|
Libya: The Return of
Colonialist Bondage
By Hakeem
Babalola
Libya’s destruction, a victory for
the West; a defeat for ordinary Libyans
The suffering of Libyans has just
begun. For there can never be true liberation when your
oppressor is the one who defines what your freedom
should be. The ousting of
Colonel Gaddafi, Libyan leader
for 42 years, by the rebels backed Western forces
especially NATO is indeed a victory for the West whose
fixation on
Gaddafi’s Libya has become worrisome. It’s
definitely not a victory for ordinary Libyans who would
continue to suffer a lot of nervous strain and shock
after the destruction. Neither is it a victory for the
rebels who have been in excess jubilation since
capturing
Gaddafi’s official residence. “We are free,”
they proclaimed in wild happiness. But they have
forgotten one important thing: that they are now slaves
to all the countries that helped them kick out
Gaddafi.
Apparently the rebels are not ordinary Libyan but a
group of people who want the share of the oil with the
help of foreign forces.
Gaddafi’s main crime may be the
fact that he refused to let the West control Libya’s
resources, hence he must be eliminated by all possible
means. In their euphoria and in their haste to get rid
of him, they forgot that none of the countries that
backed them has the interest of Libyans at heart. Let
them for once re-visit Iraq.
Gaddafi's
mistake
As for
Gaddafi, nothing
lasts forever. The man should have known that 42 years
of single-handedly
ruling or administering a nation is more than too long.
There is no doubting the fact that
Gaddafi always meant
well for Libya unlike America, Britain, France,
NATO,
UN
and other bereaved
organisations claiming to love Libya more than
God loves the Israelites.
I detest dynasty
rule, and this seems to be
Gaddafi`s undoing. A nation can never be the
personal property of any man or group. He should have
relinquished power at a
point in time and become the Father of the Nation
or something similar. At 70 and having ruled for 42
years, Gaddafi should have embraced the uprising
tactically no matter how painful it might be—at least to
prevent his own legacy which the West actually wants to
destroy.
But then power
corrupts absolute power corrupts absolutely. He should
have known that America, Britain, France and others
still consider themselves as the Alpha and Omega of this
world—the owner of our earth. And so they cannot
tolerate any opposition
from an Arab-African in the spirit of
Gaddafi. This man
should have realised
he was not fighting the "rats" within his own
environment but "desperate and hungry lions" outside his
environment who have surreptitiously waited to devour
him. Perhaps Gaddafi
should have been more careful, especially when his
colleagues in the
African Union (AU) do not like his
gut.
Gaddafi should
have known that neither America nor its allies forget
and forgive. He should have known that the oil in his
background is enough to eliminate him by all means. He
should have learnt a lesson from Iraq, a nation
destroyed by Obama's predecessor on the pretence that
the late Iraqi leader possessed Weapons of Mass
Destruction, which turned out to be a ruse. It was
simply a ploy by Mr. Bush to invade the oil rich nation.
There is always an excuse to invade certain countries
especially when the rulers of such countries refuse to
be a stooge.
Attacking a
sovereign nation
I have stopped
worrying each time the American or British or French
government issues public propaganda justifying the need
to attack Iraq or Afghanistan or Ivory Coast or Libya,
etc. in order to protect the people. I have stopped
worrying because it is now obvious to me that these
so-called "developed nations" must use ideas or
statements often exaggerated or false intended for a
political cause. They need to sound as people oriented
leaders to gain the much needed support, otherwise they
become irrelevant. They must use the empty rhetoric of
politicians as an excuse to justify the partial
occupation—of less powerful nations—especially those
nations of Africa. One wonders why the
United Nations
has not ordered the attack on North Korea! And why it is
so easy to bombard Libya under the pretext of protecting
the civilians in that region. Even though more than
20,000 have lost their lives in the civil war, what’s
coming out of people like
David Cameron of Britain,
Hilary Clinton of America and others is disturbing.
“I pledge
support for a new era,” says Mrs Clinton, US Secretary
of State. In what I consider a sinister statement, Mr
Cameron says we would like to see
Gaddafi punished for
his crimes, adding: “We need a swift transition to a
democratic and inclusive Libya,” Inclusive Libya? Is it
that necessary to include Libya in Libya’s affairs? Ah,
to include the Libyan people is to further disrupt the
agenda of a purpose. Let America, Britain and France
take over Libya completely and divide it among
themselves. For this would be the true picture of the
main objective. Libyans and Africans in general aren’t
capable of taking care of themselves hence the need to
bombard every independent African State.
Rhapsody of
Gaddafi's elimination
In February, the
trouble barely started in Libya when America, France and
Britain began to campaign for
Gaddafi's exit. Their
rhapsody of Gaddafi’s elimination was so soon then that
it backfired; because discerning minds wanted to know
why these three countries were so fixated on Libya. Is
it because like Iraq, it is an oil producing nation? Why
was it so easy for these three countries to back the
rebels? Did they know before hand that Libya was to face
uprising? What was behind their open support for the
rebels? Why did they start
freezing Libya's assets immediately when the
trouble started? Can any African nation freeze British
or US assets in any circumstance? What happened in Libya
at that time was just unfolding but these nations had
gone to town calling for the head of
Gaddafi, saying he
was killing his people. Will America or Britain or
France fold its arm if a group of rebels come together
to topple its government?
"Oyinbo"
always right mentality
I suppose it is
easy for the Western countries to attack or occupy
African continent because they have mastered the art of
colluding with African rulers. African people it seems
hate their own image. Majority of them still probably
believe that "Oyinbo" is always right. This mental
slavery is reoccurring in different forms: it may be the
process of "protecting the people of Africa" from their
dictators (as if there are no dictators elsewhere)
whenever it pleases the Western countries to destroy any
African nation of their choice. Can't they leave African
people to fight for ourselves? Or are we forever tied to
their apron?
Destroy &
Build Doctrine
It is
interesting how easy our so-called intellectuals often
blame their own rulers without asking the occupiers to
leave Africa alone. Sad as it is, it's amusing many
African intellectuals are yet to understand the game—the
game of destroy and build. Let them go read
The Shock
Doctrine by Naomi Klein. Africa has to be destroyed
to enrich the Western nations who are always the
benefactor of such destruction. Thereafter they would
send their businessmen to get the contracts to rebuild.
The notorious
International Monetary Fund (IMF) would
offer to loan in order to further enslave the "protected
civilians" even the country at large. Of course with the
collaboration of the locals— governments included—whose
thinking faculty is all about money. How long will it
take Africans to realise that no other nation or
continent—no matter how powerful or rich— would
sincerely volunteer to help Africa develop, or help
build Africa? Each man to his own problem! It’s only
Africans that can genuinely build Africa if we want. I
salute Germany, Russia, China and others who have been
diplomatic cautious and not aggressive in this regard.
Probing NATO
forces
There has always
been a double standard policy by the international
organisations. Why is
NATO spear-heading the attack on
Libya while creating the impression that the rebels are
acting on their own in the attacks in Tripoli? I agree
with South Africa's deputy president,
Kgalema Motlanthe
who has called for probe against possible human rights
violations committed by
NATO forces in Libya. Reports
have it that NATO conducted 46 strikes sorties in areas
around Tripoli. The question is whether the (court) will
have the wherewithal to unearth that information and
bring those who are responsible to book, including the
NATO commanders on the ground. NATO says the target is
not to kill
Gaddafi and that it’s not coordinating with
National Transitional
Council. Oh, really? Did
NATO
back the rebels with intelligence, logistics,
ammunitions, training and aerial cover or not? Is this a
violation of the letter and spirit of the UN charter or
not? NATO nations clearly contravened
UN arms embargo on
Libya
Disappointing
United Nations
As for the
United Nations, the organisation has achieved very
little in terms of solving conflicts around the world.
It is hard to see what is united in United Nations. Why
is the organisation always sending what it calls
“Humanitarian Aid” only after the damaged might have
been done? I think the
UN should cultivate the habit of
preventing conflicts—by all means
possible rather than sending aids. The
United Nations
seems to be failing in its responsibility to inspire
peace among nations. The presence of UN since its
inception in 1945 should have made the world a living
place to live. Unfortunately, nations have been divided
more than united. Perhaps this organisation needs to
change tactics. The UN resolution should be to protect
and not to take sides. On what principle did the UN back
the rebels?
Malam El-Rufai of Nigeria puts it
succinctly: The swiftness at which the UN passes
resolutions that water the grounds for the West's
intervention in any country is directly proportional to
the oil reserves in that country, as well as history of
past grudges.
Where is the
African Union & Arab League?
African Union ke? The AU is becoming an embarrassment.
It’s supposed to be the mouth piece of Africa but has
since become useless since the destruction started in
Libya. The organisation is so much in slumber that
foreign organisations like
European Union had to take
charge, dictating the pace of the uprising.
AU has
further tarnished its image and disgraced the whole of
Africa by not being the one in charge of an affair
concerning its member state. It doesn’t matter its
tactical approach, saying it will not “explicitly
recognised the rebels.” Whatever that means! Arab
League on the other hand is quick to say it is in “full
solidarity with the rebels.” The position of these two
important organisations added to the impunity with which
the Western countries violate Libya’s sovereignty.
The Rebels as
Stooge
My heartfelt sympathy goes to the Libyan people. Sure,
people are always the victims in these circumstances.
How can the rebels claim victory when it’s obvious the
Western countries fought the war? The rebels should have
done it alone without the help of outsiders. By so doing
they committed the same crime they accused
Gaddafi
of.
The rebels like their foreign counterparts are
misleading the people by claiming they’re fighting the
people's fight. I don't believe this. The rebels are
definitely fighting for their own share of the
resources. Any insurgence that allows foreigners to
attack one's country cannot come clean of doing it for
the same people they kill. How would they tell these
nations to leave after they had helped them win the war?
These "hegemonic" nations have come to stay and position
themselves for contracts. Of course this is normal after
spending a lot to help win the war. It’s the name of the
game Period.
Lindsay German says Libya won’t be able to
get rid of pro-west government. Ms German, Convenor of
the Stop the War Coalition, London, adds that “rebels
will form western imposed government.” The rebels in
their murky acceleration for revenge or getting rid of
Gaddafi
disregarded post war trauma on the people and
therefore committed the same crimes they accused Gaddafi
of. The rebels know quite alright that accepting the
West to help fight Gaddafi’s forces would have adverse
effect on Libya and its people. Yet no one cares.
Gaddafi & the
Western Press
Gaddafi may not be as bad as being painted by the
Western press whose bias reporting about the uprising is
alarming. Accordingly, every atrocity committed during
the uprising is done by
Gaddafi’s forces while the
rebels are considered innocent. It is Gaddafi and not
the rebels that destroyed Libya. It is Gaddafi forces
that killed civilians and not the rebels. Personally,
despite Gaddafi’s shortcomings, I prefer him to other
African rulers who often cringe before America and
Britain. For instance, I would choose
Gaddafi’s
eccentric dictatorship over
Hosni Mubarak and
Olusegun
Obasanjo’s conventional and “democratic” rule. When in a
war, you report that one side is killing its people,
then discerning minds of course would like to know what
happens to the other side. Gaddafi is not as bad as is
being painted by the West. He is much better than many
African rulers who are in the good book of America and
co. Mubarak who is now facing charges of corruption and
murder in a country he once ruled for example enjoyed
America’s backing and patronage for more that thirty
years until the last moment. However, if there’s
evidence that Gaddafi killed his own people randomly,
then of course he will have to face the charges.
National
Transitional Council
What is the principle behind the
National Transitional
Council when in fact many former aids of Gaddafi who had
defected may constitute NTC? I predict that NTC will
soon run into trouble. And I predict that whatever they
do to Gaddafi is what they too will get. But before
then, let them be cautious in dealing with the West. The
West obviously is concerned with their own interest. For
instance, they have started telling us that pro-revolt
foreign states will get contracts to re-build Libya,
meaning China, Germany and Russia will lose out because
they did not support the revolt. We are told that NTC
needs 300 billion euro to rebuild Libya. The money of
course would go back the West whose citizens will get
most of the contracts. Most importantly, the
National Transitional
Council should ask itself when last America
or Britain or France invited African forces to help them
deal with their internal problems!
True
Liberation
True freedom
will come only if each African country can confront its
own tyrants without the help of outsiders whose aim
would always to turn Africa into a “burning volcano and
a fire under the feet of invaders”. For me, the rebels’
proclamation of freedom simply because the west helped
them destroy their country is false freedom never to be
celebrated. It is bondage in freedom. Libya will now be
ruled by their oppressors pretending to be friends. Iraq
and Afghanistan are two examples.
In conclusion
Libya like Iraq
will never be the same and that is the crux of the
matter.
Libya’s destruction is a victory for the west; a defeat
for ordinary Libyans. Sure
Gaddafi has made mistakes but
neither a monster nor a mad dog as being painted by
several American presidents. As for me even with his
non-conformity, he is not as bad as most jejune African
leaders who conform to code of conduct.
Gaddafi usually
speaks his mind at the
UN
General Assembly meeting
unlike other African representatives who just nod their
heads in agreement with the so-called superpowers. Such
“being-my-self” attitude is enough to mark him out as
the enemy. Attacking a sovereign nation is the hallmark
of destroy and build principle employed by the West,
especially America, to pave way for a stooge government.
It is unfortunate that the international journalists
allow themselves to be used in this regard. I consider
NATO’s involvement; even
UN
as double standard. I
believe passionately that the West cannot and will never
give Africa and its people true freedom. It is Africans
that can liberate themselves without outside help. How
long will it take? That is what I don’t know.
Hakeem Babalola is the
Managing Editor,
African News Hungary /
editorafricannews@yahoo.com
* *
* * *
Libya could break up like Somalia—Samir Amin—2011-09-07
Libya and the
Brutality of Nations
Speech on Libya Situation
Gaddafi: A System of His Own
Libya Getting it Right: Pan-African
Libya Geopolitics
Oedipus and Ordinariness
Obama, Political Cynicism, and
the Tea Party Gaddafi: A System of His Own
Libya Getting it Right: Pan-African
Tea Party Nationalism: A Critical
Examination
“White” Cloud Storms Africa / Coalition of Crusaders Join with al Qaeda
Speech on Libya Situation (Obama) /
Obama, Political Cynicism, and the Tea Party
/ Can Libya Survive NATO?
(Vijay Prashad)
The race is on for Libyas oil, with Britain and France
both staking a claim
Free enterprise and the economics of slavery /
Econocide: British Slavery in the Era of Abolition
* *
* * *
|
One Hell of a Humanitarian Mission—30,000 Bombs Over Libya
Thomas C. Mountain —2 September 2011—After some 8,000 bombing raids, with estimates of 4 bombs used per attack
NATO has already dropped over 30,000 bombs on Libya. That’s almost 200 bombs per day for 6 months, some tens of thousands of tons of high explosives. With an estimated 2 Libyans killed per bomb and without a single NATO casualty the Western regimes have massacred over 60,000 Libyans in the past half year with the rebels themselves having said there have been 50,000 Libyan deaths. One hell of a humanitarian intervention isn’t it? . . . A major problem for NATO and its Libyan Quisling League a.k.a the
National Transitional
Council (NTC) is that most of rebel military is now under the leadership the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), a self described affiliate of Al Queda in the Maghreb (North Africa). The “general” in command of the mainly ethnic Berber rebel fighters that have captured the Libyan capital, known as the Tripoli Military Council, is the head of the LIFG. One of his top commanders is head of the Benghazi based rebel army. With the recent murder of “General” Younnis, former head of the Libyan secret police and once considered the most feared man in the country, the LIFG has now taken over leadership of almost all of the most effective fighting forces of the Libyan rebellion. . . . South African President Jacob Zuma has condemned the NTC leaders as embezzlers and demanded they return the tens of millions of dollars the NTC top leaderships is charged with stealing during their days in office in the Libyan government—Counterpunch |
 |
* *
* * *
 |
The Rape of Libya
By Bill Van Auken
AP said that the grisly discovery raised “the disturbing specter of mass killings of noncombatants, detainees and the wounded.” Among the bodies of the executed the report added were several that “had been shot in the head, with their hands tied behind their backs. A body in a doctor’s green hospital gown was found in the canal. The bodies were bloated.”eporting from the same killing field, Reuters counted 30 bodies “riddled with bullets”. It noted that “Five of the dead were at a field hospital nearby, with one in an ambulance strapped to a gurney with an intravenous drip still in his arm.” Two of the bodies, it said, “were charred beyond recognition.”Amnesty International has raised urgent concerns about the killing, torture and brutalization of people being rounded up by the “rebels,” particularly African migrant workers who have been singled out for retribution because of the color of their skin. In a report from a makeshift detention camp set up by the
NATO-led forces in a Tripoli school, Amnesty stated:—WSWS / Gaddafi switching to guerrilla mode’ / Before NATO intrusion, Libya was African Switzerland’ |
* *
* * *
posted 4 September 2011
|
