Tags:
Journalism of Courage
A Libyan fight for democracy,or a civil war?
Is the battle for Libya the clash of a brutal dictator against a democratic opposition,or is it fundamentally a tribal civil war? The question has hovered over the Libyan uprising since the first tank commander defected to join his cousins protesting in Benghazi.
It could be a very big surprise when Gaddafi leaves and we find out who we are really dealing with, said Paul Sullivan,a political scientist who has studied Libya.
In the Wests preferred chain of events,airstrikes enable the rebels to unite with the currently passive residents of the western region around Tripoli,under the banner of an essentially democratic revolution that topples Muammar Gaddafi,proving that it truly was a democratic impulse that kindled the uprising.
Gaddafi,however,has predicted the opposite: that the revolt is a tribal war of eastern Libya against the west that ends in either his triumph or a prolonged period of chaos.
Arab world united by dislike for Gaddafi
Gaddafi handed leaders across the Arab world what had otherwise eluded them: A chance to side with the people while deflecting attention from their own citizens call for democracy,political analysts around the region said. And they really do not like him.
What started as a fierce resentment about a legacy of Western intervention,fed by historical memories of colonialism and present-day anger at the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan,is now a belief that the Libyan rebels desperately needed help that only the West could fully provide. The apparent hypocrisy of repressive Arab leaders endorsing military action against a repressive Gaddafi government did not escape many Arabs.
It was clear that those backing the no-fly zone,the analysts said,especially the king of Saudi Arabia and the emir of Qatar,drew satisfaction from the effort to push Gaddafi out,though they did not say so. In 2004,Gaddafi was accused of being involved in a plot to assassinate King Abdullah,who was then the crown prince.
