Headlines

Bernard Henri-Levy

Damn, this Mali intervention is awesome

As a matter of principle, it confirms the responsibility to protect civilian populations that underpinned the earlier intervention in Libya. The first use of the doctrine merely sets a precedent, but the second is case law, and, for those who favor the duty to intervene, for those who oppose the convenient muddling of the right of self-determination with the right of the rich nations to wash their hands of the wretched of the earth, for all those who think that democracy should not stop at the border any more than terrorism does, the French intervention is an undeniable victory.

It reaffirms the old idea of just war brought back into fashion by the Libyan revolution. François Hollande decided to use force only as a last resort. He did so in accord with international law as articulated in the Security Council’s resolution of Dec. 12. He satisfied himself that the operation had a “reasonable” chance of success and that the harm that it would inflict would, “in all likelihood,” be less than that which it would prevent. That is the lesson of the jurist Grotius and of Saint Thomas Aquinas, an elegant and useful lesson in practical philosophy.

And finally, it restates the prominent role of France in the front lines of the struggle for democracy. Is Hollande following in the footsteps of Sarkozy? As if that were the question!

Read the Article

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

It reaffirms the old idea of just war brought back into fashion by the Libyan revolution. François Hollande decided to use force only as a last resort. He did so in accord with international law as articulated in the Security Council’s resolution of Dec. 12. He satisfied himself that the operation had a “reasonable” chance of success and that the harm that it would inflict would, “in all likelihood,” be less than that which it would prevent. That is the lesson of the jurist Grotius and of Saint Thomas Aquinas, an elegant and useful lesson in practical philosophy.

Hmmm. When Bush did this in Iraq, he was castigated for “imposing democracy” and for “going it alone”.

Bitter Clinger on January 21, 2013 at 8:09 PM

It reaffirms the old idea of just war brought back into fashion by the Libyan revolution.

I never knew that gloating about killing a captured enemy without a trial was a part of the “just war” concept.

malclave on January 21, 2013 at 8:27 PM

They just “drone” on and on…leading from out of their as* um, behind.

ProfShadow on January 21, 2013 at 8:30 PM

A few more victories like Libya, and we’ll be ready for the broom.

claudius on January 21, 2013 at 9:08 PM

Wow! The top cheese eating social philosopher is talking crusades. I hope that feeling persists and produces enough Muslim compost to boost agriculture in the area for generations. And this is France under the socialists! Any further proof needed that the world is insane?

BL@KBIRD on January 21, 2013 at 9:15 PM

Bernard-Henri Lévy’s War

Ulf Gartzke catches a great detail about Sarkozy in the Financial Times:

The president also seems to have deliberately bypassed his foreign minister Alain Juppé and followed the advice of celebrity philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy, who had been in secret contact with Mr Sarkozy while on a visit to the rebels.

He describes the moment Mr Sarkozy decided to go it alone and recognise the Libyan rebel movement. “Bernard-Henri rang him from Benghazi to tell him that French flags were everywhere. He told him if he allowed a bloodbath there the blood would stain the French flag. That really affected him.”

Levy’s role in the conflict, and his decision to appeal to Sarkozy’s nationalism in addition to — or, depending on your interpretation, instead of — his humanitarianism is noteworthy. Many critics of the Iraq War describe that venture as a decision imposed upon George W. Bush by intellectuals. I find that interpretation mostly but not entirely false. But it seems to be far more true of the Libya intervention. It really is a decision that owes a great deal to a single intellectual, operating as an activist more than an intellectual per se.

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/85873/bernard-henri-levys-war#

U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, U.S. Foreign Service
Information Management Officer Sean Smith, Glen Doherty (Spec Ops ret) and Tyrone Woods (Spec Ops ret) were unavailable to comment on Bernard-Henri Lévy’s “intellectualism,” “humanitarianism” or his egging François Hollande to “go it alone” in Mali.

Resist We Much on January 21, 2013 at 9:16 PM

Such was the frustration in western Europe that Sarkozy, impulsive as ever and with the encouragement of France’s philosopher at large, Bernard-Henri Lévy, even spoke of going it alone. “If nobody wants to do it, France will do it by herself,” he told a delegation from the Libyan opposition during a meeting at the Elysée at which he announced France would recognise them.

In Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11, Bernard-Henri Lévy, labeled in that piece of agitprop as the the “esteemed, prominent left-wing intellectual,” agreed with FatBoy that the war was “a bad idea”,especially since the US went it alone (which it most certainly did not).

Resist We Much on January 21, 2013 at 9:25 PM

Of course, if Bush was leading this charge, the article would take an entirely different angle.

jediwebdude on January 21, 2013 at 9:30 PM