Libyan Dissidents: We Can Rebuild Post-Qaddafi
On a night when the nation listened to President Obama make his case for the U.S. led coalition’s intervention in Libya, the Libyan Ambassador to the United States made his own comments at George Washington University. Ali Aujali has served as an ambassador for Libya since 1981, but defected from the Qaddafi government after violence erupted. Mr. Aujali’s remarks were followed by remarks from Fadel Lamen, President of the American-Libyan Council. Together their words shed some light on the point of view of Libyan dissidents, whose voices have been almost completely silent over Qaddafi’s brutal forty-two years in power.
Mr. Aujali’s remarks were mostly jubilant, praising the U.S. and European powers that chose to intervene in what looked to be a certain massacre in Benghazi. “If the French had waited even three more hours to begin their strikes, the tanks and heavy equipment would have arrived in Benhghazi” leading to the third major massacre in Libya, he said. He was emphatic in his thanks to the U.S. and European military powers that chose to intervene, exclaiming that they had made the right choice. Both speakers remarked that the U.S.-led coalition was supporting the desire of the Libyan people to attain their freedom, which they said was the principle aim of the rebel uprising.
Both speakers made reference to the fact that this is the second time that a Western coalition has come to the aid of Libya. Western Allies freed Libya from the brutal rule of Mussolini’s fascist government in 1942. Nine years later, the UN declared Libya independent, after an internationally agreed upon constitution initiated a constitutional monarchy there. Eighteen years after that, in 1969, a small group of high ranking army officers took control of Libya overnight, and Colonel Qaddafi quickly consolidated total power over the state.
Mr. Lamen contradicted the widely held view that Libya is now embroiled in a civil war. Libyans are not fighting Qaddafi in a civil war he insisted because Qaddafi “is not Libyan to the Libyans, he forfeited his rights to be Libyan, he lost his legitimacy as a leader of a country when he decided to use foreign troops on his own people, to massacre them.” This is an interesting point that lends support to Obama’s decision to engage in intervention in Libya. Qaddafi has brought thousands of mercenaries into Libya from fragile and failed states like Somalia and Chad. His forty-two years in power have also left little doubt about his resolve in crushing his own people. One Libyan-American at the event made reference to watching his seventeen year old friend hung in the street on live state television in the 1970’s.
Yet neither speaker had much to offer on the future of Libya’s uprising and goal of freedom. Ambassador Aujali was candid in stating that there were no institutions, no freedom of speech, and no freedom of press in Libya, but did not address how these institutions would be developed in a post-Qaddafi future. Neither did the speakers make any specific reference to leaders within the rebel uprising. The group continues to be a largely nameless, faceless group. Mr. Lamen was more dismissive of questions about the ability of Libyans to develop a government with civil institutions after Qaddafi, asserting that Libya had enough human and financial capital to set up a state for themselves. He did not offer any evidence, however, as to how this human capital could be coordinated, or who represented it.
These questions are too big to be ignored. The ability of Libyans to erect a functional state after Qaddafi is pushed from power, if indeed he is, is not clear at all. If Qaddafi goes, there are no institutions to fill the void. There is no unified military to set up a caretaker regime as has been done in Egypt. There will be thousands of foreign mercenaries left in the country, armed and well trained, and loyal only to the highest bidder. As President Obama gave his speech tonight, he remarked that expanding the mission to bring down the Qaddafi regime would splinter the coalition, but has the administration and NATO begun to plan for a power vacuum should Qaddafi fall? Surely a failed state filled with well armed militias, mercenary gangs, and freedom fighters would pose a serious threat to regional stability, one serious enough to justify the deployment of ground troops. Will this failed state not be the responsibility of the US and NATO? Would this responsibility not also splinter the coalition?
The presence of these unanswered questions does not bode well for the future of Libya. Yet, that Libyan leaders such as Ambassador Aujali and Mr. Fadel are asserting that Libyans truly are fighting for freedom and dignity, and that they do not view themselves as engaged in a civil war is encouraging. It is only a matter of time before Qaddafi is pushed from power. Perhaps weeks, perhaps years, but it is inevitable. President Obama and NATO leaders should begin asking themselves these difficult questions, because walking away when things fall apart may be worse than never having gotten involved in the first place.
Tweet