Even though revolution was bubbling in the Libyan pressure cooker, Western powers decided to impose their sinister ulterior motives upon the movement, giving a damning reflection of Europe, the US, and the UK
The Western world has a long history of meddling in foreign affairs in order to satisfy their own sinister ulterior motives. A history that dates back to British colonization. Of course, the West is not unique in its power grabs. Power grabs the West usually mask as peacekeeping efforts. But the West is clearly not learning from history. Indeed, previous empires have fallen due to exhibiting similar greed.
On the 6th anniversary of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi’s death, many questions remain starkly ignored by the mainstream press. When the Libyan rebels overthrew the totalitarian dictator, the media presented a neat and tidy narrative which painted the “good guys‘ having overcome the “evil villain.” But what many people don’t realize is that there was something more sinister underlying the push for Gaddafi’s demise.
WikiLeaks exposes sinister Clinton email
After WikiLeaks exposed Hilary Clinton’s emails, information came to light that Western motivations to kill Gaddafi were more sinister than mere rebels wishing to knock off their totalitarian ruler. Indeed, a rebel conducted the actual assassination with none other than Gaddafi’s famed golden gun, and news media immediately beamed the images around the globe. However, the rebel’s ability to reach Gaddafi was undoubtedly enabled by outside forces that had ulterior motives to see him dead.
According to an email between Sidney Blumenthal and Hilary Clinton, Blumenthal alleged that he had received exclusive information from “knowledgeable individuals” regarding France’s financial and political interests in Libya. Within this email, dated April 2, 2011, Blumenthal described how Gaddafi’s right-hand man, Abdul Fatah Younis, who had defected to the rebel side only a couple of months earlier, had a close relationship with France. A close relationship that supposedly granted him financial rewards.
Gaddafi betrayed for reward
In a tale potentially reminiscent of Judas Iscariot, Younis abandoned his allegiance to Gaddafi’s dying regime and sold his leader for “a bag” of approximately $7 billion worth of silver and gold. And similar to the tale of Judas, Younis lost his life only months later albeit in mysterious circumstances. Nevertheless, it appears that France and the US were able to achieve their ulterior motives riding on the back of the revolutionary horse that Younis led them to.
It wasn’t that France or the US necessarily wanted the gold itself, even though, curiously, its current whereabouts are unknown. It was Gaddafi’s rather grander plan that he had devised that was causing the West, and notably, France, to shake in their boots. According to the leaked email, Gaddafi intended to use this gold and silver to create a new currency. The intended gold dinar would become a replacement for the French franc, and it would give Francophone African countries more autonomy. Clearly, this horrified the French.
Sinister French ulterior motives
Blumenthal further claimed that his source described how the then French President Nicolas Sarkozy became hell-bent on attacking Libya. Furthermore, Sarkozy was motivated solely by protecting French interests in the region. The email listed five core reasons that Sarkozy was being driven by:
- A desire to gain a greater share of Libyan oil production,
- Increase French influence in North Africa,
- Improve his internal political situation in France,
- Provide the French military with an opportunity to reassert its position in the world,
- Address the concern of his advisors over Gaddafi’s long-term plans to supplant France as the dominant power in Francophone Africa.
On the one hand, it is clear that France was biting at the chomp to enter Libya and retain their dominance in the area. However, the email also discloses that the leaders of the National Libyan Council (NLC), Mustafa Abdul Jalil and Mahmoud Jibril, were also impatient for the French to act. It seems that their complementary interests were motivating the toppling of the Gaddafi regime.
Gaddafi deposed through Western enabling
On the fateful final day of the revolution, on the 20 October 2011, it is obvious that its conclusion was only possible via the West’s intervention. When the rebels had arrived at Gaddafi’s compound, a NATO drone located the Dictator’s vehicle convoy leaving the area. This drone, operated remotely from Las Vegas, notified French fighter jets of the convoy’s coordinates. The French then bombed the convoy, leading to the capture and death of Gaddafi.
The French, the Americans and the rebels all declared victory. Nevertheless, there was some evidence that the rebels did not necessarily want the revolution to end in Gaddafi’s actual death. A video journalist began uploading his travels around Libya in the April and March of 2011. His interviews with various rebels revealed their desire to keep the dictator alive. One particular rebel specifically wanted Gaddafi alive to witness the people being restored to freedom, thriving without a need for him.
Wanted dead or alive
Did overexcited rebels inadvertently kill Gaddafi immediately? Or was his death the consequence of instructions from the French and NATO? Either way, Gaddafi met his demise. Rebel’s streamed gory video evidence onto the internet, revealing how one had managed to shoot the former dictator through the temple, with Gaddafi’s own famed golden gun. Any rebel’s desire for the deposed dictator to witness their new world unfold, had to be abandoned. Instead, rebels took turns taking selfies with his corpse for many days, before the stench encouraged them to bury him finally.
The West cannot be excused for their patronizing meddling in foreign affairs, whether Gaddafi was a madman or not. Meddling which is made worse because there are apparently ulterior motives. The West has a bad habit of infantilizing nations that do not mirror their Western culture. Indeed, lust for power is the primary motivation of many in the West. Blumenthal’s email to Clinton clearly delinated this. The French asserted their power solely for their own selfish interests.
Despicable Western infantilizing of other nations
However, this example of Western interference in the affairs of Libya was in truth the culmination of decades of meddling. The US and the UK began taking advantage of Gaddafi’s narcissism and eccentricities during the Reagan administration. Before President Ronald Reagan, President Henry Kissinger had been busy poking the Middle East hornet’s nest with disastrous results. Consequently, Kissenger left this mess for Reagan to deal with.
When Syria instigated revenge for this Western meddling, in the form of terrorist attacks, Reagan felt that dealing with Assad was too overwhelming. Consequently, the US created a scapegoat in the Libyan dictator Gaddafi. Gaddafi made the perfect scapegoat as he had delusions of becoming an international revolutionary. He saw himself as the force that would dismantle the power of the West. Consequently, the West craftily painted Gaddafi as a force to be feared. Willingly, he embraced this image as a compliment. Meanwhile, as Assad had previously predicted, the Middle East began releasing demons from under the surface of the Arab world.
One of the biggest ironies, six years later, are rumors that Gaddafi’s sons may seek to resume power over Libya in their father’s place. According to the Middle East Eye, Gaddafists are assembling themselves in readiness for this to happen. According to a television interview with the head of the United Nations Support Mission in Libya, Ghassan Salame, “the political reconstruction process may include Saif al-Islam,” Gaddafi’s son. Nevertheless, there are other rumors that Saif al-Islam may not even be alive any longer. Noone has seen him publicly for a long time.
The ironic legacy of Gaddafi’s removal
Some Libyans do express feeling regret over the removal of Gaddafi. These Libyans feel that who and what replaced him is much worse. Under Gaddafi, religious extremism was never a part of Libya. But it now threatens to suffocate those who feel themselves to be more secular and liberal. But what is clear, is that Libyans must sort out their problems between themselves. They are capable human beings, not inferior to those that live in the West. The Libyans wish to move forward with deciding their nation’s future. A future they construct that will fulfil their own needs. Never again should the needs of power-hungry Western nations influenced them, or anyone else, ever again.