Op-Ed: Gaddafi & Libya through Western eyes

[tabatha]

For many around the world, even those who actively supported the Libyan revolution, it was difficult to defend the scenes seen in the videos of Gaddafi’s last moments. It is also hard for some to justify the celebrations of the Libyan masses when news of Gaddafi’s death emerged, with the implied suggestion being that those celebrating were cheering death.
....

It is time to ask the people who have suddenly taken an interest in the ins and outs of international law concerning the execution of murderous dictators, or Gaddafi’s social welfare system, where were you through the 42 year reign of terror? Where were you when Gaddafi ordered the deaths of 1000+ political prisoners at Abu Salim? Where were you when Libyan students were hanged live on state television for the mere crime of speaking out? Where were you when Libyan dissidents were murdered abroad, chased to their deaths by Gaddafi’s agents? And for those who seem to think of Gaddafi as a Black nationalist, where were you when he invaded Chad, sparking off yet another war?
....

It is interesting that there are no prominent Libyan activists speaking out on behalf of Gaddafi, or even against Nato intervention. Surely, if this was all a huge imperialist conspiracy one Libyan would have been found in the West to speak out? Well, unlike the many activists who now imagine they are speaking for ordinary Libyans, or the global South, Libyans actually know their country and their history, and they know that Gaddafi had to go, whatever the cost.

For the anti-imperialists are just as much at fault as any right-wing nationalist in perceiving everything in the non-Western world through a Western lens. Those criticising the war against Gaddafi have viewed the whole conflict through the prism of Nato intervention, forgetting the huge legitimate grievances of the Libyan people. It is insulting to the memory of the tens of thousands killed by the Gaddafi regime to talk about the whole affair as some sort of plot to prevent Gaddafi from using gold currency instead of dollars – the fact that this argument supposes that Gaddafi is some sort of economic revolutionary shows how preposterous it is. As bizarre as this might seem to people who only view the world with Western eyes, the people of the ‘East’ actually would like to be free from their homegrown dictators. Hey, some of them may even prefer capitalism to the bizarre ramblings of a madman obsessed with the colour green. The internal oppressor for the people of Libya was far worse than any external oppressor in the form of Nato.

http://feb17.info/news/gaddafi-libya-through-western-eyes/

[bainz]

1. Where was NATO?

Where was NATO through the 42 year reign of terror? Where was NATO when Gaddafi ordered the deaths of 1000+ political prisoners at Abu Salim? Where was NATO when Libyan students were hanged live on state television for the mere crime of speaking out?

[DCBob]

3. Did you expect NATO/US to invade a country every time an atrocity is committed by some tyrant??

What kind of warmonger are you?

[bainz]

5. I am no type warmonger.

Not sure if you are being sarcastic, but I was in my post. What happened to Mohammar makes me sick. I just can't stand blood lust. But hey, as long as it was NATO and not US (LOL), I guess it is ok.

[Fumesucker]

9. Of course not, only when they have oil or other natural resources we need..

Do you think we're some kind of altruists or something?

[DCBob]

12. Do you really think the Islamic Republic of Libya is going to give us a discount on their oil.

get real.

[Fumesucker]

15. Do you really think NATO and the US are acting out of altruism?

I urge you to take your own advice.

[DCBob]

16. I think they simply want to get rid of Gaddaf for a boat load of reasons.

[Fumesucker]

19. Yes, Islamic republics are so much easier to deal with than militaristic dictators.

Like Iran for instance..

[DCBob]

34. Neither is easy or preferable. The decison was simply to get rid of Gaddafi.

and hope the new leadership will be able to rebuild Libya into something better.

[MedleyMisty]

29. I think you're doing the exact thing that's in the subject line

Looking at it through Western eyes.

Try looking at it from the perspective of an average Libyan.

I watched them count down to the UN vote on Twitter. I saw the celebration when the intervention was approved. I saw the grumbling when it didn't seem like NATO was helping much, and the speculation about how perhaps NATO wanted the country to be split.

They aren't ignorant, no matter what your assumptions about non-Western non-white people are. They know about Iraq and Afghanistan. They know about the crimes of the West. They know that the West has interests in their resources. They also knew that they needed the help. And they've done a great job of keeping the help on their terms. No ground troops, for instance.

The NTC was formed of Libyans by Libyans, and all of the members of the NTC (which includes a woman with a PhD in constitutional law who is the head of legal affairs and women's issues) have vowed to not run in the elections. So if the West was planning on putting them in power and making deals with them, that's very shortsighted. They'll only be in power until elections are held, and then the West will have a new government to deal with.

I know it may come as a surprise, but people who aren't Western or white are autonomous beings and can make their own decisions and run their own lives and act independently. From their viewpoint, it wasn't about imperialism and political posturing and self-identity as anti-war or anti-US government. From their viewpoint, it was about their lives and their freedom. They looked at the force that Gaddafi was preparing to use against them, and they decided that they'd take the risk of asking the world for help over the certainty of death and the end of their revolution.

I seriously don't think they'll end up being occupied or with a Western puppet government, but I know that if they do, they will fight it just like they fought Gaddafi. Libyans are badass.

The whole "Oh, you poor naive ignorant little thing, you think the West does humanitarian things?" is just sneering and prejudice that exposes a very Western-centric view of the world. I don't really care why the countries who helped in the intervention helped. Which, by the way, even countries like Switzerland and Norway sent jets.

What I care about is the Libyans and their revolution. I have followed it closely since February, well before NATO got involved. I've learned a lot about Libyan culture - like the fact that Libyan music is awesome, and that Libyan hip hop artists can lay down some mad beats and rhymes. I feel close to the Libyans I've been following on Twitter for months, sharing in their laughter and tears and triumphs and worries. I'm atheist myself, but I participated in organized fasts and prayed for them. I have faith in them, and they have shown themselves to be incredibly brave, resourceful, and intelligent. They can stand up for themselves against anyone who wants to take advantage of them.

I supported the intervention and continue to support the Libyan revolution because I am on the side of the Libyans. It has nothing to do with the West for me. The day the US started bombing Afghanistan was the day I started to hate my country. The invasion and occupation of Iraq made me sick. So don't even try to paint supporting the Libyans as being a cheerleader for US military aggression.

It's just that I can see the world in more colors than black and white, and I know that life is complex and cannot be put in little neatly labeled boxes.

Libya Hurra!

[Fumesucker]

31. You managed to write all that and still not answer my question.

Do you think the US and NATO were being altruistic?

It doesn't require looking through Western or Libyan eyes to answer that question.

I've learned to look at everything with the one question in mind.. Qui bono? Who profits?

[EFerrari]

2. So no one should presume to evaluate or speak for Libyans

except this author who is apparently not Libyan or in Libya although this author feels free to presume how Westerners should evaluate the situation in Libya. What a mess this is.

[Amonester]

4. Ok, I see you criticize and criticize. Do you propose solutions...

beside critics?

[EFerrari]

27. There is no solution to this essay. It is a trainwreck. nt

[DCBob]

6. I think the main point being made is that most, if not all of the criticism of NATO and the rebels..

is coming from sources outside Libya. There are no prominent Libya activists making similar criticisms. Why would that be??

[Fumesucker]

8. It could be that it's not conducive to good health to be seen as not supporting the rebels..

Just as it was not conducive to good health to be seen as not supporting Gaddafi at one time..

[DCBob]

10. Yes, I thoguht of that and it could be true but a true activist would not worry about that.

and there must be some in Libya. Where are they??

[Fumesucker]

11. Recall the atmosphere in the US from 2001-2004...

At least where I live anyone who disagreed with Bush kept their opinions strictly to themselves if they wanted even minimal acceptance in society, I didn't know anyone in real life who agreed with me politically.

[DCBob]

14. Most but not all.. and there were plenty of activists who challenged that thinking.

even back then when Bush had 90% support.

[Fumesucker]

17. Yeah, like Bill Maher

He spoke out and was gone before anyone could blink.

We're not talking The Land of the Free either, we're talking about a nation in the throes of a revolution against a brutal dictator.

The very first goal of any successful revolution is to utterly preclude any chance of counterrevolution, that basically means that criticism is frowned upon by those same revolutionaries.

[DCBob]

20. You may be right but its odd none have spoken up if there are such horrible things going on..

and being covered up by a massive conspiracy.

[Fumesucker]

22. They were out of control enough that Gaddafi got his head blown off while in custody..

Not exactly conducive to freeing the lips of anyone who might have some minor technical quibble with the rebels.

[DCBob]

33. Perhaps as things calm down we will begin to hear from those inside who really know what happened.

Then we can better judge who was right or wrong on these issues.

[EFerrari]

28. No politicians criticized Bush in public after 9/11 until the fall of 2004.

I remember because it was two Reps from CA who took the first plunge on the same weekend.

[pinboy3niner]

7. Yes, no op-ed writer should address something he/she has not lived

You're better than that.

:hi:

[Fumesucker]

13. It would be nice while they are addressing something they have not lived..

If they would refrain from telling others who have not lived it either that they have no right to comment.

:hi:

[pinboy3niner]

23. I agree that no one should be told that he/she has no right to comment

Bur I didn't see that here. Maybe I scanned too fast. Did he actually say that?

:hi:

[Fumesucker]

30. That's what I took this line to mean...

It is time to ask the people who have suddenly taken an interest in the ins and outs of international law concerning the execution of murderous dictators, or Gaddafi’s social welfare system, where were you through the 42 year reign of terror?

Of course most of us haven't actually shaken hands with Gaddafi..

[EFerrari]

26. No, that's what the author of this piece is arguing, not me.

That's why I pointed it out.

[malaise]

18. Of couse this author i gnored all the meetings with

world leaders who just want Libyan oil

[polly7]

32. The Assassination of Mummar Gaddafi illegal under international Law

http://www.africalegalbrief.com/index.php/component/content/article/384.html

"The issue in Libya is not so much about Gaddafi, but that his murder symbolises the final occupation of Libya. The re-colonisation of Libya by America and NATO forces. It is now a question of America and Europe doing exactly what they please in that country. Not only do they have access to the large oil and gas reserves, but also something the media rarely covers the large water reserves under the Libyan soil.

Under international law there is no rational for the assassination of Mummar Gaddafi. The original reason, which was resolution 1973 which authorised the protection of civilians, was turned into a regime change instrument. The assassination of Mummar Gaddafi is a blunt admission by America, France and Britain that this crusade was not about protecting civilians, but about regime change. This was a breach of the UN regulations. This was a NATO/US operation in a scramble for Libyan oil.

What NATO and America do not realise is that they have now created a very chaotic situation, probably similar to the one in Iraq if not worse. In the competition for the Libyan oil and Gas, the NTC and the crusading countries risk fanning more conflict amongst the Libyans themselves. Sooner rather than later the Libyans will realise that they have jumped from the frying pan into the fire. The imperial solidarity shown when taking over Libya will surely disintegrate as the scramble for these resources begins."

[court jester]

21. George Washington Warned us but we don't even celebrate his birthday anymore

let alone study his teachings

"...Washington advocates a policy of good faith and justice towards all nations, and urges the American people to avoid long-term friendly relations or rivalries with any nation. He argues these attachments and animosity toward nations will only cloud the government's judgment in its foreign policy. Washington argues that longstanding poor relations will only lead to unnecessary wars due to a tendency to blow minor offenses out of proportion when committed by nations viewed as enemies of the United States. He continues this argument by claiming that alliances are likely to draw the United States into wars which have no justification and no benefit to the country beyond simply defending the favored nation. Washington continues his warning on alliances by claiming that they often lead to poor relations with nations who feel that they are not being treated as well as America's allies, and threaten to influence the American government into making decisions based upon the will of their allies instead of the will of the American people..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washingtons_Farewell_Address

It's like 70AD in Rome, all over again. Some were no doubt still mourning the death of Caligula. J. Caesar too.

Gladiators anyone? The least our Rulers could do is throw out a few loaves of bread once in awhile, or some freshly harvested Peas

"Eat Your Peas"

War is Peas

[pinboy3niner]

24. What an extremely weak, sour grapes response

Washington also fought a war he believed in--a Revolution that was FOR the people.

Like Libya.

[MedleyMisty]

25. This is what the trolls sound like

Libyan whose father was imprisoned, tortured, and killed by Gaddafi's regime and who fought in the revolution and saw quite a few friends die horribly: "I think I would like my government to reflect my spiritual values."

American who has lived a comfortable safe suburban life and never had to face antiaircraft weapon fire: "No! You're doing it wrong! You have to do what I think is best for you!"

[dameocrat67]

35. We dont know that the majority wanted to overthrow qaddafi

and people who post on twitter or international spokespersons dont prove anything since that can be pretty manipulated. for all we know most of the twitter posters were a bunch of phonies. furthermore, we know that America does not generally take offense to dictators unless they are sitting on oil. also the way qaddafi died does make me skeptical that the new regime is much better. for all we know the crowd that killed him are western collaborators who will get some oil money kickbacks when the oil fields are privatized.

frankly their indignant response to critics reminds me of the iraqi expatriates that wanted us to invade.