Libya's Future after Gaddafi

Subscribe
Muammar Gaddafi made good on his promise to die for Libya and its oil. The former Libyan leader was reported dead on October 20, seven months after NATO began bombing government targets to enforce a no-fly zone over the country.

Muammar Gaddafi made good on his promise to die for Libya and its oil. The former Libyan leader was reported dead on October 20, seven months after NATO began bombing government targets to enforce a no-fly zone over the country.

The circumstances of Gaddafi's death are not entirely clear at this point. According to the opposition National Transitional Council (NTC), he was found dead near his home town, Sirte. As this last pocket of pro-Gaddafi resistance fell to the rebels, the colonel attempted to flee, along with some of his key loyalists, but was caught in an attack and subsequently died of wounds.

Characteristically, Gaddafi wasn't killed in battle against the rebels. He fell victim to a NATO air strike. But the trans-Atlantic bloc had no mandate either to pursue the former Libyan leader or to bomb the outskirts of Sirte, which is reportedly now under NTC control.

The hard part begins

Libya's long-serving dictator is no more. This does not mean, however, that the country's woes are finally over. Col. Gaddafi's death is expected to bring an end to the fighting between pro- and anti-Gadaffi forces, which began on February 15. But it's less clear if Libya can now be declared fully liberated.

Gaddafi ruled the country for 42 years, after coming to power on the back of a coup in September 1969.

It is no secret that unlimited power can alter a person's psyche dramatically. It's no surprise, then, that there was such a huge difference between the young and charismatic revolutionary that Gaddafi was in 1969 and the 69-year-old dictator, dressed like Michael Jackson. He went through a spectacular metamorphosis during his rule, turning from a revolutionary liberator, adored by many, into a ruthless despot evoking hatred and contempt.

The Gaddafi regime is gone. But it does not look like Libya is on its way to a blissful democratic future.

Exporting democracy

What impact might the Libyan revolution have on North Africa and the Arab world at large?

Exported democracy, Western style, is not quite what the Arabs have been aspiring to, nor something they are prepared to accept. NATO's intervention has changed a lot in geopolitical terms, and primarily for the worse.

The infamous UN Security Council Resolution 1973 on the no-fly zone over Libya has been the subject of heated debates from the beginning. Russia believed the United States, Britain and France when they said they would comply with the resolution. But it was clear from the start that they would try to stretch this document far beyond its original scope.

It would be an overstatement, though, to describe that kind of conduct as foul play. UN resolutions are normally formulated in such a way as to leave enough leeway for loose interpretation. Skilled lawyers can bend a provision in any direction, and far enough that its original essence is lost. Resolution 1973 provides a graphic example of this tactic.

Russia and China learned the lesson and proceeded to veto a similar resolution on Syria. This standoff is unlikely to make the Security Council any more effective, but perhaps it will start to word its documents in a more responsible way.

The threat of radical Islam

Now that Gaddafi is gone, the question on everyone's mind is, who will form Libya's next government? There seems to be no force up to the challenge of ruling chaotic, post-Gaddafi Libya.

But it is the main paradox of the Libya war that presents the greatest, often neglected, risk.

Since the West changed its attitude toward Col. Gaddafi and began to treat him as a partner rather than a pariah, the United States, Britain, Italy and France have had no better ally in the fight against Osama bin Laden than the Libyan special services. A great deal of global intelligence information related to the world's No. 1 terrorist and his al-Qaeda network came from or through Libya. Which means NATO's Operation Unified Protector was aimed against a key ally in the war on terror.

Another important, yet widely neglected feature of Libya's civil war - or, rather, revolution - is that most of the rebel forces (about 80%) belong to the radical Islamic movement Muslim Brotherhood.

One high-profile supporter is Abdel Hakim Belhaj, the rebel's military commander in Tripoli. He has a lot of clout, is seeking a key government post, and does not conceal his animosity toward both the current NTC leadership and Libya's NATO patrons.

Belhaj used to be a leader of the now dissolved Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, labeled a terrorist organization by the United States. He was caught in Malaysia by MI6 and then handed over to the CIA, only to be extradited to Gaddafi's Libya. He spent seven years in Libyan jail, where he was tortured and interrogated by Libyan officers, as well as by CIA and MI5 agents. Western democracies did nothing to get him out of Gaddafi's prison.

Britain and the United States treated the emerging Taliban movement in Pakistan in a very similar way. And we all know how that ended.

Revolutions, especially in volatile regions such as the Middle East and North Africa, are extremely risky business and they should be avoided.

Hopefully, the Libyan revolution will be the last instance of a violent regime change in the region. Now the main concern is who will come to power - pro-Western liberals or Islamic radicals?

Democracy remains virtually non-existent in North Africa, with Algeria being the region's only country with a democratically oriented system of government. And besides, democracy is no guarantee of stability.

And, of course, there's the question of Libya's oil wealth. But that's a whole other matter.

The views expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.

Newsfeed
0
To participate in the discussion
log in or register
loader
Chats
Заголовок открываемого материала