Libya's brighter future (?)

[Hannahanneke]

http://www.therecord.com/opinion/editor ... ter-future
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... st-gaddafi

How do you think the future of Libya will look like? Are democrazy and elections a realistic outcome?

Yesterday on the news here (één) a professor said that the country could fall apart in 3 regions, 'cause of the different tribes and interests. Western interests in the oil could also influence the democratisation process. The rebels said they wouldn't take revenge on all the pro-Qadhafi people, but it looks like they're doing it now anyway.

I find the whole situation difficult to judge and the future of Libya looks very insecure. What do you think?

[Hoogstwaarschijnlijk]

I think the same as you and I doubt anyone can predict the future at this point.

What I find remarkeble was the way it was presented here in the press. It kept talking about 'opstandelingen' and 'rebellen', words with a quite negative tone, but at the same time it was quite clear for everyone that these were the good people, and that Kadafi was the bad one.

[MillMaths]

Yesterday on the news here (één) a professor said that the country could fall apart in 3 regions, 'cause of the different tribes and interests. Western interests in the oil could also influence the democratisation process. The rebels said they wouldn't take revenge on all the pro-Qadhafi people, but it looks like they're doing it now anyway.

I agree, from what I understand about the tribal nature of Libyan society, that tribal differences can be an obstacle to uniting the Libyans during the transition to a post-Gaddafi government, but that's what they have to do at this stage if the country is to avoid anarchy. Meanwhile the West should keep interference in Libyan affairs to a minimum. Okay, NATO has already sent in troops to protect Libyan citizens from being massacred by Gaddafi's supporters. If they're consistent, then they may also have to send in troops if the tables turn and the rebels start slaughtering pro-Gaddafi supporters. Western military intervention should only be limited to preventing bloodshed by either side, rebels or Gaddafi supporters, and should not encroach on the internal politics of the country. The present and future of Libya is for the Libyan people and the Libyan people alone to decide. And oil should never even come into the equation!

It kept talking about 'opstandelingen' and 'rebellen', words with a quite negative tone, but at the same time it was quite clear for everyone that these were the good people, and that Kadafi was the bad one.

The term "rebels" refers in general to those who are opposed to the people currently in power, regardless of which side is good or bad, right or wrong. It's just as conceivable that a government regarded as "good/right" is having to deal with rebels who are seen as "bad/wrong".

Are democrazy and elections a realistic outcome?

I'd find them crazy too.

[Hoogstwaarschijnlijk]

It kept talking about 'opstandelingen' and 'rebellen', words with a quite negative tone, but at the same time it was quite clear for everyone that these were the good people, and that Kadafi was the bad one.

The term "rebels" refers in general to those who are opposed to the people currently in power, regardless of which side is good or bad, right or wrong. It's just as conceivable that a government regarded as "good/right" is having to deal with rebels who are seen as "bad/wrong".

Yes, maybe, but in Tunesia they were called 'demonstranten', which has a more positive connotation (at least for me) than the term 'rebellen' that were used for Libyan people. I guess the difference is that in Libya it turned into a war, it wasn't just protesting anymore.

[Chekhov]

Libya turned into a war because the colonel savagely put down the protests, remember.

I'm not sure what the outcome of this will be but I think that factionalism based on tribal or regional identity is unlikely. Both eastern and western Libyans have been united in their hatred of the colonel's regime and desire for more democracy. The question is whether that will actually happen or the revolution will get derailed like Egypt's seems to have been.

[Hannahanneke]

I'm not sure what the outcome of this will be but I think that factionalism based on tribal or regional identity is unlikely. Both eastern and western Libyans have been united in their hatred of the colonel's regime and desire for more democracy. The question is whether that will actually happen or the revolution will get derailed like Egypt's seems to have been.

But maybe they were only united 'cause of the "shared" enemy and the shared goals? And they will fall apart again once "the shared enemy" is gone? I don't think that 'cause they were united for a while, they will stay united... It looks only like a small proof.

Me too, i'm afraid the revolution will get derailed. For which purpose did all the revolutions in the Arab spring serve if they get derailed anyway? They didn't bring Qadhafi down to have a president/leader friendly to the west for 10 years, who will be thrown off again by some leader from the army.

[hlysnan]

I'm not sure what the outcome of this will be but I think that factionalism based on tribal or regional identity is unlikely. Both eastern and western Libyans have been united in their hatred of the colonel's regime and desire for more democracy. The question is whether that will actually happen or the revolution will get derailed like Egypt's seems to have been.

Really? I thought the colonel had pretty strong support in Tripoli and coastal towns to the east, especially around his hometown.

[Chekhov]

Really? I thought the colonel had pretty strong support in Tripoli and coastal towns to the east, especially around his hometown.

Nope. The east has been firmly under the control of the rebels for months, and most of Tripoli welcomed the uprising and supported it. He does have pockets of loyalists in a few places, but I think most Libyans realize he's finished now.

But maybe they were only united 'cause of the "shared" enemy and the shared goals? And they will fall apart again once "the shared enemy" is gone?

It's a danger, but so far they've been able to avoid serious infighting and that's a good sign.

[hlysnan]

Really? I thought the colonel had pretty strong support in Tripoli and coastal towns to the east, especially around his hometown.

Nope. The east has been firmly under the control of the rebels for months, and most of Tripoli welcomed the uprising and supported it. He does have pockets of loyalists in a few places, but I think most Libyans realize he's finished now.

I meant immediately to the East, but not Cyrenaica.

[Chekhov]

The only significant town left around there to him is Sirte. The rest have been recaptured.

For all the TNC's faults, I still believe it's far better than Qaddafi ever was.

[Saim]

The only significant town left around there to him is Sirte. The rest have been recaptured.

For all the TNC's faults, I still believe it's far better than Qaddafi ever was.

NTC.

I completely agree by the way.

[Chekhov]

Both are correct.

[Saim]

Oh, damn, would you look at that.

[Ashkhan]

http://www.al-bab.com/arab/docs/libya/L ... -Stage.pdf

Libya is an independent Democratic State wherein the people are the source of authorities. The city of Tripoli shall be the capital of the State. Islam is the Religion of the State and the principal source of legislation is Islamic Jurisprudence (Sharia).

Ouch.

[loqu]

LOL. In the West's face.

[Chekhov]

ITT: people don't know what sharia really is or how it works.

[Ashkhan]

Still, we know Sharia is in contradiction to Democracy.

[Tenebrarum]

Saif al-Islam the heir to Moammar said he wanted Libya to become an Islamic State, so there you go, Sharia either way.

Nah, Tunisia, Egypt and Libya will turn out fine, like Iran Indonesia.

[Chekhov]

Still, we know Sharia is in contradiction to Democracy.

No we don't. Interpretations of sharia are about as broad as those of the Torah, ie. extremely. If these revolutions have shown us anything it's that Islam is not incompatible with democracy at all.

[Saim]

There are also some good signs coming from the charter, though;

Arabic is its official language while preserving the linguistic and cultural rights of all components of the Libyan society. The State shall guarantee for non-Moslems the freedom of practicing religious rights [...]

The State shall guarantee for women all opportunities which shall allow her to participate entirely and actively in political, economic and social spheres.

Freedom of opinion for individuals and groups

While the statement about Shariah is certainly worrying I'm still hopeful that we could see a liberal democracy develop out of this. Certainly in the next few decades either scenario is possible. Then again, I don't see hardline Islamism in this charter, just some minimal implied social conservatism ("islamic jurisprudence", "the state shall promote marriage"), alongside some inspiring liberal sentiments. Honestly, I see this as a step in the right direction even though I'm disappointed by the reference to Shariah.