Libya Is Going the Way of Afghanistan
Published in Al Arab Al Yawm
(Jordan) on 25 October 2011
by Muaffaq Mahadin (link to original)
The French and the Americans increased in their zeal and aggression against the town of Sirte, making an opportunity for armed Islamist groups to assassinate the Libyan dictator, killing Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi, his sons and a number of additional Libyan leaders. Remember the aggression of the Americans against Iraq and that they orchestrated the assassination of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and his sons because he refused to surrender, just like Gaddafi and his sons.
This mass murder has started Libya along the same road as Afghanistan in light of the following facts:
1. Contrary to what has been said about the negative repercussions of the internal opposition and foreign protectors in Libya, Syria and other places, the resistance has the opportunity to control the country and has not given it over to NATO and its allies.
2. American, British, and French aggression against Third World countries does not in any way seek to exchange the countries’ usual political system for pluralistic democracy. Rather, they invoke democracy to dissolve and dismantle the entire country and remake it in the shape of a sectarian federation, with regional rivalries to ensure the influence of U.S. intelligence, military, and NATO, and to make sure that they could loot resources and exploit the political landscape of the country they had afflicted with aggression.
3. Libya and Afghanistan had a shared local opinion of the role of NATO and its puppets, who arrested and executed the Russian-backed Afghan president, Najibullah, and who repeated the same thing with Moscow-backed Gaddafi. These opinions also note the great influence of American-supported Salifist groups, whether in Afghanistan or in Libya, and it is significant that some of the Libyan Islamic opposition was in Afghanistan.
We have also seen an explosion of conflict in Afghanistan after the assassination of Najibullah, and its descent into Civil War. Given regional and national interests, it is expected that after Gaddafi’s assassination, conflict will arrive between Salafists and secularists, as well as within the Islamist groups.
This scenario of conflict is exacerbated by the fact that international policy centers on material interests, whether for oil or new energy sources, such as solar energy in the Libyan desert. Libyan society, unlike other Arab societies, is not integrated into a single civil society and it would be easy to use tribal conflict against the backdrop of tribal feuds between former allies of the Colonel's regime and the tribes who allied with the opposition.
4. Other opinions among both African and Arab Libyans are the same as the those in Afghanistan and Asia, areas which have been made into arenas for settling policy questions and sending political, regional and international messages. This question concerning the future of conflict there occupies many in Egypt. It is of great importance in Egypt because Libya is a new candidate to become a serious drain on Cairo if it prevents advancement in the North African region, on the Arab world, and on the whole continent of Africa, making Libya and Sudan the bricks wall that prevents Egyptian progress.
This mass murder has started Libya along the same road as Afghanistan in light of the following facts:
1. Contrary to what has been said about the negative repercussions of the internal opposition and foreign protectors in Libya, Syria and other places, the resistance has the opportunity to control the country and has not given it over to NATO and its allies.
2. American, British, and French aggression against Third World countries does not in any way seek to exchange the countries’ usual political system for pluralistic democracy. Rather, they invoke democracy to dissolve and dismantle the entire country and remake it in the shape of a sectarian federation, with regional rivalries to ensure the influence of U.S. intelligence, military, and NATO, and to make sure that they could loot resources and exploit the political landscape of the country they had afflicted with aggression.
3. Libya and Afghanistan had a shared local opinion of the role of NATO and its puppets, who arrested and executed the Russian-backed Afghan president, Najibullah, and who repeated the same thing with Moscow-backed Gaddafi. These opinions also note the great influence of American-supported Salifist groups, whether in Afghanistan or in Libya, and it is significant that some of the Libyan Islamic opposition was in Afghanistan.
We have also seen an explosion of conflict in Afghanistan after the assassination of Najibullah, and its descent into Civil War. Given regional and national interests, it is expected that after Gaddafi’s assassination, conflict will arrive between Salafists and secularists, as well as within the Islamist groups.
This scenario of conflict is exacerbated by the fact that international policy centers on material interests, whether for oil or new energy sources, such as solar energy in the Libyan desert. Libyan society, unlike other Arab societies, is not integrated into a single civil society and it would be easy to use tribal conflict against the backdrop of tribal feuds between former allies of the Colonel's regime and the tribes who allied with the opposition.
4. Other opinions among both African and Arab Libyans are the same as the those in Afghanistan and Asia, areas which have been made into arenas for settling policy questions and sending political, regional and international messages. This question concerning the future of conflict there occupies many in Egypt. It is of great importance in Egypt because Libya is a new candidate to become a serious drain on Cairo if it prevents advancement in the North African region, on the Arab world, and on the whole continent of Africa, making Libya and Sudan the bricks wall that prevents Egyptian progress.
Next article![]( "Israel Is a Superpower")
