Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced yesterday that the U.S. is restoring diplomatic relations with Libya, which had been severed since 1972 (U.S. Restores Diplomatic Ties to Libya) The entire embassy left the oil-rich Arab country after a mob set fire to the building in 1979. Rice says restoring relations was a logical flow since Libya renounced terrorism and disclosed its secret nuclear missile programs in 2003. In order to reach the decision, the U.S. had to agree not to investigate who gave orders to bomb Pan Am Flight 103 over Scotland, an attack which Libya accepted responsibility for executing. Rep. Tom Lantos of California said "that our country takes note of positive changes in behavior and is more than willing to reciprocate."
Â
Who is benefiting from this decision? Is it an insult to victims in the 1988 Pan Am bombing, or is it a positive step towards peace? Was the agreement made to set an example to other "rogue states" and, if so, do you think it will have any effect on other countries with terrorist ties?
Â
*The Gather Editorial Team posts a daily topical question for debate. Please post your opinion in the "Comments" section in reaction to the question itself, to the comments of other Gather members, or better yet, publish an article on the topic. If you write a separate article, put a link in the comment section below so that other Gather members can find your posting, giving you greater visibility.
The Gather Editorial Team also invites you to log on to editors.gather.com to read The Editor's Desktop, a weekly column that addresses topics that make the most of your Gather experience.




Comments: 7
the only terrorists to show any class since the world went nuts are the IRA. as despicable as they'd been they did NOT want to be associated with the madness that consumes the planet these days and surrendered their arms and sat down with a measure of reasonableness.
To the mourners of Lockerbie my heartfelt tears. As if anything said now could add or detract to the insult of being deprived of your loved ones. Yes. let's embrace Lybia, embrace all the fundamentalist muslim loonies we can. I'm sure Chamberlain felt the same way about Nazi Germany.
We forgave the English for burning the White House to the ground in 1812.
Look at the histories of our strongest allies and you don't have to look all that far into the past to find a time when they were our enemies and we were theirs.
This isn't pro-wrestling, this is real life. We either find a way to move ahead, or we will be posturing for eternity.
If we don't want to talk to the Muslims, that's excluding somewhere approaching 1.3 billion people, Carolyn. Most of them, the vast majority, are law abiding people who've never hurt anyone. Are we supposed to punish them with economic exclusion forever because we don't like their governments? I'm not saying to turn a blind eye to human rights abuses by any means, but there comes a time when the best way to prove that our way is better is by including people in the global dialogue and exchange in such a way that their governments can't use grievances against the US as an excuse not to improve living conditions and social freedom. Anyway, when our government is willing to give Pakistan and Uzbekistan a chance, there really isn't much excuse to keep cutting out all the rest.
I say this as someone liberal enough (and proud of it) to be significantly to the left of most well known elected Democrats. The public and social policies of countries like Libya are about as far from my ideal, chocolate covered world as it's likely to get. But I don't see the solution being endless, petty antagonisms.
It's the people in these countries who suffer from long-term policies of exclusion, not their governments. After all, isolation hasn't gotten rid of the government of Libya in all this time, nor the regimes of Cuba, Iran, North Korea nor had any significant effect on China while we refused to communicate or interact with them. Policy by self-righteousness may feel good, but it has a poor record of results and that's what we need to focus on if we genuinely want to lift people up instead of just punishing them for being born in the wrong countries.
Sanctions may influence governments, but they do so at the cost of punishing the people of that country, not the government. Most citizens of any country have no power over the course their government takes. That does include this country.