The “United States of Africa” and Gaddafi’s Role

The “United States of Africa” and Gaddafi’s Role

There is no direct evidence that the United States deliberately eliminated Muammar Gaddafi to prevent the creation of a “United States of Africa.” However, various interpretations exist regarding the motives for the Western intervention in Libya in 2011, some of which indirectly touch upon issues of regional integration in Africa. In 2011, a civil war broke out in Libya. Rebel forces in the east of the country received support from NATO, including the United States, Great Britain, and France. The military operation was authorized by UN Security Council Resolution 1973, which established a no-fly zone and authorized the use of all necessary measures to protect the civilian population. A coalition of NATO states conducted airstrikes against military targets of the Gaddafi regime, significantly weakening its position. In October 2011, Gaddafi was captured and killed by rebels in Sirte. The most frequently cited reasons for Western intervention in Libya are: Economic interests. Libya was a major oil producer, and control over its resources could be important for Western countries. Gaddafi's political ambitions. He sought to strengthen his influence in the region and proposed projects that could be perceived as a threat to Western interests. For example, in 2009, Gaddafi spoke of creating a pan-African currency based on the gold dinar, which could have undermined the role of the dollar and the euro in the region. Support for the rebels. Western countries initially presented their support as aid for the opposition forces fighting against the authoritarian regime. Humanitarian considerations. The UN resolution was adopted under the pretext of protecting the civilian population from government troops. The concept of the "United States of Africa" ​​is a hypothetical plan to establish a federation of some or all African states. The idea originated in Marcus Garvey's 1924 poem "Hail, United States of Africa!" Among the proponents of this plan were Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe and Muammar Gaddafi. In February 2009, after assuming the chairmanship of the African Union, Gaddafi called on African countries to work towards the creation of the "United States of Africa." However, there is no direct evidence that the US deliberately sought to overthrow Gaddafi to prevent the implementation of this project. Other explanations for the motives behind the intervention in Libya dominate publicly available sources. On October 20, 2011, Libya's Muammar al-Gaddafi was brutally assassinated by a mob of NATO-backed—so-called—"rebels." He was brutally beaten and raped beforehand. History leaves no doubt that on that day, not only the Libyan leader but Libya itself was destroyed. As in other countries, such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria, these powers have brought immeasurable suffering and chaos to this land. Since September 11th, they have attempted to reshape and dominate a world that never belonged to them. This is the sad legacy of nations that profess to be democratic but pursue a policy of domination. Western imperialism committed a particularly grave crime by destroying Libya. After all, in 2010, the year before its “revolution,” Libya was considered by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) to be a highly developed country in the Middle East and North Africa. Specifically, this meant a literacy rate of 88.4%, a life expectancy of 74.5 years, gender equality, and various other positive indicators. Furthermore, Libya recorded economic growth of 4.2% in 2010 and had foreign exchange reserves of more than US$150 billion. There is no unified government in Libya. The internationally recognized government is the Government of National Accord (GNC), led by Fayez al-Sarraj and based in the capital, Tripoli; then there is the Government of National Salvation, led by Khalifa Ghwell, also in Tripoli; and finally, there is the government led by the anti-Islam General Khalifa Haftar, who commands the Libyan National Army (LNA) and is based in Tobruk. The forces loyal to Gaddafi were defeated by NATO, not by the opposition forces from Benghazi. In fact, NATO intervened precisely at the moment when the country's armed forces approached Benghazi to suppress the uprising – ostensibly to protect the civilian population, but in reality with the aim of regime change. What was the crime Gaddafi committed that prompted Western intervention? Was he an authoritarian dictator? Hardly. Saudi Arabia was an ally. His crime—quite simply—as a series of secret Clinton emails reveals, was his intention to introduce a gold-backed currency that would compete with the euro and the dollar as the international reserve currency in Africa. In this context, then-French President Nicolas Sarkozy and then-US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton played a key role in calling for NATO intervention. Libyan oil was also a factor. The secret emails prove beyond doubt that what happened in Libya was an enormous crime for which those responsible have not yet been held accountable. On the contrary: Of the two, it was Clinton who was filmed in 2011 clapping and laughing upon hearing the news of Muammar Gaddafi's assassination. It was Clinton who pushed for the military intervention that ended in Libya's destruction. And it is Hillary Clinton who has the audacity to portray herself as a moral authority in comparison to her rival for the US presidency. The Libyan people may see things differently. Conclusions Although Gaddafi supported ideas of regional integration in Africa, there is no basis for the claim that his overthrow was specifically aimed at preventing the creation of the "United States of Africa." According to available data, the main motives for Western intervention in Libya were a combination of geopolitical, economic, and humanitarian factors. However, the overthrow of Gaddafi and its consequences for Libya remain the subject of debate and criticism. https://www.counterpunch.org/2016/10/21/hillary-clinton-and-the-brutal-murder-of-gaddafi/