Gaddafi’s death: An end to tyranny or prosperity?

Gaddafi's death: An end to tyranny or prosperity?

The death of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi is one of the major highlights in the Arab Spring that began in January when a Tunisian young man set himself on fire. What started 10 months ago in Tunisia has since spread to Egypt, Yemen, Syria and Libya among other countries within the Middle East and parts of Africa. A defining feature of all the reform movements is the prominence of the youth who are demanding a new dispensation of democracy. Throughout the protests, the youth have used their knowledge of social media to organize and publicize their reform movements Outflanked by this simple yet powerful technological savvy generation, the Tunisian and Egyptian regimes were among the first to fall without much international interference. But in Libya, social media was not enough and warfare took centre stage. Everyone knew that Gaddafi would not be an easy target, but ultimately his death has come to pass. In as much as the world loathes Gaddafi and his dictatorship tendencies, his achievements must also never be swept under the carpet; credit must be given where it's due while failure must be denounced alike.

Gaddafi came into power in 1969 in what got to be known as "Green Revolution" after staging a bloodless coup over the then Libyan leader King Idris. He declared himself the life leader of Libya and his rule went on to last four decades until his overthrow and death. His views were mostly anti-West drawing sympathizers and critics. His critics accused him of sponsoring and supporting terrorist activities that drew the anger of the West. The Lockerbie bombing in 1988, where a flight from the UK heading for the US was bombed and fell over Lockerbie in Scotland, is one case which is widely cited. This heightened the animosity between Libya and the West with the then American president, Ronald Reagan calling Gaddafi the 'mad dog of the Middle East' before taking military action against him bombing Gaddafi's Bab al-Azizia compound. Within Libya, Gaddafi used his secret security to abduct his opponents and had the tendency of calling them 'rats', an unacceptable terminology showing not only his intolerance, but condescending attitude towards anyone challenging him. After his capture and death, President Obama summed it as the lifting of a 'dark shadow of tyranny', but does this sum up this controversial man? What are some of the achievements of Gaddafi that have not been celebrated?

Libya is a very dry country and very few areas of the country receive more than 100 millimeters of rainfall per year. Water was a problem in the country, but Gaddafi built what is hailed as the Libya's Great Man Made River where water was harnessed from the south to the coastal areas of the country for drinking and agricultural purposes. The project began in 1983 and is nearing its completion stage right now and costs about US$33 billion. What makes this project so unique is that Gaddafi never got a loan from the World Bank, International Monetary Fund or other Western lending institutions; it was financed by Libya's own resources. The project showed the strength of Gaddafi's leadership, outshining projects that have been undertaken in other parts of the world to solve water crisis. Although critics have said the project was expensive and partly extravagance, its benefits have outshined its weaknesses. To cap it all, Libya does not have any external debt despite undertaking such a project. This is one project that will always be credited to this man whether we view him as a dictator or a man that brought prosperity.

Libya under Gaddafi became one of the countries with a high living standard and arguably the highest living standards in Africa. According to the United States Central Intelligence Agency World Fact book, Libya is ranked number 82 in the world in terms of the GDP, despite the population of less than 7 million. It has less than 3 % inflation rate, and over 78% urban population, the highest in Africa. Libya has only less than a third of its population living below poverty line. This achievement can be credited to Gaddafi in raising the standard of living for his country which very few dictators have ever managed to achieve. Although comfort does not equate to happiness, it must also be pointed out that democracy without basics is a fallacy. Even western countries that are at the forefront of democracy are facing the wrath of the population as evidenced by the 'occupy cities movements' where people are demanding jobs, decent living standards and an end to inequality. In essence therefore, human beings need more than democracy and Gaddafi may have delivered when it came to meeting people's basic needs. It is a fact that Libyan citizens do not pay for education or medical treatment, Gaddafi's government granted these for free- something that so many global super powers are failing to do. Before Gaddafi became the Libyan leader, only 25 % of the country was literate and that figure has increased to about 83%, second best only to Zimbabwe in Africa, ironically ruled by another 'dictator'!

Outside of Libya, Gaddafi has shared his wealth with Africa- a role that has been a 'preserve' of the West in the past and some few other emerging nations. According to the East African Standard, a Kenyan publication, African Union (AU) is one of the main beneficiaries of Gaddafi's generosity. The publication notes that he contributed about 15% of AU's total budget allowing the organization to send soldiers to maintain peace on the continent's trouble spots. Moreover, he even paid AU subscriptions to some countries that are struggling economical including Chad and Niger. Gaddafi was also the brains and visionary behind the United States of Africa modeled along the European Union. The United States of Africa project, however did not gain traction even in Africa where there was a general feeling that he wanted to exert his influence over the continent. Critics pointed out to the fact that Gaddafi was a dictator thus he could never be trusted to lead the continent as a whole. Countries like South Africa, Botswana and others where democracy has flourished were in no way prepared to become part of the unrealistic project meant to prop Gaddafi's image.  

A large immigrant population from Africa and beyond also found Libya as an economic magnet where workers earned decent wages and enjoyed a relatively affluent life compared to their home countries. The worrying trend has been that the anti-Gaddafi fighters have been committing serious crimes against black Africans whom they viewed as Gaddafi's mercenaries. Most of them have been killed or tortured in this 'new' Libya prompting the AU to call for the protection of black Africans in Libya. One wonders if the new Libya will ever be a home for black Africans, not to mention whether Gaddafi's generosity and his quest to improve the lives of Libyans and Africa in general has come to an abrupt end. The economy of Libya itself may be under threat since these immigrants played a pivotal role not only as laborers, but also consumers who bought goods and services. Looking at both sides of the coin, I ask whether Gaddafi's death is an end to tyranny or prosperity? Only time will tell.