Saddam promoting women's education and literacy 1970's
Is Gaddafi making his move, that is the question on the lips of many especially the Americans and the British.
Well of course that is what Whitehall wants and so too the White House, and the way they look at that "move" is for Gaddafi to move out.
Tehran on the other hand and so too China, Russia and even some of the NATO nations woudl like to see Gadddafi retain his grip in Libya at least for the interim.
The Arabs are a different breed, and again although from the same breed the pedigree changes depending on the part of Arabia they come from, their religious inclination, their political beliefs and the type of Arabs they are it is a mixture of all these that is an Arab and you have as many mixtures as you have Arabs, that's how complex the Arab problem is.
When the mixture differs you know what you are looking at, there are so many and they are all, almost all, ferocious, and Sadam Hussein recognised that a long long time ago.
Giving democracy to an Arab is akin to giving durians to the English and forcing it down their throats and telling them go ahead eat this, it is after all the "king of fruits, " for want of putting it mildly.
All said Arabs are Arabs, and Arabs and democracy only makes the entire Arab world crazy, so in a nutshell they can't have democracy, less we have a crazy republic, and that is something we would not want from the Arabs of all people and if you know Osama bin Laden, you'll know what I am getting at.
Iraq was a prosperous and progressive nation under Sadam Hussein, people from all over the world worked and did business in Iraq, it was a Middle Eastern Power, and had a stabilising effect on Middle Eastern politics, Iraq prospered because Saddam realised that democracy would never work in a country like Iraq, not with his Arab brethren, not with him, and not especially in a country where religious tensions amongst the two rival Islamic sects ran so high on the one hand and that both these groups could at any time get into loggerheads with the Christians and peoples of other religions, there was a Kurdish problem to manage too, so he ruled it the way an Arab nation had to be ruled, the Baath Socialist way, and I hope at least in hindsight people will admit that it was indeed the best way, especially looking at Iraq today.
Both Gaddafi and Saddam promoted equal rights in their respective countries, women were given positions in the administration and the army long before any other Arab nation even thought of doing so. Why even Gaddafi's personal bodyguards are women, and both these leaders brooked no religious intolerance in their respective countries.
When Iraq took over Kuwait, after all an Arab State (which historically was part of the Babylonian Empire, until some white man gave it some boundaries) the entire World took on Iraq and interfered in what was internal Arab affairs.
Saddam did not have the 'Monroe Doctrine' or its equivalent with which he could legitimise this takeover and prevent outsiders from interfering in Arab affairs, if Iraq had gone for Israel it would have been a different proposition, this was an Arab state, but when Iraq went to war with Iran earlier, many of those countries that had gone to Iraq over its take over of Kuwait supported Iraq, that's how world leaders play marbles.
The interest is always oil and the means to control this commodity, that is what the powers from Whitehall the White House are keen on nothing else, and if that means killing Arabs so be it, after all they are only Arabs.
An embarrassed English government has also admitted to having interfered with the internal affairs of Libya, and even the Libyan rebels knew what was good for them and turned down the offer, they have learned their lesson from Iraq.
All of Arabia is aware of what happened in Iraq and they do not want it in their land, they too yearn for happiness like everyone else, but this prolonged ill treatment and deprivation of the Arab by the West using some Arabs has resulted in a sense of hopelessness which makes many of these people turn to the likes of Bin Laden and his band of merry men for hope and salvation.
Gaddafi keeps telling the world that the day he leaves Libya or is moved out, the Taliban will be on the door steps of Europe and he is not wrong, because Libya will again be reduced to another Iraq with tribal wars and tribes being forced to take sides in the conflict.
Libya will then be ripe for Taliban picking, and lo and behold on the shores of the Mediterranean, you'll find parked an organisation (THE AL QAEDA) whose time would have come, is that what Europe wants?
Well if that is what Europe wants that is what Europe will get, be forewarned, the signs were there before the Gulf war of what would happen in Iraq, the world was lied to, and see what is happening in Iraq today, it will happen in Europe, and the springboard will be Libya.
In the Libyan scenario the better option is for all parties to get together and negotiate a settlement with Gaddafi still in for the interim, this should be under the auspices of the United Nations and not the Americans, or the Russians, nor the Chinese or the British, the UN will not be out of choice there is India and France to oversee such a truce, failing which the world may force Gaddfai to play his last card, and that is an all out purge of those who oppose him, should that fail he will make his next move whatever and wherever that may be and pave the way of a glorious Al Qaeda entry. An Entry into Europe.
Move aside Charles Martel, Bin Laden has come and the new battle of Tours is about to be begin.1279 years after yours.
History does repeat itself, but we never learn.
