‘Ghaddafi’ Articles at j’accuse, Page 2

J’accuse feels obliged to be its usual cynical self. The news from home is that everybody with a keyboard or a pen has been worked up into a frenzy about the Malta – Libya relationship now that the Mad Dog has exhibited evident signs of the late stages of rabies. The fog of war – or the blinding light of international attention – seems to have turned our collective media machine into an exhibitionist three year old eager to show the dinner guests its latest development in potty training.

Where do we start?

Chapter 1: The “I told you so” brigade

No you didn’t. Forget partisan divides, forget the finger pointing to Mintoff’s or Tonio Borg’s cuddling up to the Michael Jackson lookalike. We’ve been living in the shadow of Muammar for as long as he’s been there. He’s been a permanent fixture in the World Constellation so inevitably his proximity to our tiny nation could not have been ignored. Our leaders chose invariably the option of kowtowing to the Libyan threat via at first enthusiastic then reluctant cooperation. I do not recall anybody yelling “foul” at the different depths of government strategy of coping with Ghaddafi.

Not until the Egypt revolution was almost over did we hear the first yelps of anti-Ghaddafism – yelps that could be translated to let’s do something to stop encouraging the leader. Until then we had all remained mum about the flow of investment and collaboration between successive Maltese governments and Ghaddafi. After all, since the end of the US embargo it HAS been a free for all.

Of course there were a few tut-tuts and mellow barks along the way (last one was when Ghaddafi awarded Mintoff his eccentric prize) but on the whole one can confidently state that the Maltese people were quite content to settle down around a system of forgetful appeasement. Brothers in Libya my arabic back side.

Now we are divided between those in who one corner practically wear the revolutionary hat while plotting complex evacuation plans and calling for the government to save the businessmen and the brains in the other corner who stare a democratic uprising in the face and can only see the threat of immigrant invasion.

Forgive us if we’re not that carried away.

I gave up waiting for Ghaddafi’s “imminent TV speech” on SKY news after about an hour or so. I ended up watching his two-minute intervention this morning and what a sight that was. The dictator sat inside an old car holding up an umbrella and claimed that he was on his way to the Green Square to address the youths but had been held back by the rain. Meanwhile, reports from Tripoli – scant as they were – told us that the rain was really a shower of bombs and semi-automatic guns fired on the protesting crowd. The situation in Libya is turning into the greatest nightmare among the Jasmine revolutions but we should have expected this and more from Colonel Ghaddafi.

Here’s the J’accuse take on the goings-on:

One report had Ghaddafi’s men handing out meat, sugar, salt and other food as well as promising places in University or civil service positions in exchange for support. We are used to politicians buying the support of their electorate through the notion of favours – Malta in the eighties comes to mind as the most glaring example – but I was still shocked to see how far the control of the dictator could go to be able to convince people to renege liberty and freedom with the promise of food on the table or an education. Next time we wonder about the cost of education we should have this particular exchange in mind.
It has become evident that the Colonel has given orders for armed forces to bomb/shoot upon the people. This is the ultimate sign that any claim of popular sovereignty has whithered away. When a supposed leader of the people – whether a King, a President or a Prime Minister chooses to shoot upon his own people it is the ultimate sign that he is no longer their representative or guardian. This fact was reinforced by the defection of the two pilots to Malta and by the fact that it is clear now that Ghaddafi is relying on mercenary African forces flown in to shoot upon the people (the price quoted varies from $12k to $18k per mercenary). The Libyan envoy to the UN and a number of ambassadors as well as Ministers of Ghaddafi’s government were outraged by the use of force on their own people. Some resigned, others called on the UN to act and at least one General was under house arrest for refusing to obey orders.
The question arises whether an intervention by an international force is warranted at this point. Given the fact that Ghaddafi is no longer acting in the interests of his own people and that it is international (albeit mercenary) mercenary forces that are doing the damage is it still possible for the UN to tread on tip toes around the issue fearing that an intervention in “internal affairs” would spark a dangerous precedent? There is the fear of a split of the Libyan state along the Benghazi/Tripoli fault-lines but is that enough of a deterrent to intervention by a UN peace force? The democratic right to protest is at the foundation of the Jasmine revolutions. Until now governments have been swayed by the public demonstration of peaceful masses with limited loss of life. Libya opens a new chapter as the Colonel clings to power through brute force. How will the UN react? The Russian and Chinese seats at the Security Council must be very hot at the moment.
Ghaddafi’s regime has acted swiftly to cut most communication in and out of Libya. Surprisingly the shutdown has been quite effective leading to frustrating news items across the board from CNN to SKY to Al Jazeera. The internet still offers small windows over the goings on as J’accuse has shown via the Libya17feb stream on livestream.com. This has been another effect of the Jasmine Revolutions. The Idiot’s Guide for Despots in Trouble is being written as we speak. Chapter 1 is a huge chapter on effective counter-communication. Ghaddafi’s henchmen patrol the streets with loudspeakers and the phone and internet systems are down. The role of information is crucial to an effective revolution. That and roundabouts or squares.
Green Square joins Tahrir Square and Bahrain’s Pearl Circle in the panoply of revolutionary sites. Ghaddafi recognised this and used the Square as bait – apparently giving orders for the mercenaries to wait for people to assemble in the square before randomly opening fire. The butchery took place at night and then, as witnessed by fleeing tourists, the Ghaddafi team cleaned the square from all signs of violence in the morning: just in time for the first news of a calm and quiet Green Square. Until now the only call for assembly and unity in a Middle Eastern/Arab country that was not heeded was in Syria. Yemen, Jordan and Bahrain have all witnessed popular marches or protests – as has Iran. The latter is the other nation where a violent reaction by the rulers is to be expected.
On the periphery of the action we had David Cameron becoming the first foreign leader to visit Egypt after the revolution. Sadly Cameron was accompanied by eight leaders of the arms industry in what was evidently a sales pitch for the UK Arms market. Cameron’s protest that the UK has very strict sales conditions will not have impressed many observers.
Business is business and J’accuse does feel the need to express solidarity with all the Maltese workers caught up in Libya and attempting to get out of the nightmare (that includes the Fenechs… good luck Chris). There is however a tinge of hypocricy in the way some blogs have highlighted Malta’s interests in the Libyan revolution. First of all J’accuse is not at all sympathetic of all those who have in the past gone to bed with Ghaddafi and his regime in order to set up shop with the blessing of a dictator. If you are comfortable making money with his blessing then don’t expect tears of compassion if your investments go up in smoke with the first sign of democratic change. Funny how some people can weep rivers of tears for sweat shops in India, Pakistan or China but then have no qualms about Maltese investments in Libya for example. Business no?
Finally there was the appeal from some quarters – notably the Runs – for everyone and his brother to drop everything and concentrate on Libya. Forget about the divorce debate and glue yourselves to television waiting for the latest news? What exactly are we meant to be stopping the nation for? A Ghaddafi announcement? Or maybe, just maybe, the divorce discussion is has meant the shit hitting the fan for too many people and the Libyan revolution is a welcome distraction. Sure we are concerned with Libya and what is going on. Sure it must given its due relevance but spare us the bullshit of wanting to stop everything else. You’ve got to love the Runs’ logic by the way… here’s the best screamer of the lot:

“…it makes more sense […] to have people vote for or against divorce in the general election in two years’ time. Those who are against divorce can vote for the Nationalist Party, which has taken a position against it. Those who are for divorce can vote for… nobody, because Labour has not taken a position in favour of it…”

She doesn’t get it does she? In case anyone with half a brain in their head is reading…. there is a party with a clear position in favour of divorce. It’s just that Daphne Caruana Galizia would rather pretend that it doesn’t exist. At least until she can come up with some other wild story like the Harry Vassallo VAT saga come next election…

spread the word:

spread the word: