearer is the country's oil production and exports could be off the market for many months due to

There are a lot of differences of the education system in the schools between United States and in comparison Libya.

Ronald Reagan is now one of the most controversial presidents of the past fifty years. Although all have their defenders and detractors, Reagan, though not necessarily a polarizing figure, was engaged in some behavior that has caused questions as people examine his decisions. He is probably best known for his ability to communicate his conservative ideals to the public, and had an innate ability to get people to follow him. Some would say though that his strong arm tactics began the alienation of the United States from the rest of the world, and has led to this moment in time in which the US is reviled by many countries. His chief objective seemed to be to stop the Cold War and end communism as it had stood for the better seven decades, and he did accomplish his task. However, he lacked the delicate diplomatic touch that many wished he would have used. But, he was strong in his convictions ad was not afraid to voice them to any country or individual leader he believed needed to be told how to act properly. This paper looks at the situation with Libya in 1986, examines Reagan's diplomatic doctrine as it applies to this situation, and then determines the immediate and eventual impact of Reagan-led US actions.

Two-thirds of the world’s remaining oil reserves are in the Middle East which will make international policy imperative in the future (Campbell 2007). It is

The current U.S. President, Barack Obama, has continued this humanitarian and moral trend with the use of U.S. military force in Libya and Syria. However, both events are very much different in seeking the approval or consultation by Congress given their political context. In 2011, Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, had come under the international spotlight as a major threat to the citizens of Libya. Given Libya’s location centered amongst several Arab states, there was much at stake for U.S. interest. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the United Nations also backed the U.S. and other NATO allies’ military

Interesting topic! When reading your post, a question came to mind, does the Libyan crisis lie in government, struggle of power or the distrust toward Libya’s public financial system? Your research seems very broad, how might the topic be narrow down, so you concentrate on the most important aspect of your questions? Additionally, which questions are you concentrating on the

The war in Darfur materialized at the wrong time for the United States, Norway, and Britain, two of which are permanent members of the U.N. Security Council. At the time, they were focused on ensuring the success of the Naivasha negotiations in Sudan. The Naivasha agreement, also known as the Comprehensive Peace Agreement was an permanent ceasefire agreement between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/ Sudan People’s Liberation Army to end the Second Sudanese Civil War. This was long time coming because the conflict had started all the way back in 1983. The Security Council used the ‘Brahimi principal,’ which states “regional organizations take primary responsibility for the problems in their backyard” to push responsibility on to the A.U. The Brahimi principle The Security Council was glad to give someone else the responsibility of Darfur so they could focus on others tasks at hand.

Unlike what is emphasized by Obama in Extract 1, vast social reforms, immense welfare program, infrastructure-building were underway in Libya. As have been mentioned previously, Libya was one of the Africa’s most prosperous country due to the reforms that were done under Gaddafi’s regime. And as a result, by the time the 2011 crisis was unfolding, few people, mainly in the western world, were inclined to have any sympathy for Gaddafi or take any of his claims seriously, and the attempt of showing Gaddafi in a bad light quickly spread through the western mainstream media and Gaddafi had become hated in the western world. But the trigging factor is that, contrary to popular belief which had been transmitted by so many people, like Barack Obama, Libya under Muammar Gaddafi, whom was often portrayed as “tyrant” and “dictator” was in fact, Africa’s most prosperous democracy-according to the United Nations Development Index, prior to the U.S.-led intervention in 2011; according to the same index(see fig6), Libya had the highest GDP per capta, the lowest infant mortality and the highest life expectancy in all of Africa(see

In this article she wrote about how the “C.I.A. was involved in the smuggling of weapons between Libya and Turkey. She also stated that many of the weapons smuggled into Libya were directly linked to the Benghazi attacks” (Picket 1). But why start smuggling into an unstable country in the first place? It can be linked to the rise of Qaddafi in Libya. When he came to power the Libyan Militias needed help to remove him from power and since it played into the United States plans in the middle east, it only a matter of time before the U.S pitched in. When Qaddafi fell weapons were still floating around the country, falling into the hands of the C.I.A, which in turn was sending them to other groups that were “friendly” during Qaddafi’s overthrow. So trying to help Libya also helped their militant groups gain power and when regular people gain any kind of power it all goes to their heads, clouding their sense of right and

Background: In the midst of the Cold War and the Arab-Israeli conflict, conflict arose over Gamal Abdel Nasser’s nationalization of the Suez Canal. This was of particular concern due to Nasser’s increased connection with the Soviet Union, through the Czech Arms agreement and the Aswan Dam. Following Nasser’s nationalization of the Suez Canal, Great Britain, France, and Israel invaded Egypt. In facing this crisis, the U.S. had to consider Cold War politics with the Soviet Union, relations with Arab and Israeli nations, and relations with the invading powers

Conflict over energy resources—and the wealth and power they create—has become an increasingly prominent feature for geopolitics particularly in the Middle East . The discovery of oil in the late nineteenth century added a dimension to the region as major outside states powers employed military force to protect their newly acquired interests in the Middle East. The U.S.’s efforts to secure the flow of oil have led to ever increasing involvement in the Middle East region’s political affairs and ongoing power struggles. By the end of the twentieth century, safeguarding the flow of oil from the Persian Gulf had become one of the most important functions of the U.S. military establishment. The close relationship between the United States and the Saudi royal family was formed in the final months of World War II, when U.S. leaders sought to ensure preferential access to Saudi petroleum. The U.S. link with Saudi Arabia and other countries in the region has demonstrated to be greatly beneficial to both parties, yet it has also led to ever deepening U.S. involvement in regional politics.

Zune highlighted the United States’ tradition of cooperation with Morocco through the cold war, which provided a space where the US-Russian rivalry played out . He added that in recent years, the strategic importance of Morocco to the US diplomatic efforts in Africa has increased. Morocco’s location, wedged between Europe and the political unrest in the region, raised its strategic significance even further.

There are several countries which are located within the Combined Joint Task Force- Horn of Africa AOR. This paper will discuss the cultural influence of the Republic of Djibouti as well as its influence on bordering countries within its region. Additionally, this paper will portray Djibouti’s global significance and its effect on United States interest within the AOR. Historically, Djibouti’s strategic location and status as a free trade zone within the Horn of Africa has played a major role in this country’s importance throughout the globe. Hence, Djibouti maintains relationships with numerous countries and to date openly welcomes negotiations with other countries that can contribute to the country’s economic development. Continued