Libya, from ally to devil in six months !

Tweet

 The big question now is which foreign power will dominate Libya. The United States, which has waged this little war from well offstage? Italy, which gets most of its oil from Libya? France, where President Sarkozy has been hinting at a Mediterranean union – bien sure, under French tutelage?

Image via Wikipedia

By Eric S. Margolis

WATCHING rebel gunmen rampage through Col Muammar Gaddafi's Bab al-Aziziya compound – once Tripoli's Forbidden City – was a strange experience for me.

I spent an evening there with Gaddafi in 1987, a year after it was bombed by US warplanes. Libya's "Brother Leader" talked about the Middle East, Palestine, North Africa. He led me by the hand through his ruined private quarters, still reeking of fire and smoke, and showed me the bed in which an American 1,000kg laser-guided bomb killed his two-year-old adopted daughter.

We sat in his gaily coloured Bedouin tent, talking into the night. He opened up to me about his love for fancy dress and beamed happily when I told him, tongue in cheek, how attractive he was to western women.

Call this dictator nostalgia – a feeling not of course shared by a majority of Libyans who are now trying to hunt down their deposed leader of 42 years. Few will miss him. Gaddafi was a blight on Libya and an embarrassment to the Arabs.

Meanwhile, Libya is literally turning into a gold rush as the big western oil firms pile into Libya and pay court to the new government in Tripoli, the National Transitional Council.

Police units and troops from Britain, France and Italy may soon follow – all, naturally, as part of the west's new "humanitarian intervention" strategy that has replaced "counter-terrorism".

Libya is in semi-chaos and its economy devastated by six months of conflict. The food distribution system has broken down. Thousands of heavily armed "rambos" make their own law. There are barely any state institutions aside from the national oil company and central bank. The secret police have evaporated.

As a modest historian, I am delighted when history draws striking parallels. We now see the fascinating spectacle of those old colonial powers, Britain, France, and Italy, starting to move back into their former overseas possessions.

Britain ruled Libya until a young colonel named Muammar Gaddafi overthrew the doddering old British puppet, King Idris. The US lost one of its largest bomber bases at Libya's Wheelus Field. Neither nation was to forgive Gaddafi.



Imperial Britain had seized Libya from Italy's fascist regime in 1943. Italy colonised Libya after tearing it away from the crumbling Ottoman Empire. Italy used concentration camps and poison gas to terrorise Libyans into submission.

France, whose colonial empire included neighbouring Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, Chad, and Niger, long competed with Italy and Spain for regional domination. Mussolini's Fascist regime pressed claims to Tunisia, Corsica, Nice and Cannes.

An obscure colonial border dispute over Chad's Aouzou Strip dating from the 1920's between France and Italy led to a nasty little Franco-Libyan border war there in 1987.

French Foreign Legionnaires in jeeps, disguised as Chadian nomads, drove the wretched Libyan army from Aouzou in what became known as the "Toyota War". Disguised French special forces and Legionnaires, as well as Britain's SAS, just used the same theatrical tactics in Libya.

The big question now is which foreign power will dominate Libya. The United States, which has waged this little war from well offstage? Italy, which gets most of its oil from Libya? France, where President Sarkozy has been hinting at a Mediterranean union – bien sure, under French tutelage?

Oil is a potent aphrodisiac. Libya has vast reserves of premium, low-sulphur oil and gas, and a hundred-year supply of ancient artesian water.

Energy-rich Libya will become an important market for European consumer products and industrial exports, as well as a huge major supplier of investment funds from its estimated US$50 billion worth of annual oil exports.

There are more prizes to be had: Libya's gold reserves, estimated at US$4-5 billion; and its nearly US$100 billion of foreign deposits and investments.

The files of its intelligence agencies which may reveal the true story behind the bombings of a French and US airliner in the 1980's.

Western intelligence will also want to talk to Gaddafi's intelligence chief, closest confidant and brother-in-law, Abdullah Senoussi, with whom I spent a most interesting evening in Tripoli. France has a warrant out for his arrest for the 1989 bombing of a UTA airliner over Niger.

It's likely US, British and French intelligence have already grabbed Gaddafi's files.

Eric S. Margolis is an award-winning, internationally syndicated columnist, writing mainly about the Middle East and South Asia. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Related Post:
Ex-colonizers aid Libyan Rebels Assault on Tripoli 'planned weeks ago';No easy transition, rebuilding after Gaddafi  

Malaysia's future: A time for Malay renewal !

Tweet

A time for renewal, too

Ceritalah By KARIM RASLAN

The debate over Malay identity is fundamental to Malaysia’s future. Only when tensions within the Malay community itself are cooled will the resentment and grievances between Malaysia’s ethnic groups be resolved.

AS I reflect over the events of the fasting month – and indeed the past 12 months – I cannot help but conclude that Malaysian Malays are facing an existential crisis, which is primarily political in nature.

Moreover, because the Muslim/Malay community is dominant numerically; its tribulations will impact the rest of the nation.

In short, no one can be insulated from the community’s uncertainties.

Sadly, Malaysia’s communal peace has been further rocked by the Jais raid on the Damansara Utama Methodist Church (DUMC).

This has been accompanied by a steep increase in the number of claims of Christian proselytising amongst Muslims.

Such fears over murtad are nothing new.

They have been current for years, even decades, peaking in times of political uncertainty: witness the Maria Hertogh riots back in 1950.

However, we need to put things in perspective; 2011 is not 1950.

Malay/Muslims currently outnumber non-Muslims significantly. In short, demography favours the ummah. Moreover, the position of Islam is constitutionally-assured.

Nonetheless, the re-emergence of the murtad issue suggests a more deep-rooted anxiety among Malay-Muslims about the future.

Indeed, there are fundamental concerns about the Muslim response to both globalisation and modernity.

How do we maintain our faith and culture in an era when interaction with non-Muslims has become both a norm and a necessity?

The ummah has responded to such challenges differently and this reflects the Malay/Muslim community’s underlying heterogenity.

Contrary to Umno’s obsession with Malay unity, the community is by no means monolithic.

At the same time, political developments post-2008, have heightened and accentuated these shifts – lending them a partisan hue as PAS, Umno and PKR have weighed in on various issues.

As these differences of opinion surface, we are faced with a secondary challenge: how do we deal with disagreements over what it means to be Malay and Muslim?

Can we maintain our dignity, objectivity and calm when face-to-face with opposing views? How do we manage when our major political parties – PAS and Umno – assume conflicting positions?

Amid the debate, many are electing to withdraw, preferring isolation to engagement. Such a retreat makes dissent, however reasonable, even more complicated and potentially dangerous. To my mind, withdrawal is a disaster.

The Malay community has always possessed an outward-looking mindset. We cannot, and should not, abdicate from our engagement with the world. We have thrived by exchanging ideas and knowledge with others as traders, scholars and travellers. Indeed, the decline of the Muslim world came when we closed our hearts, minds and borders.



Still, I am not disputing the need for Muslims to maintain their faith, but the notion that the only way we can do this is by shunning non-Muslims and/or trampling on the rights of minorities is nonsensical.

Doing so will only reinforce the misperception that Islam is intolerant and regressive. It also hastens our own decline.

Given these concerns I’ve been heartened by Prime Minister Najib Razak’s recent attempts to recapture the centre ground.

His willingness to end censorship and reform the electoral system is most welcome.

It displays an openness (however belated) to listen to others. This is courageous given the narrow-mindedness of many of his fellow party members.

However, opening up in the midst of a debate is always tough. Will tentative changes be enough to satisfy an increasingly restive Malay (and Malaysian) public? Will it be too little and too late?

The debate about Malay identity is fundamental to Malaysia’s future.

It will become increasingly heated and painful. For example, Malay identity cannot be separate from the role of the Rulers. This bond has to be examined and questioned.

Given the depth and breadth of the upcoming debate we must ask whether Umno alone can manage this process? Indeed, has PAS’ greater moral authority sidelined the party of Merdeka?

The consequences of half-hearted reforms are obvious if we look across the Causeway to Singapore where the presidential elections have just been concluded.

While the PAP government deserves praise for allowing all four candidates to campaign openly – providing them with equal mainstream media coverage, there’s no doubt that many Singaporeans feel “shortchanged”.

Reforming from within rarely satisfies. Indeed, Dr Tony Tan’s incredibly slim margin of victory underlines the unhappiness of ordinary Singaporeans who expect much, much more from their politics.

Malaysians will be like their cousins across the Causeway. They won’t be willing to suffer timidity and half-hearted reforms.

Tentative steps will be swept away by a tide of popular resentment. Indeed, boldness will be the only solution.

At a time when the very core of Malay identity is being debated, piecemeal reform will not be enough. Reform will go nowhere unless the state loosens its grip.

The Najib administration must recognise that a mere shift in tactics will not be enough to win back Malaysia’s cynical and jaded electorate, especially the Malays.

The last three years have taught us that the Malay/Muslim community is becoming more complex and indeed, difficult to please.

As Umno and the Prime Minister discovered during the Bersih 2.0 debacle, it is no longer possible to succeed solely on emotive appeals for ethnic and religious unity.

Rather, Najib and his government must be willing to accept the diversity that now exists within Malay discourse, and tailor their policies accordingly.

Indeed, Umno no longer controls the debate.

For instance, economic policies need to champion the interests of middle- and working-class Malays, rather than expecting them to automatically back the ventures of the intra-ethnic elite.

Barisan has to keep asking themselves: what’s really in it for the people?

Furthermore, differing views over culture and faith must be allowed rather than repressed.

Indeed, one feels that such an approach may very well work among every race in Malaysia in general.

All the same, the resentment and grievances between Malaysia’s ethnic groups can only be resolved when tensions within the Malay community itself are cooled.

This Hari Raya must not only be a time of celebration for Malaysian Malays, but also renewal.

Related posts:

Malaysia still in pursuit of full independence 

The true meaning of independence

 Reviving our winning ways     

Rage of the youth is growing !

Tweet


By Pankaj Mishra, Guardian News & Media Ltd

Even in the West there is little chance of stable jobs or affordable education. A secure and dignified life seems even more remote for most. Across the world, the rage will grow.

Image Credit: AP

• Supporters of Anna Hazare wave Indian flags and shout slogans during 12th day of Hazare's fast against corruption in New Delhi on Saturday.

In India, tens of thousands of middle-class people respond to a quasi-Gandhian activist's call for a second freedom struggle — this time, against the country's venal "brown masters", as one protester told the Wall Street Journal. Middle-class Israelis demanding "social justice" turn out for their country's first major demonstrations in years. In China, the state broadcaster CCTV unprecedentedly joins millions of cyber-critics in blaming a government that placed wealth creation above social welfare for the fatal high-speed train crash last month.

Add to this the uprisings against kleptocracies in Egypt and Tunisia, the street protests in Greece and Spain, and you are looking at a fresh political awakening. The grievances may be diversely phrased, but public anger derives from the same source: extreme and seemingly insurmountable inequality.

As Forbes magazine, that well-known socialist tool, describes it, protesters everywhere are driven by "the conviction that the power structure, corporate and government, work together to screw the broad middle class" (and the working class too, whose distress is not usually examined in Forbes).

For years now, the mantra of ‘econ-omic growth' justified government interventions on behalf of big business and investors with generous tax breaks (and, in the West, the rescue of criminally reckless speculators with massive bailouts). The fact that a few people get very rich while the majority remains poor seemed of little importance as long as the GDP figures looked impressive.



In heavily populated countries like India, even a small number of people moving into the middle class made for an awe-inspiring spectacle.

Helped by a ‘patriotic' corporate media, you could easily ignore the bad news — the suicides, for instance, of hundreds of thousands of farmers. However, the illusions of globalisation shattered when even its putative beneficiaries — the educated and aspiring classes — began to hurt from high inflation, decreasing access to education and other opportunities for upward mobility.

False promises

Economic growth is no defence against the frustration of the semi-empowered. The economies of both India and Israel have recorded dramatic growth in recent years. But inequality has also grown spectacularly. The Financial Times, which recently compared India's oligarchic business families to Russia's mafia-capitalists, pointed out two weeks ago that "the 10 largest business families in Israel own about 30 per cent of the stock market value" while one quarter of Israeli families live below the poverty line.

Last month the Indian supreme court blamed increasing social violence in the country on the "false promises of ever-increasing spirals of consumption leading to economic growth that will lift everyone".

Obviously it is not the supreme court's remit to define India's economic policies. Nor should Anna Hazare be entrusted with establishing the office of an anti-corruption ombudsman, a mission that amounts to nothing in a country littered with compromised and impotent institutions.

Still, they respond, however incoherently, to a crisis of legitimacy afflicting their country's highest institutions, and their supposed watchdog, the media.

In the last decade, billionaires, ‘billionaire-friendly' legislators and CEO-worshipping journalists have together constituted what the political economist Ha Joon Chang calls a "powerful propaganda machine, a financial-intellectual complex backed by money and power".

Nevertheless, the real facts about ‘economic growth' are getting through to those most vulnerable to it in both the east and the west: the young.

Denouncing "the corruption among politicians, businessmen and bankers" that leaves "us helpless, without a voice", the manifesto of the Spanish indignados could have been authored by the Indian supporters of Hazare.

Even as they export jobs and capital to Asia, economic globalisers in the West continue to preach the importance of upgrading skills at home. Yet the dead-end of globalisation looms clearly before Europe and America's youth: little chance of stable employment, or even affordable education.

The violence in European cities this year comes at the end of a long cycle of steady socio-economic growth. In postcolonial India and China this cycle had barely begun before it began to splutter. A secure and dignified life seems even more remote for most.

Worried by the prospect of social unrest, China's leaders frankly describe their nation's apparently booming economy as "unstable, unbalanced, uncoordinated and ultimately unsustainable".

The Chinese philosopher Zhang Junmai once wrote that an agrarian country has few ‘material demands' and can exist over a long period of time with ‘poverty but equality, scarcity but peace'. Returning to an austere age of wisely managed expectations is no longer possible — even if it was desirable. It remains to be seen what political forms this summer's unrest will take. But there is no doubt that many more people across a wide swathe of the world will awaken with rage to what Zhang warned against: "A condition of prosperity without equality, wealth without peace."

Pankaj Mishra's new book The Revenge of the East will be published next year