Libya has seized the world stage from Egypt as it see-saws dramatically between Gaddafi and the rebels. I am glued to Al Jazeera English around the clock, which most recently has been showing footage of the triumphant rebels firing into the air after retaking the city of Ajdabiya. But my optimism knows limits.
Libya, like Yemen, has a tribal society. The lack of unity or state institutions that can compete with traditional loyalties suggests a serious risk of chaos dominating the scene for a long time to come. The rebel leadership in Benghazi is struggling to cope with the burdens of responsibility. They are effectively cut off from rebel enclaves in the west and it is not clear whether the latter would follow Benghazi if given the chance.
Gaddafi meanwhile has tenaciously burnished his well-deserved reputation as a Machiavellian monster. He has succeeded in clinging to power in the face of a powerful upsurge against him. But although his tactics have halted the flow of defections, they have also united the Arab League and the international community against him. It is truly remarkable to see the Arab League, many of whose constituents are struggling to quash their own liberation movements, speak on behalf of a foreign intervention led by Western powers in another Arab oil state.
The ripples of the Libyan intervention have traveled widely. In Russia it has sparked a rift between Putin and Medvedev. Putin said the UNSC resolution was like "medieval calls for crusades" and Medvedev called these remarks "unacceptable". Ambivalence has pervaded the anti-intervention coalition of nations, including Turkey and Germany.
The intervention arrived in the nick of time as was made clear by pictures of a column of smoldering tanks with their gun turrets pointed at the large civilian population of Benghazi. Turkey had argued for a delay to make room for negotiations with Gaddafi. That would have been an unmitigated disaster. It was thanks to the no-drive zone, the mandate for a robust intervention from the air, that civilian populations across Libya have averted decimation, for the time being.
The Obama administration has done much good in its caution and reluctance. It is important that the responsibility for Libya remains unequivocally with the Libyans, for several reasons. Iraq demonstrated that liberty must flow from within. Moreover, the US should not own Libya's successes and failures.
Libya and Yemen, even if they oust their long-time dictators, are not structurally capable of achieving the progress that is emerging in Tunisia and Egypt. Nor do the Libyan rebels seem to want outside help in building state institutions, for the time being. Unfortunately they will struggle for years to come.
The main hope lies with Egypt. Right now the only Arab states that can be turned to in the promotion of liberty are small Persian Gulf nations like Qatar and UAE. Nevertheless Qatar's Al Jazeera is one of the seminal strands of the Arab Spring. Imagine adding Egypt's powerful voice and weight? Egypt is the most populous Arab nation, has a strong military, and has long been a cultural and intellectual center. Thus the aspirations of Libya's colonial freedom fighter Omar Muktar (who was born near Tobruk!) depends on the progress realized by Tahrir Square.
Posts
