Riposte On Libya

I would like to thank those who have read and responded to my previous post on Libya. In some of the more colorful responses I have been called an apologist for the west, and something of a sell out (not in those exact words but the meaning was clear). 

In all this, I am reminded of a quote that is attributed to Julius Nyerere who when faced with increasing criticism of one of his fellow African leaders is supposed to have said ' I cannot take the sides against my fellow African' or words to that effect. True or not it sheds light on a mindset that is representative of many Africans even those not in positions of leadership.

What is at the heart of this debate?

In the simplest terms, it is about what the citizens of any state can reasonably expect from their governments. Libya was by most standards, indeed looking at the latest  human development indicators, head and shoulders above the world. http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/LBY.html

The Libyan people were living lives that many African people can only dream about and that is in part the cause of this divide. I would aver that the Libyan people wanted more, much more from their government. While in Uganda, and indeed in most of Africa we may be happy with good schools and hospitals and roads, the Libyan people seemed to argue, what may be a fantasy in the rest of Africa, an inclusive and functional social system is the bare minimum they expect from their government.  

Put differently, does a society that has most of the social support systems most aspire to have the right to revolt against a system that has delivered on these systems? The answer depends on the aspirations of that society. In an earlier post, I alluded to the fact that a liberal political dispensation has become the accepted norm. In light of the demographic structure of Libya, representative and accountable governments, a respect for universal human rights, various freedoms are now considered normal. Gadaffi had clearly delivered on the social front, but the people he ruled over wanted a more open political system.

Gadaffi the revolutionary Pan- Africanist?

A lot has been said about Gadaffi  and his Pan African credentials. He is the prime mover of the United States of Africa idea, a rendition of a debate as old as most African states. It has also been said he wants to be the ruler of this new entity. Libya, until recently has been a key funder of the African Union picking up the tabs of many of Africa's smaller states. There is no doubt that he has made some positive contributions to the African unity project. However there are some nations that look upon Gadaffi's Pan- African credentials and frown.

A key beneficiary of Gadaffi revolutionary zeal was Charles Taylor. The carnage sown by Mr Taylor through out western Africa with the blessing, funding and training of Gadaffi and his security apparatus is almost biblical. Caveat, Liberia had its own internal tensions mainly along the lines of dividing the political spoils between the native Liberians and the descendants of freed slaves who dominated the Liberian  political system, however it was the emergence of Samuel Doe that served as a catalyst for Libya's involvement.

When Doe violently assumed power, he made two decisions that angered Libya, a firm alliance with the United States and a reestablishment of formal diplomatic ties with the state of Israel. It was these decisions, made well within his rights as the leader of the Liberian people which irked Gadaffi who saw himself as a bastion of anti- Imperialism used interchangeably with anti-Americanism and anti-Zionism.

Capitalizing on this, Taylor and Forday Sankoh of Sierra Leone with training and funding from Libya unleashed Hades hounds on west Africa. As a point of his defense, Charles Taylor argued that Gadaffi was at least partly responsible for some of the crimes committed by his men and went on to suggest Gadaffi should be his co-accused.http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/charles-taylor-defense-gadhafi-trial-war-crimes/story?id=13094284 for a Sierra Leonian perspective please see http://www.shout-africa.com/top-story/libya-indict-muammar-gaddafi-now-for-war-crimes-in-sierra-leone/

Whatever Gadaffi's credentials he bears some personal responsibility for some serious crimes against the people of Africa in general and Liberians and Sierra Leonians in particular. His pernicious influence is also felt in Darfur and Chad, and his treatment of the Berber minority within his country.

Bringing it together.

I have never made any secret of  the fact that I supported the decision to oust Gadaffi for the reasons I have stated above and in other places. I am a firm believer in a liberal open and democratic society because I believe that it is the only system that contains within in sufficient safety valves to preclude the violence that serves as a mile marker on this continent.

That said, I believe the Libyan people are the final arbiters in this debate and their position  is,  thank you very much for the schools and the hospitals and the fine roads that the rest of Africa can only dream about, we as a people want state that best represents our aspirations. A genuinely representative state, not a quasi monarchy led by the King of African kings Muammar Gadaffi and his princes and princess.