The shape and form of the forthcoming Libyan/British relationship is of major interest to those of us Libyans that live on this European island. It is even more of an issue for people like myself that have lived the vast majority of our lives in the UK. A place as much home as Belashher, Tajoura. Will it be a symbiotic relationship, akin to the bird and the hippo? Or more parasitic? Or will the organ grinder keep playing a merry little ditty for the monkey? It's a relationship that will matter greatly to Libya as she tries to emerge from a period where potential has taken a massive backseat to results. Britain can make Libya acceptable. They can make it sought after. And they can provide the expertise and business governance needed if Libya wants to become a "player". Britain isn't the power it was, even as recently as the Thatcher years. But its influence is still felt.
As with any people, the opinions on this point amongst Libyans is varied. There a many in Libya who want the relationship to thrive, to bring in much needed investment. These people are the ones who are desperate for work, and the influx of foreign firms will increase the number and quality of those jobs. There are those who have long enough memories who fear a return to the "friendship" that was prominent during the monarchy. It was an affair that sowed the seeds of the Gaddafi revolution and gave the "Free Officers" legitimacy. Then there's the fear that the UK will influence Libya down a path that is not "Libyan" - a phrase that is difficult to define but easy to recognise.
What is the historical background of the relationship of these two nations? And is it possible to learn from that to predict the future? In recent times, the relationship has been as schizophrenic as the man that used to lead us. I love you, I hate you (for a long time), I tolerate you and I love you again. And of course, the I love you, but for very different reasons. In 1951, when Libya finally gained independence as a sovereign state, Libya effectively became a protectorate of Britain. This suited the Western leaning King and this situation didn't look like it would change after the discovery of vast amounts of oil in the Libyan desert. Certainly, throughout the 60s, the UK maintained it's position.
The Gaddafi regime changed the whole dynamic of the relationship and from the early 1970s until the beginning of this century, Britain's position on Libya was anything but friendly. In 1972, Gaddafi announces his support for the IRA, not a move to endear him or Libya to Her Majesty the Queen's government. 1984 saw the infamous incident of the shooting of WPC Yvonne Fletcher during a demonstration outside the Libyan Embassy. The suspect of the shooting was Matouk Mohammed Matouk, who fled the UK under the banner of diplomatic immunity. Due to this event, ties with Libya were not to be restored until Tony Blair started his process of "bringing Gaddafi in from the cold". 1986 saw Margaret Thatcher give U.S fighter planes permission to take off from UK bases to bomb Gaddafi. And this animosity continued until the early part of this century, when Tony Blair looked to bring Libya back into some sort of respectability. His motivation for this is up for speculation. So, to speculate, it could have been due to his desire to make the world a safer and more peaceful place. I suspect this may be his answer. Or it may have been due to the fact that Libya had huge amounts of untapped wealth, an infrastructure that had suffered 20 years of neglect, an economy that was weak and workforce that lacked the necessary skills to make the country thrive. And so first of all flights were restored to the country (prohibited after the Lockerbie bombing of 1988 that was blamed on Libya), then convincing Gaddafi to give up weapons of mass destruction - apparently - and finally lifting of international sanctions. Britain, and Tony Blair in particular, were instrumental in this. However, it now put an acceptable face onto the Gaddafi regime and the level of uphappiness amongst Libyans took a lot of the foreign public by surprise. Tony Blair legitimised Gaddafi - however, it was probably his actions, indirectly, that began the wheels in motion that have led us to where we are. Libyans had no freedom prior to Tony Blair's actions. However, the Gaddafi regime became slightly more lax, arrogant as he was in his belief that his new found Western friends would safeguard his position for their benefit. And to 2011, when they do not.
Therefore, what history tells us is simply that Britain's relationship with Libya is undoubtedly one of convenience. And that is fine. All countries are like that. No nation is altruistic and Britain (and France) will be expecting a significant piece of the Libyan pie. And as a Libyan, that is fine. After all, to thrive an economy needs to trade with other economies. And those that helped out our country the most in our hour of need deserve it most. There is plenty of wealth to share around. But I sincerely hope that the alliance is one based on mutually beneficial business needs. And that the new Libyan administration, whoever they may be, don't buckle under the political will that Britain will certainly try to exert. That our foreign policies remain ours (no, we will not accept peace with Israel until the establishment of a Palestinian state) and that our domestic laws are not changed to please the sensibilities of the British public. I hope the new government show the strength to say no when it suits us. This is not a criticism of Britain, but simply a request that Libyans remain assertive against the avalanche of demands and do what is right by us, without fear.
I believe we can.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please give me comments and feedback below, whether about the subject matter specifically, or the blog generally.
I will be writing on a more regular basis, with a new article once a week, so if you like what you read please come back. At the moment my attentions will be on Libya, but it will become more diverse. To find out about new articles, follow me on Twitter (@redahmeid) or Google+ (Reda Hmeid). And have your say.
Thanks
Reda
As with any people, the opinions on this point amongst Libyans is varied. There a many in Libya who want the relationship to thrive, to bring in much needed investment. These people are the ones who are desperate for work, and the influx of foreign firms will increase the number and quality of those jobs. There are those who have long enough memories who fear a return to the "friendship" that was prominent during the monarchy. It was an affair that sowed the seeds of the Gaddafi revolution and gave the "Free Officers" legitimacy. Then there's the fear that the UK will influence Libya down a path that is not "Libyan" - a phrase that is difficult to define but easy to recognise.
What is the historical background of the relationship of these two nations? And is it possible to learn from that to predict the future? In recent times, the relationship has been as schizophrenic as the man that used to lead us. I love you, I hate you (for a long time), I tolerate you and I love you again. And of course, the I love you, but for very different reasons. In 1951, when Libya finally gained independence as a sovereign state, Libya effectively became a protectorate of Britain. This suited the Western leaning King and this situation didn't look like it would change after the discovery of vast amounts of oil in the Libyan desert. Certainly, throughout the 60s, the UK maintained it's position.
The Gaddafi regime changed the whole dynamic of the relationship and from the early 1970s until the beginning of this century, Britain's position on Libya was anything but friendly. In 1972, Gaddafi announces his support for the IRA, not a move to endear him or Libya to Her Majesty the Queen's government. 1984 saw the infamous incident of the shooting of WPC Yvonne Fletcher during a demonstration outside the Libyan Embassy. The suspect of the shooting was Matouk Mohammed Matouk, who fled the UK under the banner of diplomatic immunity. Due to this event, ties with Libya were not to be restored until Tony Blair started his process of "bringing Gaddafi in from the cold". 1986 saw Margaret Thatcher give U.S fighter planes permission to take off from UK bases to bomb Gaddafi. And this animosity continued until the early part of this century, when Tony Blair looked to bring Libya back into some sort of respectability. His motivation for this is up for speculation. So, to speculate, it could have been due to his desire to make the world a safer and more peaceful place. I suspect this may be his answer. Or it may have been due to the fact that Libya had huge amounts of untapped wealth, an infrastructure that had suffered 20 years of neglect, an economy that was weak and workforce that lacked the necessary skills to make the country thrive. And so first of all flights were restored to the country (prohibited after the Lockerbie bombing of 1988 that was blamed on Libya), then convincing Gaddafi to give up weapons of mass destruction - apparently - and finally lifting of international sanctions. Britain, and Tony Blair in particular, were instrumental in this. However, it now put an acceptable face onto the Gaddafi regime and the level of uphappiness amongst Libyans took a lot of the foreign public by surprise. Tony Blair legitimised Gaddafi - however, it was probably his actions, indirectly, that began the wheels in motion that have led us to where we are. Libyans had no freedom prior to Tony Blair's actions. However, the Gaddafi regime became slightly more lax, arrogant as he was in his belief that his new found Western friends would safeguard his position for their benefit. And to 2011, when they do not.
Therefore, what history tells us is simply that Britain's relationship with Libya is undoubtedly one of convenience. And that is fine. All countries are like that. No nation is altruistic and Britain (and France) will be expecting a significant piece of the Libyan pie. And as a Libyan, that is fine. After all, to thrive an economy needs to trade with other economies. And those that helped out our country the most in our hour of need deserve it most. There is plenty of wealth to share around. But I sincerely hope that the alliance is one based on mutually beneficial business needs. And that the new Libyan administration, whoever they may be, don't buckle under the political will that Britain will certainly try to exert. That our foreign policies remain ours (no, we will not accept peace with Israel until the establishment of a Palestinian state) and that our domestic laws are not changed to please the sensibilities of the British public. I hope the new government show the strength to say no when it suits us. This is not a criticism of Britain, but simply a request that Libyans remain assertive against the avalanche of demands and do what is right by us, without fear.
I believe we can.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please give me comments and feedback below, whether about the subject matter specifically, or the blog generally.
I will be writing on a more regular basis, with a new article once a week, so if you like what you read please come back. At the moment my attentions will be on Libya, but it will become more diverse. To find out about new articles, follow me on Twitter (@redahmeid) or Google+ (Reda Hmeid). And have your say.
Thanks
Reda
No comments:
Post a Comment