People:
NATO bombs are still raining in Libyan cities that are resisting take-over.
I am a realist, which is not synonymous with abandoning principles. The West has effected an unjustified military assault to effect regime change in Libya to suit it ends.
As a principle, Gaddafi should not launch a guerrilla warfare. It is inimical to the values that should define Africa and beneath the dignity of a man who championed and sponsored the need for a formidable and self-reliant Africa to be to springing from bushes and mountains against a group he claims does not have what it takes to rule.
Granted the Gaddafi regime was betrayed by insiders who secretly gave information and cooperated to execute the takeover of Tripoli. In war and love, the fat lady sings. Alas, it does not matter whether the Western military played the band or paid the piper. Mortals hear the song to signal a finale. The tune was in the making 5 months hence, aided by Western intelligence and Qatar. But as a military tactician, Gaddafi should have known better and made provisions to defend the seat of government with counter intelligence and boots - because he saw it coming. In that fight, rebels would not claim victory because NATO has not developed the capability of sending bombs that ask questions before choosing the suspects among fighters to kill. NATO will be killing the rebels, too. That would have been manifested insanity in the annals of allied warfare.
The best defense: a civilian resistance in Tripoli Squares and elsewhere were nowhere. The world would have taken a second look when it most mattered at showdown time. Some countries would not have rushed to hail the rebels who were merely riding on the shoulders of NATO.
Gaddafi was outplayed. Why fight and denounce what he called terrorists or Al Queda when NATO knew there were such elements in the anti-Gaddafi brigade but was still willing to be bedmates with the " terrorists " in a Machiavellian end justified the means? That was the most foolish thing to harp on - if Gaddafi thought that would endear him - to who? He failed to heed to the simplest of common sense in the politics of things: no permanent enemy; just permanent interest.
Gaddafi knew he was a marked man as a thorn in the flesh of Western powers but he kept talking to bait more than he could figure them out. In the end, even the African governments abandoned him to make nice with their donors. I am sure there were many individual and group jokers who had no tangible means to talk or steer sense but inflated their importance and even got paid in their self-centered forays. What a shame.
Whatever.
Now, students must go back to school, banks must open, hospitals must function. No human, no matter how great or benevolent, can override these values without being a problem. Bloodshed is not the legacy the African Union needs to shore up its credentials. Nobody knows what will become of the frozen African Investment Fund set up by the Gaddafi government to sponsor projects that would have made Africa less reliant on foreign assistance and loans. Let African nations keep begging from IMF and other Western nations until they are tired of being dependents - both mentally and materially.
If there is a silver lining, it is a wake - up call for the elections of a corps of presidents in Africa who would be proactive, coupled with pro Africa think tanks informing the civil society, to stem the pretext for foreign determinations in Africa as we witnessed in Ivory Coast and Libya. More important, building to improve the standard of living in Africa through accountable governments is the best deterrent to mindless encroachments.
There is an election as the TNC says. It should be the test of popularity. Bombs don't vote.
Lessons learnt, move on.
MsJoe
No comments:
Post a Comment