Why are we marching against NATO actions in Libya?

This is a simple but yet the toughest question that has been posed to us by those who feel that we are not justified to march against the Western forces that have taken it upon themselves to intervene in Libya by declaring war against the rule of Gaddafi.

Many people, African and South Africans in particular are opposed to these protests against the actions of the Western powers. They ask us, are we trying to protect Gaddafi? The answer is no.

They ask us, are we trying to condone the manner in which Gaddafi has ruled Libya? The answer is no. They ask us, are you trying to say that the African Union has been responsive to African problems at all times?

The answer is no. Then they ask, why are you marching to the embassies of the USA, France and the United Kingdom in the main? I will answer for myself and not for others, as to why do I support the call for NATO forces to withdraw their operations in Libya.

In May 2011, I wrote a piece on the Libya matter trying to capture the complexities that arise out of the actions of Gaddafi and the Western forces. I argued passionately about how the world had been played by Gaddafi to an extent that the protesters are today being called rebels instead of “protesters” or “demonstrators for democracy”.

In that note, I said: “The word rebel carries a negative connotation that seeks to say that one is going against what is acceptable. There is nothing acceptable about Gaddafi’s 42 years of rule over Libya.

The media and global citizens have failed the aspirations of the Libyans by referring to them as rebels. A rebel is someone who must be locked away for having caused great injustice to the norms of a particular country.

While Gaddafi may be correct to call these people rising up rebels, as the global citizens we should be at no point backing such an action or articulation, because once we do that we condone lethal force and war unto the rebels.”

In the same article I did not mince my words about the absence of the African leaders on the Libyan matter and their lack of ability to provide leadership.

This is what I said then, over two months ago: “African countries are found wanting at this juncture, they are quiet and inactive on any substantive or sentimental discourse over what is happening in Libya.

This silence further entrenches the belief that many of the African leaders have benefited from Gaddafi’s pocket one way or the other. South Africa is trying to be a voice of reason but its voice is not emphatic enough.

The African Union, of which Gaddafi is its former Chairperson, seems to be clutching on straws in how to deal with the matter. This is one African problem, to which an African solution seems to be a distant ambition.

Not even the proponent of African Solutions –Thabo Mbeki – is making an input on the matter, this possibly motivated by his very cold relationship with Gaddafi.” In that very same article that I wrote, a part of me was forced to concede that the Western forces were given an acceptable ground to intervene on the Libyan matter because of the “inaction” of the African Union.

In the same stanza that I made recognition of this and I made no secret of the fact that many African leaders have enjoyed the pleasures of forbidden fruits from Gaddafi, as I said:  “As Africans, we seem to be force to look to the West for a solution, however at what price shall it come?

How much exploitation shall be done on the people and resources of Libya? Gaddafi is clearly not going to surrender power, no matter how heated things get, he has made it clear that he will fight until the end and I have no reason to doubt this.

The global community is looking as to how the realignment of global power will play itself out over the Libya matter. We are also interested to know for how long African leaders will succumb to being silence through patronage.

This moment will show the corruption-chain amongst our African leaders who are willing to stand by and divert on the dream of the African Renaissance.”

Even though I was willing to accept that the actions of the West may be justifiable to an extent, due to the inactiveness of our own African leaders over the matter, I however cautioned over us Africans finding an illusion in these actions and starting to believe that the West has our best interests at heart.

I captured this by saying:  “Whilst some Africans have every reason to defend the actions of the West, we must not be deluded that these actions are out of good faith without vested interest.

The Western intervention is selective and oil motivated. Of course, Gaddafi has become a highly disliked individual, through his demands to set-up camp when embarking on state visits or through his theatrics in the United Nations Assembly when delivering addresses, so some may see this as an opportunity to rid the world of him.

The reality is that, the United Nations Security Council is going to be use systematically by those who can lobby their case better to achieve a particular end, and that end is not favourable to Africans.” 

I continue to stand by each and every one of these stanzas that I have quoted above from my previous writing some months ago. We must all agree on some fundamentals, such as that the actions of the Western forces have gone against the standing resolutions of the United Nations Security Council.

Resolution 1970 called for, in Section 9 that,   “9. Decides that all Member States shall immediately take the necessary measures to prevent the direct or indirect supply, sale or transfer to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, from or through their territories or by their nationals, or using their flag vessels or aircraft, of arms and related material of all types, including weapons and ammunition, military vehicles and equipment, paramilitary equipment, and spare parts for the aforementioned, and technical assistance, training, financial or other assistance, related to military activities or the provision, maintenance or use of any arms and related material, including the provision of armed mercenary personnel whether or not originating in their territories”.

Subsection C of this resolution provided that some assistance can be provided with the upfront approval by the committee.

We are aware of the reality that France in particular has broken this Section 9 of Resolution 1970 by providing finance and military equipment to the people that have become known as the rebels.

The UN Security Council has shown double standards in a similar matter in Syria when it issued a non-binding Presidential Statement to condemn the crackdown on protesters by the Syrian government.

They have not decided to attack Syria in the same fashion that they attacked Libya, instead they talk of the sovereignty of Syria and how the people of that country should be given space to resolve their differences and amicably find solutions to their problems.

This is the same process that we believe Libyans should be allowed to embark on.  I am supporting the cause to march against the actions of Western forces because I am aware that they are in breach of Resolution 1973 of the UN Security Council which in summary, was ordering for the creation of a No-Fly zone in Libya so as to ground Gaddafi’s air force.

However, today these forces are now bombing compound and destroying infrastructure in Libya and are after the blood of Gaddafi, something that is not in any standing resolution of the UN Security Council. Their actions have become illegal.

I am not going to believe that the African Union is a holy organisation, however I will believe that today there is more will amongst African leaders – including Gaddafi – to provide an African solution to the matter, out of interest to kill the attempts of re-colonisation by the Western forces.

Over the last decade, the USA has been at the forefront of invasions that orchestrate regime change in countries that have oil; this action is not separated from the reality that there is a looming energy shortage in the world.

I am not a supporter of Gaddafi, I will never be. However, I will stand firm for the principle that we owe it to the fallen African freedom fighters to preserve the gains of freeing Africa from the chains of Western forces.

We cannot, because of the weaknesses of the African Union, allow the systematic invasion taking place in Libya.

We will continue to address the challenges that face the AU; we will continue to refine our local politics in our respective countries, so as to give a new crop of leaders to the African continent who will at all times champion the African agenda.

Our disappointment over the performance of African leaders in advancing Africa forward is not enough to make us inactive and give up the gains of our freedom. The reality is that if we fail to defend our freedom, there will be no AU, SADC, ECOWAS etc to build on going forward.

I am clear in my mind that today Africa stands at the brink of surrendering its freedom back to the Western forces. It is our duty to defend the work of men such as Nyerere, Nkrumah, Sobukwe, Mandela, Machel and others.

We are aware that we are faced with warlords and famine in Somalia, we are mindful of the divisions in Ivory Coast, we are aware of the Monarchy rule in Swaziland that starves the people of that land.

We have not forgotten the struggles of the people of Chad, Malawi, Kenya and other parts of the African continent that either are filled with peacekeepers or are suffering from hunger and disease.

These are all realities that confront the African continent; however, we can only provide an African solution to them if we have an Africa that we own as Africans and are not subjugated by the Western forces.

This is why it is important to fight the Libyan matter, we are no longer willing to surrender Africa.