The Quaddafi Question: What To Do about Libya?

Prior to the current democratic crisis in Libya, most people probably didn’t have a clue who Muammar el-Qaddafi was. The fact that el-Qaddafi sounds more like a comfy slipper or throw blanket doesn’t help the general population conceptualize him as one of the most ruthless dictators in North Africa. But recent Libyan cries for democracy have pushed the military autocrat and his high quality headwear to the forefront of international dialogue, prompting a response from the man who has monopolized control of Libya for nearly half a century. This response was of course not the one we wanted, but the one that we expected. El-Qaddafi is digging into his trenches and gripping harder to the power that he feels slipping through his grasp.

The first days of violent conflict in Libya indicate that this power transition could be the bloodiest yet. Armed opposition groups are emerging from Tripoli to Tobruk, many of which are comprised of el-Qaddafi’s defected military personnel as well as protesters. Qaddafi’s solution to compensate for his lack of control over the Libyan military is to use private security forces. That’s right, the despot is hiring mercenaries to essentially go to war with his own citizens and using rhetoric that infers carnage is imminent. Furthermore, the world remains idle as these events come to pass. Many media outlets have asked, “Who will stop Qaddafi?” That’s a damn good question made all the more pressing as innocent demonstrators are being executed on a daily basis.

It’s nice to know that Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times is considering remedies to the threat the Qaddafi regime imposes as he described certain “sensible” measures postulated by Senator John Kerry, the Genocide Intervention Network and the International Crisis Group. While a couple of these political and institutional maneuvers can be considered effective, a majority can ironically be taken with a dollop of Heinz ketchup as they flip-flopped on their faces to even have a chance of success.

The one proposal that might plausibly have a positive impact on the situation would be offering safe haven to pilots ordered by el-Qaddafi to fire upon innocent protestors. This would incentivize Libyan military personnel to continue defecting free of reprisal from Qaddafi-backed forces. Other steps posited by Kerry and accompanying organizations should be subject to criticism as well as skepticism, as even competent implementation of these policies will have little influence over the outcome of coming incidents. A key example is the instituting of a no-fly zone over Libya, which proved to be successful in the Gulf War by preventing Saddam Hussein from pulverizing his Kurdish population. However, that no-fly zone was safeguarded by NATO forces—and because there is no enforcement mechanism to protect the no-fly zone, why should Qaddafi comply? This resolution would actually prevent Libyan military members from being able to defect, as it grounds their planes on the basis that military assets will be destroyed if aircrafts are spotted. Not to mention el-Qaddafi isn’t even using his military because of their unreliability, and a majority of the military assets are not even under his direct control. So, if a no-fly zone were initiated, one pilot attempting to defect from the regime could possibly result in the destruction of combative resources essential to resist el-Qaddafi’s privatized forces. This was proposed by the Libyan ambassador to the U.N. Instead of protecting the Libyan populace from el-Qaddafi, this would put them at a strategic disadvantage to defend themselves.

Also, the belief that freezing the el-Qaddafi family’s assets will curtail weapons agreements and exchanges is completely unrealistic. Let’s not forget that former Tunisian dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali had an incomputable $41 million dollars in cash stashed away in his residential quarters, and he only controlled Tunisia for twenty-four years. As el-Qaddafi has been in power for forty-six years, sitting on the wealth of many Libyan oil reserves, we must assume that the disposable income he has in the form of cold hard cash at least doubles or triples that of the former Tunisian tyrant. Thus cutting off el-Qaddafi’s capacity to incite and fund violence will not be achieved simply by a stylishly suited-up European banker flipping a switch or signing a paper.

Continuing with monetary issues, the U.N. has just recently announced that it plans to place financial and trade sanctions on Libya. This measure proposed by Senator Kerry and company drew a standing ovation when a resolution was passed today at the U.N. Awesome, another round of sanctions. The true question is why U.N. delegates are so emphatically applauding for a tactic that has failed countless times to formidably affect anything. Even Dave Chappelle recognized the fallible efforts of U.N. sanctions during a comedic satire where he proclaimed the organization should “sanction him” with their non-existent army. El-Qaddafi is sitting on millions of dollars with which he can wage war and entrench himself in power, and the U.N. plans to sanction him. What happens when you take a dart and throw it at a skyscraper? Usually nothing; in this case gas prices go up, and credibility goes down. In the U.N.’s case though, I’m not sure how much lower it can plummet.

Kristof incidentally ends his article by stating that the response from the international community must be “strong.” Well Nick, these actions are not strong; nor are they decisive or substantive in any way. Yet again the international community has submitted to its passive aggressive policy agenda which will invariably inflame the situation while proscribing nothing. How many times will the global community stand placidly, blankly staring humanitarian crisis in the eye, and blink? This is not a situation where the U.S. and other countries with imperialist tendencies should shy away, but a circumstance where leaders of the free world must take the helm and coordinate tangible intervention in the name of human rights and all that is democratic. This is not a matter of east vs. west, Muslim vs. Christian, but a matter of preventing the silencing of the voices that have been stifled for forty-six years—and if the global governance does not act in a timely manner, it will only be a matter of time before there are not many innocent Libyans left to defend. •

[mc4wp_form id="5878"]