Freedom or Survival ?Author(s): El-Gomati, Anas
European Union Institute for Security Studies, April 2011
The Gaddafi era is almost certainly over. It remains nonetheless problematic to assess and provide policy options that would adequately resolve the present conflict in Libya. How can the present deadlock be resolved without negotiating with the key figure who has so strongly defined it over the past four decades? Despite the wave of international diplomatic condemnation, UN and NATO military involvement and the unquestionable evidence of Gaddafi’s atrocities, we still find that internal support for him remains. The future of the revolution is at stake as we face a protracted military battle, leaving the most pertinent question still yet to be asked - what are Gaddafi’s supporters fighting for?
So we confront the dichotomy of the Libyan situation. Not a civil war in a traditional sense for control of the state, but rather a battle characterised by conflicting aspirations and motives. On the one side, freedom – the freedom to build an egalitarian, democratic country – and on the other side survival. A battle to survive an uncertain future for those who have enjoyed privilege and protection by Gaddafi – in other words the beneficiaries of his policy of patronage and favouritism.
We should be careful not to led astray by orientalist interpretations, when attempting to understand the conflict, the most dangerous of which is to overestimate the tribal structure of Libya. To view Libya as a primitive, tribal society implies the conflict is pervaded with mysterious, irrational objectives incomprehensible to the outside world, and this would be a serious mistake. Rather we should diagnose the situation more accurately: that a meritocratic Libya is feared by the privileged sections of Libyan society. The pro-Gaddafi elements of support, the ‘Gaddafists’, do not recite from the Green Book in their marches on the streets, and do not appear to believe or even adhere to its most basic tenets. Musa Ibrahim, the recently appointed regime spokesman, as of March 2011 began to talk of democratic reforms and a constitution. In this apparent admission of guilt, it seems that not even the regime officials believe in their own Green Book ideology. ...