The world is fixatedly watching the news unfolding in Libya that it has even
overshadowed raging civil wars in Somalia and elsewhere and a budding genocide in
the Ivory Coast. The on-going exceptional popular movements in North Africa and the
Middle-East, led mainly by enlightened young revolutionaries that aspire for a dignified
life, democracy and human decency have been phenomenal and an inspiration to
people everywhere. Young men and women, standing together shoulder to shoulder, are
making history. These dignified young people through slogans written both in English
and Arabic are letting the world know of their aspirations for a better and peaceful life,
and are showing their admirable determination to achieve their goals by peaceful means
and are begging the world, especially the United States, to be with them at this critical
and pivotal time in human history.
The world would be a much better and a more peaceful place if the popular uprisings in
North Africa and the Middle-East are allowed to succeed. If that were to be so, the
biggest losers would be radical ideologies and organizations whose existence depends
on chaos and societal tension and strife that result from the misery, despondency,
hopelessness and dissatisfaction of local populations, especially the youth. As such, this
would be the best chance to win over hearts and minds of the Arab youth and people
everywhere that long for democracy and aspire to be free, and its significance in the
advancement of peace and stability could not be underestimated.
According to reports, the ill-advised US military involvement in Iraq for the express
purpose of toppling one dictator, Sadam Hussein, cost the United States over a trillion
Dollars, the lives of thousands of its men and women, resulted in the death of tens of
thousands of Iraqis, festered anti-American sentiments in the Arab and Muslim world to
an unprecedented degree and served radical elements and groups as a good recruiting
tool. In stark contrast to that, in the last couple of months alone dictators that ruled for
decades with iron feasts, unfortunately with the knowledge and “blessing” of the US,
have been toppled in short order and with minimal cost.
If this fledgling revolution is given bold but strategically thought-through and carefully
planned assistances on many fronts; applying enough pressure on and assisting
transitional authorities to be more accountable, inclusive and transparent, encouraging
and constructively engaging the agents of change – the youth- building civic society,
etc., I would say that stability, peace and democracy will have won over a seeping
radicalization of societies across the region. Obviously, some of the measures may
stand in the way of current and immediate interests, particularly economic ones; but the
strategic significance and importance of being on the right side of history will be
immeasurably invaluable.
Madame Secretary,
I am deeply concerned about the situation in Libya. I believe Libya at the moment is the
tail that wags the dog. Appropriate and timely action or the lack there of would be very
detrimental and consequential first to the Libyans, then to oppressed peoples of the
region and elsewhere and finally to American foreign policy and its security interests.
Three groups are particularly paying closer attention to the fluid developments in Libya.
The first group is decaying monarchies, archaic theocrats, despotic rulers and bloody
dictators who have ruled (and continue to rule) with iron feasts and without any sense of
accountability. Ironically, but sadly, because of political expediency and security
exigencies or economic interests, most of them happen to be close allies and friends of
Western democracies, particularly the US.
It is indeed encouraging that the UN Security Council, in response to the atrocious and
belligerent acts of Colonel Gaddafi, has passed a precedent-setting unanimous
resolution to freeze the assets of the Libyan dictator, his family members and close
associates, and that the ICC is looking into possible indictments against these butchers.
Nonetheless, Gaddafi appears to be convinced that major powers are unable to muster
a UN-sponsored resolution that would allow immediate intervention of a military nature.
And absent that critical element, and the only factor at this time that could play a pivotal
role in directly affecting the balance of power on the ground, he seems to believe that
indictments alone would not prevent him from continuing to torment his people. He is
aware of, and seems to take solace in the fact that Al Beshir of Sudan is still free to do
whatever he has been doing despite indictments by the ICC.
If Muammar Gaddafi, through brute force and by massacring his people, is allowed to
suppress, albeit temporarily, the revolutionary popular movement in Libya – primarily and
as a direct result of inaction by the world’s major powers, those dictators who are
currently under intense pressure and who are being shaken by similar popular
movements and those that are on the verge of facing the same fate from their subjects,
would be emboldened to play by that unwritten rule of Gaddafi’s ruthlessness and
definitely resort to similar barbaric tactics of slaughtering their own people in a vain
attempt to sustain their undemocratic rule as much as they possibly could. Any similar
acts by these dictators may temporarily thwart popular uprisings that could immediately
remove them from power. But their further stay in power would not be peaceful but one
that is replete with vicious reprisals. And the result would be an entrenchment of these
dictators that would only lead them to resort to a cycle of vindictive retaliatory measures
on whoever “failed” to stand with them.
If Hitler were properly challenged and stopped when he started invading his
immediate neighbors or when he started to scapegoat German Jews for Germany’s ills,
the world could have avoided the unnecessary loss of the lives of millions. Every time a
dictator gets a breathing space, he would only get emboldened. From archaic
monarchies of the bygone era to bloody dictators like Meles Zenawi, Isaias Afewerki, Al
Bashir, etc. are closely watching the Libyan phenomenon and gleefully, but vainly,
hoping that the inaction and ineptness of the great powers to impose “no fly zones”
drags on until Gaddafi reverses the tide. If Gaddafi is allowed to continue to unleash his
destructive power on innocent civilians and somehow stays in power any longer, I would
not be surprised if some maniacal dictators that depend on his financial backing to
sustain their undemocratic rule surreptitiously send armed contingents of their own in
order to help him stay in power. Therefore, any inaction in Libya sends the wrong
message to every dictator of the world that by resorting to brute force and violence to
crush the aspirations of their own people, they would assume that the worst they could
face could only be mere condemnations and would not face an imminent severe reaction
including military intervention at the behest of the population. Thus, the decision of
Western powers as regards to the Libyan situation would have ramifications that would
directly impact the aspirations of people the world over and affect their quest for freedom
and human dignity.
The second group wistfully watching what the reaction of Western powers would be the
Libyan people themselves. Included in this group are also oppressed people
everywhere, from Iran to Asia to Africa that aspire to empower themselves, be free and
change their lives for the better. All the Libyan revolutionaries are asking for is for the
major powers to deny Gaddafi the ability to use airpower against them. Although it is not
as simple as it sounds, the reluctance of these powers to answer the call of the Libyan
people in a timely and decisive manner to impose “no fly zone” in Libya is a grave
mistake the consequences of which would be highly regrettable. This apparent
reluctance has sent the wrong message to Gaddafi that Western powers are incapable
of standing for their principles and that they are unable to quickly react to prevent him
from “punishing” his “ungrateful” people for his 42 years of “service”. That dismal failure
by Western powers (US and Europe) to act promptly and decisively has emboldened
him not only to redouble his effort to change the military equation on the ground by using
his aerial advantages to do as much harm as possible to achieve that goal, but also has
the audacity to send his diplomats to foreign capitals.
If Gaddafi is allowed to even partially crush the popular movement and the Libyan
people are let down, it could lead to the disillusionment of the young generation of
Libyans that is at the very center of this popular movement for freedom and human
dignity, and could lead them to lose hope all together in the political ideals that Western
societies hold dear. The reaction of Western powers to the Libyan situation, either active
or passive, would, therefore, send a powerful and unequivocal message that would
reverberate far beyond one may think and could be detrimental to the peace of the
region and the long term interests of democratic nations.
The third group that is very closely watching and eagerly hoping for Gaddafi to succeed –
obviously not out of love for him, but expecting to benefit from ensuing resentment of the
Libyan people, especially the youth, because of the West’s failure to assist them in their
fight to free themselves from this dictator – would be hardliners and radical groups.
Failure by Western democracies to assist the people of Libya in every possible way
would be a boon to these groups as they would use it as proof that all Western powers
care about is Libyan oil and not the wellbeing and aspirations of the people, and that the
West is colluding with Gaddafi to suppress them. As oppression, suppression and
absence of freedoms and closed political space create fertile recruiting grounds for
radical groups, Gaddafi’s violent measures and the West’s lack of a timely, active and
decisive response would benefit these groups and enable them to get a foothold in
Libya. Once these groups have a viable presence there, and in view of the possibility of
disillusionment of the youth, if their quest for democracy does not get appropriate
assistance from Western powers in the form of imposing a “no fly zone”, for example,
the eagerness and fervor of the young Libyans to espouse democracy could fade fast
and an irreparable despondency could set in and most may look elsewhere for
deliverance from Gaddafi. In that unfortunate case, it is feasible that radical groups will
fill the void. And that would not be to anybody’s liking except those radical groups
themselves. As strange as it sounds, if the situation goes Gaddafi’s way – I believe it will
not – some may even entertain the idea of seeing in Gaddafi a “necessary devil” in the
fight against radicalism. We already have seen him trying to use that card. That very
notion would, indeed, be an unforgivable travesty.
It appears that Western powers are prisoners of their own power; they either overplay it
and squander their resources by acting unnecessarily as in the case of Iraq, or are
oblivious to human suffering and become too timid and hesitant to act to intervene in
defense of human life as in the case of Ruanda earlier and now Libya.
Would the West’s economic interests (oil in this case) override the very tenets of their
democratic values and common human decency? How many people will have to
unnecessarily die for the world powers to come to their senses and act decisively?
Your Excellency, Madame Secretary,
I pray and hope that the world is not once again going to bear witness to the massacre
of innocent civilians. Refraining from or hesitating to take decisive action to stop Gaddafi
would be inexcusable and morally reprehensible. There is a moral imperative to stop
him, and stop him now. But it is also in the best interest of the United States and
democracy to side with the Libyan people; not in words but in deeds. I cannot see how
this tragedy could be allowed to unfold under your watch and that of President Obama’s.
As an Ethiopian political activist living in the United States and enjoying the freedoms it
accords to all, and someone fighting for democracy and human rights in my country of
birth, I plead with you, Madame Secretary, to use your good offices to positively
influence the situation in Libya by denying the Libyan dictator the use of aircraft and
heavy artillery that he is callously deploying to massacre civilians and prevent his
diplomats from venturing outside the country. Mere credible threat that he should stop
any use of military aircraft and heavy artillery in 36 hours, and directly addressing his
pilots and military commanders (if possible by naming names) that they should
immediately stop complying with Gaddafi’s orders to massacre the Libyan people under
any pretext or they would be held accountable for their criminal acts, would have
immediate impact on the battlefield and Gaddafi’s torture chambers. That stern warning
and direct message coupled with deployment of reconnaissance flights (AWACS) could
boost the morale of the Libyan people and spare the world witnessing yet another
human tragedy.
Failure to do so, Madame Secretary, would amount to letting the Libyan people down,
and the US and other major powers should be ready to assume responsibility for
allowing this preventable human tragedy to take place. And it, no doubt, would be a big
strategic mistake and at the West’s peril.
