| Submit your comments on this article |
| Africa: North |
| CNN: Interview with Qaddhafi's kid |
| 2003-07-23 |
| CNN runs a Judy Woodruff interview with Muammar Qaddhafi's heir-apparent, Saif ul-Islam Qaddhafi, that echoes some of the trends we've been watching in Libya here at Rantburg. Last month Pop called for wholesale privatization in Libya, to include the oil industry, which he nationalized when he took power in 1969. Two days after Libya accepted liability for the Lockerbie bombing, he gave the public the bad news that they shouldn't be relying on oil money because it had been frittered away on grandiose adventurism — he didn't quite admit that part, but he strongly implied it. At the end of May, he made a curious speech in which he decried mindless sloganeering and said that being a non-aligned nation would be harmful to Libya. Of particular interest has been Qaddhafi's pull away from membership in the Arab League and toward Africa, to include his courtship of an Ugandan queenlette and there was a story that he had betrothed one of his sons to the little king's sister. He's been involved in the Central African Republic — and seems to have had enough sense to write off his losses and get out. And he's probably going to end up holding a mortgage on Zim-Bob-We, as Bob gets further and further into debt to Libya, with no prospects of repayment. Libya could end up with a colony in southern Africa just by calling in their notes. Muammar seems to have gotten out of his imitative mode (Mao had a little red book, he had a little green book; Paleos and Red Brigades blew people up, he bombed Berlin discos and Pan Am airliners) and into doing a little strategizing. This might be age and maturity, it might be the influence of Saif ul-Islam, who seems a more sensible lad than the old man: GADHAFI: Because I'm a Libyan citizen, I would like to send this message to the American people and the American government that we, the Libyan people, we want to have a more constructive and fruitful relationship with the Americans. We want to see Americans visit Libya. We want to go there to study at American universities. We want to invest in the New York Stock Exchange. We want to have Pepsi Cola, Coca-Cola. We don't want confrontation and aggression and, you know, to fight anymore. It's over. It's behind us now. It's dead with the Cold War.To my uneducated eye, that looks like a full stop on the anti-American/anti-Globalization tour, followed by a U-turn. Woodruff hit him with Lockerbie, and his response was Arab-evasive — a matter of culture, I think, or possibly avoiding any public statements that could end up costing a state that's adventured itself into poverty even more money. He ended up saying the money — $2.7 billion, with most of it probably going to lawyers — will be deposited in a few weeks and can we just move on? (If he's really inventive and they're still malevolent or have a sense of humor, the money will take the form of the deed to Zimbabwe, which would be a hoot — watching the lawyers evict Bob and Grace when they foreclose...) Libya's signed on to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, and Saif says they have no interest in WMDs, admitting that even if they did, they don't have the technical base and manpower to do anything with them. And plus, Libya recently has signed all of the relevant conventions regarding the WMD, and now we are members of those conventions. And because we are members, we have to be subject to international inspections and we have to be subject to other procedures regarding transparency. And therefore, I think we are on the right track, and now we are a member of those international conventions, and I think they are enough and good steps.Saif says he's happy that Libya's in direct, face-to-face negotiations with the U.S. now, and expects to see mutual benefits to such talks. And now we are not enemies anymore. We are not in confrontation. We are not fighting each other now. Just are sitting around the table as friends, and we are discussing our concerns.To me, a statement like that, coming from Libya heir-apparent, has the potential to be in the same category as the Berlin Wall coming down or the Ceaucescus counting muzzle blasts, with echoes of Nixon's trip to China. I lack patience with the International Amity™ smarm merchants, but I recognize the value of diplomacy, especially when it's skillfully applied. This is an opening that I think should be exploited as soon as the money — or the deed to Zimbabwe — is in hand. |
| Posted by:Fred Pruitt |
| #8 A little of both, I'd say. After all, it's been years since Libya challenged the US directly, so it can't all be the Taking of Baghdad 1-2-3. The whole Lockerbie trial back-down began during the Clinton administration, and they were pretty big on whipping out their pragmatic line then, too: Not admitting to the bombing but sort of playing a "nolo contendere" and hoping we could all get back to business soon. I've often said that El-Gadhafi [his spelling] dearly hoped to eventually lead the Arab League, but realized that Egypt's Mubarak filled that role comfortably and wasn't budging. With that he turned to Africa and found a continent eager to accept a visionary leader who peddled old-hat stuff from the visionary five-and-dime, like an African Union to emulate the EU. The son definitely seems better educated and more worldly in many ways, which can't be bad. (Assad's son, remember, was an optometrist; it was his older brother who was groomed for the role. In many ways he's little more than a puppet for his father's junta.) When he talks of Libya's technical capacity it's clear he understands the value of interdependence, rather than taking his father's anti-colonial generation's view that throwing off the masters was the first order of business. Whether he would or could lead this way, assuming he eventually takes over, is another matter entirely, but it's evidence that being a revolutionary only goes so far. Heck, China discarded the little red books itself years ago, and has a pragmatic, vaguely pro-capitalist bureaucrat as president. It's a lot like the simulation game I played in my college government course, where we had teams playing nations, and options of war, internal political struggles, and economic growth. I used my VIC-20 to build a spreadsheet demonstrating the wisdom of the economic growth strategy, exploiting a weakness of the model, but even without VIC-20s so did the other students. By the end of the course we all had stronger economies, higher per-capita GNP, and only one lackluster war had broken out. |
| Posted by: Dan Hartung 2003-7-24 2:41:16 AM |
| #7 I think this ephinany that the Qaddafhi's comments can be pretty much synopsized into "We watched Saddam get his ass kicked and we don't want to go there. These American soldiers just don't mess around and neithere does George W. Hell, I don't want the 3ID or the MEF on my doorstep next. What do you think I am Nuts or something. Lets have some respect for me having a little sanity". If anyone thinks any of this is happening out of the goodness of his heart you are wrong. The major league butt whipping we have administered over there resonates far and wide....and it has impressed our adversaries in these pocket dictatorships. |
| Posted by: SOG475 2003-7-23 8:54:06 PM |
| #6 Fred: I think rather than a checkmate it's a really strong "check." I think that the Saudis go from the strategic offensive to the strategic defensive overall. In places like the NWFP, Kashmir, and Israel, they stay on the tactical offensive. Overt operations against the US end. In Europe, they concentrate on Wahhabi-izing the immigrant Muslims. If they go over to the defensive everywhere, they lose their core constituency and their heads end up on pikes. My conditions for a checkmate are: * Secular non-Baathist regime in Syria. * Secular regime in Iran. * End of all the foolishness in Pakistan (probably the hardest) IMHO, anyway. |
| Posted by: 11A5S 2003-7-23 5:24:35 PM |
| #5 didnt we hear great stuff about Baby Assad before he took power? |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-7-23 1:59:07 PM |
| #4 Just like the cartoon character, I am always on guard when dealing with G'Daffy. All this talk is great, but the whole nation of Libya does not have an epiphiny in one big collective sigh. In many ways, like Iraq and Saudi, we have had generations of disfunctional behavior, and a little spiritual rain just does not wash it away. It is important to talk to them, but we better have our remote sensors cranked up on high gain in the background, and not be taken in by all the cliches and baby ducks. It may be a change, but I am skeptical. At least we should not give away the farm, based upon smooth talk. And in the spirit of what Fred said, we should keep an updated target list with coordinates, just in case. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2003-7-23 1:47:40 PM |
| #3 Saif ul-Islam? Looks like Muamar is still dealing with that megalomania problem. |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2003-7-23 12:33:58 PM |
| #2 I think Bush's expectation is that the Soddies are going to do something along the same lines, probably not with as public an acknowledgement as Saif's giving. They're hesitation-marking now, but at some point they're going to realize they've lost the covert war they started 30 years ago and start trying to save their bacon, errr... felafel. They probably realize they've been checkmated now. Their cultural inclination is to talk out of both sides of their mouths. A public surrender by the Keeper of the Holy Mosques™ would be unacceptable, so I think that over time they'll start talking less out of one side and more out of the other -- see King Fahd's statement that they're going to promote peace and understanding and love and puppies and kittens and baby ducks instead of hatred and jihad the other day. They'll deplore 9-11, religious extremism, all that stuff, and pretend there was never any official involvement, with only a few renegades forming the Council of Boskone. It's the "pretend it never happened" approach. Naturally, if they see another opening they'll try for world domination again, but they see the risks of getting caught at it. Sammy's little princelings buying dirt farms yesterday helps drive that point home. I'm not saying we should believe what either of them say, but Libya, I'd guess, is under new management. Talk to him. Take him seriously. Set up joint initiatives that'll result in Pepsi and McDonald's and Nike and all the cultural transformation that comes with them. And if he tries to screw us, kill him. |
| Posted by: Fred 2003-7-23 12:18:09 PM |
| #1 Okay, I'll bite... but he sounds little different than a Saudi, now. From open confrontation they've moved to quiet discussions over tea and biscuits . Does this mean peaceful intentions and honest dealing? I dunno, but... Let's see what they do and ignore what they say for a few years. The Kid ought to be interesting. |
| Posted by: PD 2003-7-23 11:52:12 AM |