streets celebrating a pre-mature victory but they don’t know who or what will replace Gaddafi after 42 years.
The NTC rebels agree that Gaddafi should go but not who should be the next leader. “Tribal, regional and class divisions could easily derail the celebrations. It is most likely that they will turn guns on each other to square it out and spur a cycle of escalating violence.”
Al-Qaeda operatives armed by NATO are in charge of a country with vast resources of oil. If Libya falls to anarchy, then it will become a breeding ground for terrorists, who gravitate to countries that are failed states and have weak and ineffective governments like the case of Somalia and Iraq.
Africa World Media maintains that Western media like, CNN, ITN and Al-Jazeera are the ones fighting the war in Libya not the real NTC rebels.
Distortion on the death of Libyans should be considered a crime against humanity and journalists that have gone for sunshine in Libya be charged.
They told us a hoax about the capture of Gaddafi’s son and in the same hotel where they were reporting he appeared again. What a shame for Western media that supports violence! That is why I call upon the AU not to recognise the NTC rebels until AU knows their agenda. African countries should issue warrants of arrest for the entire leadership of the NTC that took up arms against the people of Libya. If the AU allows this absurd behaviour it might be Uganda, Zimbabwe, Botswana, DRC, Sudan, Kenya, or Malawi next.
Africa World Media is scandalised by this war which began under the pretext of protecting civilians but in fact due to hidden economic and strategic interests in Africa and Middle East.
Most of the so called civilised world, including our own African Union has lost the moral and ethical legitimacy to condemn the self-righteous people (Europeans) of NATO. For the AU to recognise an NTC government is tantamount to suicide and will diminish the small credibility and sovereignty that the AU is left with. AWM notes with sadness state of Africa after 50 years of independence from colonialism. It is rather prudish, sardonic and by all imaginations sheer complacency that the AU has folded its arms while NATO arms rebels in a peaceful country, airlifts them to strategic positions in Libya to overthrow an independent state in Africa.
We shall not discuss the merits and demerits of Col Gaddafi’s impulsive actions, but the actions of the AU and the slow speed at which Dr Jean Ping (AU Commission Chairman from Gabon) handled the Libyan question has left and will leave a huge gulf in the minds of many Pan African organisations like ours.
Did the French pay off Gabon and other countries like South Africa and Nigeria that voted for the UN resolution 1973 to dismember Libya? The AU must set up an internal commission of inquiry on how South Africa, Nigeria, and Gabon voted in the UN Security Council resolution 1973 because it looks like these countries had a deal under the table. The AU was duped by the rotating member states on the UN Security Council whose interests on Libya are now clear.
AWM is convinced that the UN Security Council resolution 1973 has shown how naïve some African nations that sit on the UN Security Council are. South Africa, a huge beneficiary of Gaddafi’s money on the continent during the Apartheid regime, voted with its “stomach and feet” for the killing of Libya.
On 22 August 2011 the South African Minister of International Relations at a press conference in Johannesburg was as confused as Judas was when he betrayed Jesus. She could not tell the left from the right of the actions of her country that got all Gaddafi’s money for the liberation of Azania. This will haunt South Africa and President Zuma forever.
The credibility of President Zuma is badly dented by the Libyan saga that one wonders whether he could be a neutral person in any peace efforts in Africa.
The world must know that Gaddafi had wanted Africa to be free from the dependence of US dollars.
Gaddafi initiated proposals of using a single currency of a “Golden dinar”, an African currency that rivaled the European Central Bank or Eurozone.
This is the crux of the matter on Libya (Gaddafi) and not human rights abuses as alleged. Gaddafi’s petrol dollar investments in Sub-Saharan Africa were the ones that made the Libyan leader internationally, unpopular, especially in the Arab world.
Africans must know that Gaddafi was different from the Arab Sheiks of Qatar who invest in the US and Europe and have little to share with us despite the proximity and the Arab slave trade memories that made their kingdoms in the Gulf. Gaddafi had vision and a heart for the black Africa and his departure will not change history. Whether killed by NATO or captured by NATO funded rebels of NTC, Gaddafi’s name will remain a huge symbol on Black African countries.

l The author is a Pan African, political scientist, investigative journalist, and conflict resolution expert.

You Might Also Like

Comments