April 22, 2011
My persistent criticism of the devastation of Libya by the US, Britain, France, and their allies in the NATO or Arab League is not to be seen as my support for Gaddafi's long rule and the desire for him to continue in office to suppress dissension or molest his own people. Far from it. My intention is not to lionize Gaddafi either.
Having monitored Gaddafi's political administration and attitude to his opponents over the years, I am not the kind to glorify him and wish that he will remain in office to continue with his iron-fist politics.
Regardless of the improvements that his administration has brought in the Libyans' standard of living (as a result of the economic boom brought about by his government's good policies), and his quest for the establishment of a United States of Africa (to give the continent more visibility in international politics, which I support), there is every justification for him to end his rule.
He should do so to allow for fresh blood to run affairs in a manner that will sustain democracy in that country and allow for a long-lasting atmosphere in which the people can live their lives without having to look over their shoulders all the time.
I am convinced by evidence that Gaddafi is autocratic and certainly out of tune with the kind of political spirit that pervades governance in this century. Despite his claim that his style of governance has empowered the Libyan people (through the tenets of his Green Book and the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, which has created institutions of direct representation at the different levels of governance), what indeed happens is to the contrary.
He still wields enormous powers and rules the country unchallenged. His word is the command that his government's functionaries obey, much of which has created the atmosphere for the rebellion now tearing the country apart.
Gaddafi is not content with his own long reign and wants to go over the top to make his legacy a permanent feature in Libyan politics long after he has paid his dues to Nature. There are clear glimpses of how he wants to do so. Through an intricate arrangement, he wants to transfer power to his son, Saif Islam al-Gaddafi, which will perpetuate his ideals.
This fear of a Gaddafi dynasty is genuine and must not be glorified, especially since it doesn't seem to have room for any other successor but a Gaddafi family member. The tendency to turn Libya into a family property and manage according to self-willed arrangements is deplorable, to say the least.
The principles of contemporary politics frown on this kind of narrow-minded approach to governance.
Having said that, let me add that Gaddafi cannot be said to be deaf to dissensions against the move toward establishing a Gaddafi dynasty or blind to the over-arching imperative that his 42 years on the throne is at a moribund stage and that sooner than later, his political sun will set. He is aware of this fact and may only be delaying it but can't prevent it.
Thus, the domino effect of the Tunisian and Egyptian uprisings on the Libyan one was just the catalyst that was to end it all for him had some miscalculation by the forces behind the protests not added a different complexion to the uprising. From all initial indications, the forces arrayed against Gaddafi were formidable—and we were all waiting for him to fall.
But the Libyan uprising took a turn for the worse when the Benghazi protesters twisted everything out of gear and resorted to armed rebellion as a direct counteraction for Gaddafi's contemptuous reaction to their protests, insulting them as “rats,” “cockroaches,” and drug-induced al-Qaeda gangsters.
Having already used brutality to suppress previous uprisings against him, Gaddafi had no other option but to resort to the same means to deal with the February 16 protests. He least expected the protests to turn into an armed rebellion; and when it did, he couldn't relent in his use of force.
The rebels' recourse to armed rebellion seemed to suit Gaddafi as he moved his forces to the hotbeds, which created the humanitarian problem to alarm the world.
At this point, the uprising turned ugly and has remained so ever since. Had the protesters not resorted to the military option, the uprising would have resulted in something else than what we have seen over the past two months with the intervention of the International Coalition through a military action aimed at solving the humanitarian problem associated with the rebellion.
Had the International Coalition not chosen military power as the option, the situation wouldn't have deteriorated thus far.
Had the United Nations first gone for a diplomatic and political solution, it would have softened the ground to end this crisis in Libya. The UN would have found better means to clip Gaddafi's wings instead of bowing to pressure from its more powerful member states to allow them devastate Libya on behalf of the Benghazi rebels.
And being a belligerent person, Gaddafi welcomed this show of force and has since been unleashing his own firepower.
Gaddafi's resolve has been strengthened to fight on, knowing very well that those in Benghazi have been his perennial opponents. He also knows that whether he accedes to the rebels' demand or not, his end will not be pleasant.
The decision that the International Criminal (War-Crimes) Tribunal investigate him with the possibility of trying him as a war criminal suggests that he will end up where others before him have been dumped in disgrace or death (Slobodan Milosevic, Charles Taylor of Liberia, etc.). Knowing very well that whether he leaves power or not he will have a bleak future, he has chosen to dig in.
Gaddafi's resolve is reinforced by his personal family history (as he has already relied on his grandfather's martyrdom to suggest) and the fact that he can rely on diehard forces to prolong the fight. He claims that the West and his Benghazi opponents seem to be under-rating his capabilities and no one knows more than he does in terms of what he has to sustain the battle for survival.
Such a determined and desperate (or maybe, psychopathic) person is not likely to be cowed into submission easily. Gaddafi is no mere push-over, as must have dawned on his opponents by now. He has all the arsenal he needs to prosecute this war and will continue to dig in.
What will continue to happen must be clear to us by now: for as long as the West backs Gaddafi's opponents and joins them to wage war on his government, the latter will not relent in its efforts to reclaim lost territory and influence to hold the country together.
Gaddafi's forces are still fighting because they know they are engaged in a legitimate battle to redeem their government's image and regain control and command over the territories now in the hands of the rebels.
They see the International Coalition as an invading force to fight to death and will continue to be resilient despite the air strikes and destruction of ground forces and military hardware supporting their fight with the rebels.
They are being guided by the nationalist spirit of Libyan patriotism to bring all territories in Libya under the control of the Gaddafi government and will press on. This kind of spirit is difficult to overpower, especially if the rebels themselves are not strong enough to do so on their own but will need foreign support for that purpose.
The danger that lies ahead is not difficult to surmise. The ongoing battles will continue to worsen the Libyan crisis. If the stalemate persists, it will frustrate the rebels and their backers into doing desperate acts. Failing to resolve the crisis means only one thing.
Ultimately, the country will end up being split into two (the rebel-controlled East and the pro-Gaddafi West) with the International Coalition creating a buffer zone between them and monitoring as a demilitarized zone.
In the end, we will have two Libyas, just as we have had the two Koreas since 1953. Anything of this sort will redefine politics in that part of Africa and close the chapter on a failed attempt by the West to eliminate the Gaddafi threat and turn Libya into its geo-political center of influence in the Mediterranean region. 
No comments:
Post a Comment