|
Menu |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rebel without a hope |
|
By Khaled Diab Like an ageing rocker, Muammar el-Gaddafi is on a mission to rid
Africa of poverty and conflict. But are his dreams of a United State of African
to prove as futile as his earlier visions of Arab unity? |
|
April
2009 There is
something of the ageing rock star about the Libyan leader Muammar el-Qathafi
(pronounced Gaddafi in the Libyan dialect). It’s not just his unkempt hair,
his eccentric sense of dress, his insistence on sleeping in a tent and the female
bodyguards who surround him like tough-as-nails and confident groupies –
and how all this confuses the staid and conventional leaders he visits. The
Libyan leader sees himself as being antiestablishment and has a penchant for
rubbing the political the Arab, African and western political establishment
up the wrong way. But after four decades at the top, he is the establishment
and his radical rhetoric is wearing very thin. Gaddafi
actually reminds me somewhat of Bob Geldof: he had a couple of early hits,
failed to make it into the rebels’ hall of fame and has kept his dimming star
alight by projecting himself as a saviour and harbinger of world peace. Isolated
by the American-led
sanctions regime and ridiculed by his Arab counterparts, Gaddafi embraced
his African brethren – and African leaders, such as Nelson Mandela, helped
break Libya’s international isolation. After angrily turning his back on the
frustrating quest for Arab unity, Gaddafi has centred his attentions on
African unity. In
co-operation with South Africa and Nigeria, Libya played a pivotal role in
transforming the toothless body known as the Organisation of African Unity
into the nascent African Union which was established in 2002 – which many
disappointed Africans dismiss as another impotent
talking shop where African leaders get to rub shoulders at taxpayers’
expense. Earlier
this month, Gaddafi was elected
chairman of the AU, not to mention hailed as “king of kings” by his
entourage of tribal African leader. The
maverick – some would say delusional – colonel then wasted no time in rocking
the boat, ruffling feathers and pushing his reality-lite visions. He not only
dismissively asserted that democracy could not work in Africa because of
tribalism, he urged the assembled leaders to merge into a single “United
States of Africa”. I like it
when people think out of the box, but Gaddafi’s idea is so far out there that
it belongs on another continent that has not yet been discovered. I am a
believer in gradual integration and may be even the eventual emergence of
some kind of loose union. However,
this is a clear case of putting the cart before the horse. Too many African
states are having trouble enough ending or avoiding conflict within their
arbitrary borders that going for an even larger geographical union is bound
to spell disaster – or at the very least total paralysis. In
addition, the AU has generally failed to live up to expectations. Its key
successes relate to the peacekeeping efforts in such hotspots as Darfur and
Somalia, as well as interventions in support of democracy in Togo and
Mauritania. But the continent’s overall democratic deficit remains huge, and
the AU’s mechanisms for promoting greater integration and transparency, as
well as rooting out corruption, have so far failed to achieve significant
results. How on earth can this dysfunctional body be transformed overnight
into a US of Af, as Gaddafi wishes? Despite
support from some AU members, such as Senegal, most Africans have reacted
sceptically, with some African leaders suspicious that the Libyan leader –
who used to support myriad revolutionary groups – is out to topple them by
other means. “Gaddafi
should first let African countries sort out their myriad domestic problems
before they can start aspiring for grander things,” an editorial in Kenya’s
the Standard sensibly pointed
out. “Unity won’t be an automatic panacea to the insurmountable problems
we are likely to face. We should learn from the European Union where
countries are strictly vetted before admission to the bloc.” “Unlike
Europe, Africa has not succeeded in moving beyond the most rudimentary stages
of the [integration] process,” argues
Gerrit Olivier, co-director of the Centre for African and European Studies at
the University of Johannesburg. “African countries, in spite of the notions
of African unity and pan-Africanism, stick rigidly and evangelically to the Westphalian
model of absolute national sovereignty.” And
therein lies one of the key stumbling blocks along the road to African, as
well as Arab, integration. Whereas post-war Europe has pursued a pragmatic
gradualist policy, in Africa and the Arab world – grappling with the dual
curse of colonial legacy and corrupt and ineffective leadership – hollow and
haughty rhetoric traditionally took the place of concrete action. The AU has
been an attempt at pragmatism, but Gaddafi is doing his best to derail that. “Gaddafi
must stop promoting dictatorship and supporting leaders who do not respect
the wishes of their people with reckless proclamations like his infamous
‘revolutionaries do not retire’,” advises
Tajudeen Abdul Raheem, deputy director of the UN
Millennium Campaign in Africa. Although he has modernised Libya and done
it some good, the isolation he has brought to the country, the wastage of its
oil wealth on promoting global revolution and other crackpot schemes, as well
as his oppression and poor human rights record, count greatly against him. Of course, in his warped view, Gaddafi
doesn’t see it that way. Officially, he retired from politics in 1979 and
holds no official title but, in an Orwellian twist, he calls himself
“Brotherly Leader and Guide of the Revolution”. The country, which he calls a
“jamahiriya” (a term he coined to mean government by the masses), is supposed
to be run by a collection of local popular assemblies, but no prizes for
guessing who actually calls the shots.
Gaddafi has not been idle on the
domestic front either, and is following up his ‘Africa unite’ hit with an ‘I
wanna be anarchy’ scheme that is just as muddled but almost charmingly naïve
in its idealism. Disillusioned by widespread corruption, Gaddafi has urged
Libyans to endorse his proposal to dismantle
the government and give the oil wealth directly to the people. When I read the news, I thought that
some good – instead of the occasional hassle at airports – could finally come
out my having been born in Libya, and I could apply for citizenship to get
some of that action. Seriously, while I applaud the idea of giving Libyan’s a
fair stake of their country’s oil wealth, how does he propose that Libya
function without a government? Four decades at Libya’s helm have done
his sense of reality no good and it’s time for Gaddafi to actually retire.
His people could do without this particular comeback kid. A
shorter version of this column appeared in The Guardian Unlimited’s Comment is Free section
on 19 February 2009. Read the related
discussion. ãCopyright 2009 – Khaled Diab. Unless otherwise stated, all the content on this
website is the copyright of Khaled Diab. |