Communists unite.
Article
By Anissa Haddadi | June 7, 2011 5:47 PM GMT
The problems with intra-national conflicts are often that in order to
fully understand the set of complex dynamics and circumstances that
come into play, far information than what is reported in and provided
by the mainstream media is needed. In Libya problems did not surface
just three months ago and despite being crushed, opponents of the
Gaddafi regime existed before the uprising so is it really justifiable
for Mustapha Abdul Jalil, the former Gaddafi Justice Minister to now
be the head of the National Transitional Council? Where are the Libyan
opponents who were epeatedly arrested and persecuted by the regime
before the current uprising?
However with the help of the West, and the mainstream media, the
council is now widely accepted as the legitimate successor to Gaddafi.
Dissenting voices are still echoing, but this time against the
council's members and the rebel movement.
For many Pan-Africanists the Libyan western intervention is yet
another imperialistic manoeuvre and the Pan-African parliament
officially condemns what they see as a Nato attack on Libya. Many are
not necessarily supporters of Gaddafi and called for his departure
long before the uprisings, but what they regret perhaps the most is
the inability of the African Union to deal with its own continent and
to take charge. Many point out that images from the protests
broadcasted on T.V sometimes seem surreal as we can see people
chanting and cheering while in the background bombs are still
dropping, but I guess in times of war, the absurd is sometimes needed
to escape from the imminent threat of death.
According to the critics of the Nato-led intervention however, what
seems even more surreal is to expect that all the opposition groups
and dissident voices have regrouped around ex-Gaddafi ministers and
are now forming a homogenised group. As pointed out by many observers
an important fact, often overlooked is the flag used by the rebel
fighters. Their flag, in contrast to the Tunisian and Egyptians
protesters, differs from the national one. It is the old Libyan flag
used under the King Idris monarchy, which was highly criticised by
Arab nationalist for maintaining close ties with the West, and was
dropped by Gaddafi upon his arrival to power. Is the flag then another
clue that the Libyan uprising was planned by the West or is it just a
way to stand in opposition from Gaddafi? Whatever the answer, let us
just hope that it is not an indication that Libya should look
backwards and not forward.
Another useful critic is the speed at which the situation evolved in
such a limited amount of time. The first protests emerged in Tripoli
and were peaceful but were brutally crushed by the Libyan regime.
However the next sets of protests were in Benghazi and this time
government institutions and buildings were this time directly
attacked. It seems that in the space of two weeks the population had
regrouped to form a rebel led movement. But where were all those guns
coming from when the fighters are allegedly just everyday citizens?
A third problem advanced is that contrary to public belief the Libyan
opposition is not made of one group but rather is constituted of a 40
strong coalition of groups who mainly agree on one fact: Gaddafi needs
to leave. So while the bureaucratic leaders will officially control
the country from their official buildings, how will they ensure that
the coalition groups that feel left out do not continue to fight on
the streets after Gaddafi leaves?
Finally a fourth problem advanced regards the Al-Qaeda threat in
Libya. While Gaddafi's claim that the Islamist organisation has
drugged the youth's Nescafe to turn them into dissidents helped those
who downplayed a possible Al-Qaeda involvement in the movement, a
rebel commander has firmly backed the organisation of the late Mr bin
Laden.
So in these conditions what will happen to Libya if Gaddafi leaves or
is removed?
It seems that Pan-Africans are not the only ones who ask the question
as Fidel Castro joined their position and maintain that oil is the
main motive behind the Nato operation and that as long as the
Transitional Council are dependent on the West, Libya will never
really belong to the Libyan people. In an article published in the
Cuban newspaper in February, Castro makes an analogy between Libya and
Latin America; talking about the US's quest for oil he wrote:
"Upon this energy source today's civilization was developed. Venezuela
was the nation in this hemisphere that paid the highest price. The
United States became the lord and master of the huge oil fields that
Mother Nature had bestowed upon that sister country."
Just like the Pan-African movement, Castro also blames the world media
for depicting simplified versions of the situation: "One can agree
with Gaddafi or not. The world has been invaded with all kinds of
news, especially using the mass media. One has to wait the necessary
length of time in order to learn precisely what is the truth and what
are lies, or a mixture of events of every kind that, in the midst of
chaos, were produced in Libya. For me, what is absolutely clear is
that the government of the United States is not in the least worried
about peace in Libya and it will not hesitate in giving NATO the order
to invade that rich country."
So is the Libyan crisis just a western set-up and will Nato forces
control the country once Gaddafi is out? Well, the problem with that
version is that it only focuses on the West and denies important
international and regional players. The possibility of Nato sending
forces on the ground to help the new regime settle and ensure a return
to peace remains a strong possibility. On the other hand it seems that
by being diplomatically extremely pro-active and seeking ties with
various states such as Israel, China and Russia, the Transitional
Council does not want to be dependent on Nato and rather wants to be
able to lean on different allies. The real question is maybe not what
will happen to Libya if Gaddafi leaves but rather will the council
stand up to its people's expectations? The problem with revolutions is
that they often base themselves on ideals, and ideals do not always
materialise. While Gaddafi out of power will undoubtedly be a step in
the right direction for Libya, state and institution building is a
long, painful and messy process and in that sense the most important
challenge of the Arab Spring will be to succeed in making better
regimes where others revolutions have failed.
This article is copyrighted by IBTimes.co.uk, the business news leader
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
No comments:
Post a Comment