|
|
Op-Ed
Turmoil in Libya: The US Choices
Monday, March 7, 2011
By Dr. Ahmad Rashid Malik
Tokyo- (PanOrient News) The territory of world’s 17th largest State, and the supplier of 2% of the world’s oil, Libya, is on the verge of a major catastrophe.
The turmoil in Libya is unworthy and unholy for the supporters of Islamic-Socialism and left-wing radical ideology. The challenge is political. People want political participation in a participatory democracy. The challenge is not religiously oriented or Islamist as some circles in the West are mistakenly portraying. Nevertheless, there’s a price to pay for political freedom. The price is in the streets and not in the shops or in superfluous parliaments. It is a hard struggle that involves unending sacrifices.
Strongly reacting to peaceful demonstrations,the brutal state-led military massacre has headed Libya toward insurgency and plunged it into a bloody civil war on the pattern of neighboring Chad – something never envisioned about affluent Libya. The political and economic system in Libya has been broken and has ultimately collapsed. It is an abrupt failure of the Islamic-Socialist democracy introduced by the embattled, despotic Libyan ruler ,Colonal Moamar Al-Gaddafi in the 1970s. He lost his legitimacy in his social welfare state, but he is still militarily struggling to regain the political popularity.
The Libyan armed conflict appeared similar to the insurgencies and civil wars in Chad and Afghanistan. The crisis has no similarity with Pakistan unlike the remarks passed by Gaddafi that he would not allow his country to become another ‘Afghanistan and Pakistan’. His derogatory remarks have already annoyed intellectual circles in Pakistan where he lost sympathy and political support. In a country where there are no free and independent political parties, media, independent judiciary, and human rights groups, the end is not dissimilar to what is happening in Libya today. For internal follies, blame cannot be simply passed on to the meddling West.
On the contrary, in a surprising manner, in order to get Western support, Gaddafi repeatedly announced the presence of terrorists, fanatics, and Al-Qaeda elements’ hand in the country’s disturbances leading to a death toll exceeding 1500 committed by the State forces. Serious quarters did not pay any attention to Gaddafi’s allegations. The ‘secret’ hand of Western countries also could not be established. Gaddafi had closer military contacts with Italy, France, Russia, and Bulgaria than with Islamic organizations or countries. He cooled down tensions with Great Britain and the United States after 9/11 and paid millions of dollars to project a positive image in America and Europe.
Despite protests, Gaddafi looks set not to submit to the people in the streets who are advocating change in all the major cities from Benghazi to Tripoli to Misrata to Zawiya and the rebel-held towns of Brega and Ajbadiya. Ever since political disturbances erupted in Benghazi, one thing has become absolutely clear: Gaddafi does not want to leave the seat of power no matter how many people lose their lives. He dismisses internal and external pressure to relinquish power. This has made him an unwanted leader who is hanging on to power for his personal whims.
Libyan authorities were not able to squelch the tsunami of over 191,000 refugees fleeing from Libya to the neighboring countries of Egypt, Tunisia, and Algeria. The UN, USA, EU, Russia, and relief groups offered assistance to these countries to rehabilitate refugees. The looming refugee crisis signals Gaddafi’s departure, if not immediately then eventually.
Global reaction in support of the demonstrators and against Gaddafi is growing. The United States is not clueless on Libya. It does not need to jump into the chaos and take the blame for themselves by getting involved in the Libyan crisis through its military might when the Libyan civilians and rebels could achieve the desired outcome by themselves. The United States has a sizeable marine presence in the Mediterranean Sea to look after its interests in collaboration with European navies. US President Barack Obama warned Gaddafi of civilian casualties.
Consequently, the Obama Administration has frozen Gaddafi's assets and imposed economic sanctions. With a war going on in Afghanistan, the Libyan conflict poses a vexing challenge to the United States. In a most wise manner not to open a new war theater, US Defense Secretary Robert Gates told Congress: ‘This is a fight that must be led by the Libyans, who seem increasingly capable of ousting Gaddafi. It would be a boost for the credibility and legitimacy of any successor Government if they did it themselves’. US military intervention would endanger the lives of hundreds of thousands of civilians peacefully struggling to oust Gaddafi.
Further, the anti-Gaddafi diplomacy can easily work. The warmongers in the United States might dislike Obama’s choice. A low-profile US response and restraint might achieve tangible outcomes than its full political and military involvement in Libya. The Arab street protests in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, and Bahrain, for example, also did not call for US intervention. Arab protesters are proudly marching toward a democratic path by themselves. The United States’ best response might be to not get involved. To remain authentic, victory must come from the streets. This blocks the extremists and their so-called radical philosophy, too. By now, the United States has learned enough lessons from Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
Moreover, the United Nations also imposed sanctions and demanded to refer Gaddafi to the International Criminal Court (ICC). The call to have ‘no fly zones’ in a large country could not prevent Gaddafi’s strike against his own civilians. This is the gravest humanitarian issue. The Arab League and the international human right associations are heavily criticizing the Libyan government actions against the civilians. The Western sources are calling to arm the demonstrators and rebels to support them against physical oppression. This will create more bloodshed. The intensity of the crisis has blocked the prospects for Gaddafi to escape to a foreign land, including Venezuela. His presence on the political map of Libya and the crisis, which is not less than Afghanistan, might lead to the bifurcation of the territorial integrity of the State, thus further complicating North African problems.
It is feared that US intervention could set off a backlash of Pan-Arabic nationalism against America and Europe. A political, moral, diplomatic, and economic support would be much admirable at this point than escalating the conflict to other areas.
What happened in Libya is tragic. Libya under Gaddafi was not a corrupt regime in the Arab world. The regime has remained at the tail of the Transparency International for years. Gaddafi’s social welfare policies were greatly lauded. The State was tolerant of other faiths. Apart from eradicating corruption and solidifying inter-faith harmony on Islamic-Socialism pattern, human rights, political freedom, and independent media were also inevitable to strengthen the regime. What appeared is that Libya’s present problems are entirely its own. Even this does not give the world the right to meddle in the internal affairs of a sovereign state at this critical juncture.
Dr Ahmad Rashid Malik is Fellow of The Japan Foundation in Tokyo.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of PanOrient News.
PanOrient News
© PanOrient News All Rights Reserved.
|
|
