Huge success for Egypt's protesters: State security will be dissolved
Egypt’s State Security and Investigations Service, the nation’s secret police notorious for torture, abuse, and widespread surveillance of citizens’ lives, will be dissolved, the Interior Ministry announced on state television Tuesday.
The agency, which was also responsible for counterterrorism operations, will be replaced by a national security agency that will take over counterterrorism work and will be subject to international human rights standards, according to the ministry.
The news is a huge success for the protesters who brought down former President Hosni Mubarak last month.
The state security agency was one of Mubarak’s key tools of oppression, and protesters had demanded that it be completely disbanded. Their calls only intensified after they stormed state security buildings around the country early in March, reacting to suspicions that the officers were destroying the documents that were evidence of their abuse.
In the agency’s headquarters in Cairo, protesters found prison cells, torture devices, and file after file showing the deep surveillance the agency conducted on dissidents, activists, journalists, and politicians. Many files had already been shredded.
(Read the full story here: Powerful weekend victories propel Egypt's revolution)
But though they welcome the announcement, activists will be watching for proof that the move doesn’t amount to simply a renaming of the hated agency.
Will the new agency start from scratch? Will former state security officers, and their superiors, be brought to justice for their crimes? Will the new agency be subject to judicial oversight and truly abide by international human rights standards?
What about the emergency law, in place for three decades, that gave state security authority to essentially do as it pleased and severely curtailed civil rights? If it is not repealed, the new body will have the same powers.
These are the questions they’ll be asking as the government moves to implement the decision.
Pro-Qaddafi fighters raise their weapons as they are pictured during a government-organized visit for foreign media in Bin Jawwad, Libya, Saturday. Pro-Qaddafi fighters like these have been pushing rebels further back everyday. How far east will they get? (Ben Curtis/AP)
How far – and how fast – will Qaddafi's forces push into Libya's 'liberated' east?
Benghazi, the de facto capital of Libya’s rebellion, has become a city where fear-driven rumors are rapidly replacing the heady optimism of just one week ago, when the disorganized rebel militia held two of eastern Libya’s key oil installations and were vowing to march on Tripoli.
Today, Muammar Qaddafi’s forces induced a panicked rebel retreat from Brega, peppering the town – home to one Libya’s largest petrochemical complexes – with rocket and mortar fire.
It’s been the government’s pattern in recent days: Massive amounts of indirect fire from a distance, with the regime’s forces moving forward once most of the rebels withdraw. The same tactic was used last week as Qaddafi’s forces retook the town of Ras Lanuf, home to Libya’s second-largest oil export terminal
The disorganized rebel militia, still with no organized leadership and obvious involvement from the military units who have defected to the rebel side, rarely gets close enough to even see their enemy, Without the heavy weapons and training needed to return the indirect fire that is relentlessly driving them back, Qaddafi’s forces are essentially shooting ducks in a barrel.
Around the crossroads with the main coastal highway and Brega’s petrochemical complex, where rebels were massed yesterday afternoon, homes and shops were left smoldering by the government troops' fire. Last week, Qaddafi hit his own oil facilities at Ras Lanuf
Full casualties are as yet unknown, but an ambulance driver in the area said at least one car with a family seeking to flee Brega was caught in the barrage, killing a husband and wife and their two children.
How far east will Qaddafi's forces push?
Now, the road lies open to Ajdabiya, a large town 40 miles from Brega, and from there it’s just 100 miles to Benghazi. Along the road linking these towns and cities are the same militiamen – scattered, confused, and outgunned – who have been routed consistently with few loses to Qaddafi’s forces in recent days.
With momentum on his side, Qaddafi and his loyalists are also stepping up a propaganda campaign against the rebels, seeking to encourage fence-sitting Libyans to side with what they’re portraying as a winning team, and promising death for those who don’t.
Earlier this week Saif Islam, one of Qaddafi's son, claimed at a rally that he receives “hundreds of calls from the east” every day begging for Qaddafi’s troops to “save us” and warned of dire consequences for those who continue to oppose his father.
Calls of another sort have have been coming in to democracy activists’ cell phones here in Benghazi.
Threatening phone calls
A few nights ago, one of a group of men watching Al Jazeera in a Benghazi hotel lobby received a call from an unknown number. The man on the other end of the line claimed to be from the 32nd Brigade, a ruthless and well-equipped unit that acts as a praetorian guard for Qaddafi and is led by another of his sons, Khamis.
The call was put on speaker as a calm and chilling voice, frequently chuckling, called the Libyans fighting Qaddafi dogs, cowards, and mutineers, among the printable insults. When told that Qaddafi was killing dozens of Libyans in the area every day, the man told the crowd they were liars.
As the crowd grew more agitated, shouting their own insults back, he promised. “We’re going to kill all of you. I’m going to come and do it myself, and I’m going to enjoy it. Real Libyans will have no mercy for you.”
“That man was talking to us like we’re animals,” says Ahmed Sanalla, a young activist in Benghazi. “If we don’t beat them, the reprisals against us will be massive.
The government threats aren’t necessarily idle ones. Qaddafi has jailed and tortured thousands of his political opponents during his time in power. In the 1970s and 1980s, public executions were sometimes held and shown on national TV.
Denying aid
Meanwhile, aid workers say Qaddafi’s government is denying medical access to the western towns of Zawiyah and Misrata, which have been subjected to tank and mortar fire in recent days as punishment for rising up with the rebellion.
Doctors Without Borders said in a press release yesterday that in those two towns “large numbers of people are cut off from any medical assistance, amidst reports of … shortages of medicines and other medical materials.”
“We are deeply concerned with the denial of access to medical care and the plight of patients in public health facilities within government-controlled areas,” said Bruno Jochum, the group’s operations director.
Lost amid Chávez's rants on Libya, a quieter Latin American foreign policy
Venezuela's offer to mediate a peace deal in Libya was pushed off the negotiating table just as quickly as President Hugo Chávez placed it down. Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi's son dismissed the idea, and Libya's opposition rebels dually responded to the offer this week by defacing Hugo Chávez Football Stadium in Benghazi (the base of Libya's rebels).
Why is a stadium in Libya named after Mr. Chávez? For the same reason that Colonel Qaddafi owns a replica of independence hero Simon Bolivar’s sword. The two men are tight.
But lost amid all the bombast of Chávez's ¡Viva Libya! antics, cooler Latin American heads are pursuing a similar foreign policy to more credible effect. And that may provide a telling example to developing economies, and also to Chávez himself – if he stopped tweeting long enough to listen.
Think you know South America: Take our geography quiz
Indeed, less entertaining than Chávez but more interesting is how many of Latin America’s former dictatorships have transformed themselves into booming social democracies, still clinging to the goals of social inclusion and international sovereignty espoused during the radical 60s but now adopting orthodox economic and diplomatic tools to achieve their aims.
Two recent examples of Latin American forays into Arab politics provide illustrative contrasts. Chávez's offer to convene a Peace Commission to mediate between his embattled Libyan friend and rebel factions was an embarrassing failure, albeit consistent with his oft-stated goal of “south-south” solutions to developing world problems.
In practice, Chávez's version of "south-south" diplomacy seems to mostly consist of giving away Venezuelan oil at deeply discounted rates to countries like Dominica and Nicaragua. Perhaps because he’s so chummily embraced international pariahs, such as Holocaust-denier Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Sudanese indicted war criminal Omar al-Bashir (whom he invited to Venezuela), his “south-south” agenda invites ridicule.
Other than Venezuela’s reliable Latin block – including fellow Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas members Nicaragua, Cuba, and Bolivia – no one else seemed to take the proposal seriously.
“It is as if I were to facilitate an agreement in the Amazon,” Said el Islam Qaddafi said in a March 3 interview with Britain’s Sky News, bringing Chávez's quest for peace just west of the Middle East to an ignominious end. “[Venezuelans] are our friends and we respect them...but they are far and have no idea."
Chávez has also been among the most stridently supportive of Palestinian statehood, though it’s probably not causing too much consternation in Tel Aviv. His support starts to assume a potentially ugly tinge when taken alongside his occasional declarations that Israel is supporting his opposition and Mossad agents are in the region to assassinate him.
However, when eight other Latin American nations declare their recognition of Palestinian statehood, as they did in December and January, including regional heavyweights Argentina and Brazil, Israel’s diplomatic corps is forced to take note.
“The decisions are largely symbolic but highlight the continuing trend in Latin America to pursue an independent foreign policy that to some degree reflects domestic political considerations,” says Michael Shifter, president of the Inter-American Dialogue in Washington, D.C.
Israel said the recognition was meaningless. Still, no other than Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu felt compelled to call Chile’s President Sebastian Piñera hoping to avoid a similar move by the center-right government. The call was ineffective. Chile recognized an independent Palestinian state on Jan. 7.
This week, Mr. Piñera traveled to the Middle East to meet with Israeli and Palestinian officials, laying wreaths at the tombs of former Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and Zionist founder Theodor Herzl.
Meanwhile, Chávez's travels are largely confined to visiting the world's most autocratic outposts, with an occasional side trip to sign oil agreements. Billions of barrels of oil might be enough to buy the support of energy-impoverished nations all over the world but it still hasn’t brought him what he seems to yearn most – international respect.
Cuban curators work as an image of Cuba's leader Fidel Castro is exhibited at the 'Oficios' gallery in Old Havana, Cuba, Tuesday. A Twitter account that tweets excerpts from former President Fidel Castro's frequent musings on world affairs has passed 100,000 followers, which the government says makes it the first Cuban themed Twitter account to break that threshold. (Javier Galeano/AP)
Watch out Chávez, Fidel Castro now has 100,000 Twitter followers
Latin America’s revolutionary left is attempting to make “the people’s struggle” truly popular once again by opening a new flank in cyberspace. And the strategy appears to be paying off, at least in numbers.
Slightly more than a year after opening a Twitter account to post his “Reflections” on world affairs and diatribes against US global meddling, Cuba’s aging revolutionary patriarch Fidel Castro has reached 100,000 followers. In fact, he blew right past the mark, registering more than 800 new followers today alone (672 more followers than I have attracted to my sad little Twitter account – The Nica Tim – in more than five lonely months).
But not even Twitter, which limits posts to 140 characters, has been able to persuade Mr. Castro of the importance of brevity. Thanks to URL-shortening service bit.ly, Castro – a man once known for giving tireless six-hour speeches under the hot Cuban sun – can use Twitter to link to his Reflections posted on other sites, which are as garrulous and adjective-laden as one might expect from the bearded octogenarian.
As he himself only follows 19 people on Twitter, Castro appears to have short patience for others' rants.
Still, a captive audience of 100,000 people is quite a feat, especially considering none of those people were bused in to the plaza and forced to be attentive.
And, given Cuba’s low Internet connectivity rate, one can also assume that most of those who are following Castro are off-island supporters rather than Cuban state workers required to support their leader.
Venezuela’s loquacious President Hugo Chávez has also found a home for his rhetoric in cyberspace. With nearly 1.3 million Twitter followers, Mr. Chávez often posts from his BlackBerry – giving him double cool points.
Unlike Castro, who uses Twitter mostly to refer readers to his manifestos posted on other sites, Chávez uses Twitter for brief updates on his daily or political affairs, or to post "¡Viva!-so-and-so" slogans, usually punctuated with a double exclamation points, to show he really means it!!
"Greetings to all the governors, mayors, and spokesmen and women of Popular Power!! I invite you all to build a new Country!!" – Chávez posted recently.
While most of Chávez’s posts aren’t the most exciting thing on the Internet, at least he’s trying. In Nicaragua, meanwhile, Sandinista President Daniel Ortega has yet to take his first tentative steps into cyberspace.
President Ortega, 65, who is arguably much more old-fashioned and conservative than even Fidel, nearly twenty years his senior, apparently still thinks the best way to reach the masses is in the plaza and on the radio. Though the Sandinista Youth has attempted to draw a following on Facebook, their leader is still very much offline.
What remains to be seen is whether Ortega – who starts all his speeches with a prolonged "aaaaaaaahhhhhh" (10 percent of a Twitter post) – will eventually join the Internet age in 2011, an election year in Nicaragua.
If he does, he’ll find some stiff competition to put up popularity numbers such as those enjoyed by comrades Castro and Chávez. And that could possibly touch off an online revolutionary rivalry.
But they’d really have to go off to deep end to achieve the celebrity appeal of Charlie Sheen – more than 2 million Twitter followers in one week!!
Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi (l.) raises hands with Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez in Margarita Island, Venezuela, in this Sept. 28, 2009 file photo. (Bolivar News Agency/Xinhua/Sipa Press/Newscom/File)
Hugo Chávez stands by his man, Muammar Qaddafi. But can he bring peace to Libya?
Unusually quiet at the start of the Libyan crisis, Venezuela’s President Hugo Chávez is back in form warning of US plots to invade the oil-rich African nation and proposing a “Peace Commission” to mediate the situation.
“We cannot be led forward by the drums of war,” Mr. Chávez said earlier this week. “Because the United States, I am certain, is exaggerating and distorting the issue to justify an invasion.”
Let the world not be quick to break relations with Libya or deploy military forces, he seemed to be saying, months after he himself broke relations with neighboring Colombia and sent troops to their shared border.
Think you know South America: Take our geography quiz
The normally Twitter-happy Chávez was initially silent when the revolt against ally Muammar Qaddafi erupted last month. But on Feb. 25, he broke his silence with a tweet: "Viva Libya and its independence! Qaddafi is facing a civil war!!"
The two leaders have since spoken by telephone, with Colonel Qaddafi reportedly agreeing to consider allowing Chávez to mediate Libya's civil conflict. The United States, it appears, will not be invited to the negotiating table, around which Chávez envisions South American and select European leaders.
How serious is this mediation proposal? Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa today said it is "under consideration."
Qaddafi and Chávez: Good buddies
Qaddafi and Chávez are not only ideologically aligned but also seem to enjoy genuinely warm relations, having visited each other several times and bestowing national honors upon one another.
Demonstrating just how close the two are perceived to be, a rumor that Qaddafi was fleeing to Venezuela – based on pretty much nothing – was quickly accepted within the realm of possibility by world leaders and news outlets.
The opposition here has seized upon the issue, declaring the close ties between Chávez and Qaddafi an international embarrassment.
One opposition member demanded the return of a replica of independence hero Simon Bolivar’s sword, which Chávez bestowed upon Qaddafi during a 2009 visit to Caracas.
Which Arab uprisings do we support?
Meanwhile, government-aligned commentators have twisted themselves into almost amusing ideological contortions, supporting other “popular liberation revolts” in Arab nations but denouncing Libya's popular uprising. Why? It essentially comes down to Israel.
The Tunisian and Egyptian governments had relations with Israel and were therefore imperialist stooges, so those were good revolts. Libya, however, is threatened by “a conjunction of foreign interests of the right, among which figure the governments of the United States, Israel, and Europe," according to a pro-Chávez editorial.
It would be quite a foreign relations coup, indeed, if Chávez, who was once famously told to “shut up” by the Spanish monarch, could forge a compromise in Libya. Few expect it to happen.
A more reasonable proposal might be to let Qaddafi pitch his tent on one of the beautiful islands off of Venezuela’s Caribbean coast.
The new Egypt, where the PM resigns on Facebook
When Egyptian Prime Minister Ahmed Shafiq resigned Thursday, giving in to the demands of protesters, the news didn’t come in a press conference, or through state television, or even a normal press release.
It came via an announcement posted on the official Facebook page of the Supreme Council of Armed Forces, the group of military officers ruling Egypt until new elections are held.
By now, using such means to announce a government’s resignation may not raise many Egyptian eyebrows. But its worth noting just how embedded the social network has quickly become in Egyptian politics and governance.
From the platform used to plan the protest that started it all, to the means of announcing one of the movement’s victories more than a month later, Facebook is now an integral part of Egypt’s political scene.
But that doesn’t mean the site deserves the credit for toppling Mubarak. Egypt’s revolution was a people’s revolution, not a Facebook revolution. It was won through the determination and resolve of the Egyptian people. Facebook was only a tool.
And during the most critical stage of the protests, when the Mubarak regime shut down the Internet throughout the country, they came out and fought for their freedom without it. Some of those protesting have never logged onto Facebook, much less owned a computer.
But some of the seeds that eventually blossomed on Feb. 11 were sown last year, in the death of Khalid Said, a young man who was brutally beaten to death on the street by police.
Several young Egyptians, one of them later revealed to be Google executive Wael Ghonim, created a Facebook page to raise awareness of Said’s death and the epidemic of torture and police abuse in Egypt. The page, called “We are All Khalid Said,” quickly attracted a huge membership, and it was used as a springboard to launch the call for a nation-wide protest Jan. 25.
After the fall of Mubarak, the military officers of the Supreme Council eventually realized that Facebook was a perfect way to reach many of the young activists of the revolution. They created an official Facebook page, and began releasing statements on it.
Feb. 26, the council released a statement on Facebook apologizing for using force in attempting to disperse demonstrators near Tahrir the night before. Some would say the council, giddy in its newfound social networking skills, has gone overboard. Thursday’s statement on Shafiq’s resignation was Facebook statement No. 26 from the supreme council.
Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega (C) and First Lady Rosario Murillo (C L) take part in the IV Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN) Congress, at the Revolution Square in Managua, on February 26. Ortega was officially proclaimed by the Sandinista Congress as presidential candidate for a second consecutive period, for November 6 elections. (Elmer Martinez/AFP Photo/Newscom)
US to Nicaragua's opposition: We can dance, but you lead
If Nicaragua’s sluggish opposition is waiting for Uncle Sam to swoop in like Superman to rescue Lady Democracy from the grips of mustachioed villain Daniel Ortega, they’re in for a long wait.
That was the gist of the message delivered Wednesday afternoon by US Ambassador Robert Callahan, who stressed that Washington wants to be Nicaragua’s partner in democracy, but Nicaraguans need to do their own leg work.
“Democracy needs to emanate from the bosom of the people; It can’t come from another country or international [organization]. It can’t be imposed or created by magic,” Mr. Callahan told a group of 150 business leaders gathered at a luncheon event organized by the Nicaraguan-American Chamber of Commerce (AMCHAM).
While Callahan’s words might have sounded inspirational at a commencement speech to university graduates, they most likely fell on slumped shoulders at the business luncheon. That’s because many in Nicaragua have lost hope in their country’s divided political opposition and want the US to take the lead.
Even the country’s business leaders, who have been criticized in the press for kissing up to President Ortega, say they feel forced to play ball with the Sandinista strongman because the political opposition is too ineffective to partner with.
“We tried for several years to work with them without any success,” one business leader told me about Nicaragua’s political opposition.
The ambassador’s message came four days after Ortega accepted his party’s nomination to run as the Sandinista presidential candidate for the sixth consecutive election, despite a constitutional ban prohibiting his reelection and amid increasing concerns that he’s pushing Nicaragua towards dictatorship.
While the US has expressed serious reservations about Ortega’s candidacy, Callahan says Nicaragua must find its own footing on the path back toward democracy.
And it’s not going to be easy, he warned. Democracy, the ambassador stressed, is hard work; it takes strong and dedicated leadership, constant vigilance, tolerance, sacrifice, and energy. And above all, it takes an entire nation.
“Whether it be a mature and prosperous democracy, or a nascent democracy, or a country that is fighting to create a representative government – it’s the people of that country who have to assume responsibility for their own affairs. The people need to build their future and define their destiny,” Callahan said.
Perhaps. But for those Nicaraguans who viewed Ronald Reagan’s support for the Contras as a positive thing, Callahan’s message is a tough pill to swallow.
Nicaragua’s history is one marked by repeated interventions – and even armed invasions – by the United States. The Sandinistas’ namesake, Gen. Augusto C. Sandino, gained international fame and national-hero status fighting against the occupation of US Marines in the 1930s.
It’s that spirit of nationalism that President Ortega tries to personify today. He constantly rails against US meddling – both real and imaginary – in Nicaraguan affairs. During his nomination speech Feb. 26, Ortega openly challenged Callahan by telling the outgoing ambassador to stick around Nicaragua after his post ends in July to apply for Nicaraguan citizenship and then run against him for president. “And then we’ll beat you!” Ortega bellowed.
Truth is, the US isn’t exactly living up to Ortega’s expectations of a meddlesome imperial overlord these days.
Instead, the US has attempted to work with the Ortega administration, providing some $60 million a year in aid and development programs for Nicaragua. Yes, some US aid – particularly the $64 million in Millennium Challenge Corporation development funding – was cut following what was viewed as widely fraudulent municipal elections in 2008. But many other programs have continued, and new ones have been started.
In that sense, the US is also failing to live up to the opposition’s expectations.
Many in the anti-Ortega current want Washington to take a much tougher stance against the Sandinista leader by threatening sanctions or embargos or somehow making Nicaragua a pariah in the region (something Ortega, arguably, is handling quiet capably on his own – and a position that will be further cemented if Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi seeks exile in Nicaragua, as is rumored).
Instead, the US continues to make quaint calls for democracy, rule of law, and respect for individual rights, while tiptoeing around Ortega’s continued abuses.
Even when tossed a lob pitch, such as Ortega’s recently announced candidacy – explicitly prohibited by Article 147 of the Constitution – the US is opting to bunt rather than swing for the fences.
“Can an electoral process born into original sin have anything other than an illegitimate ending?” I asked the ambassador Wednesday, rather leadingly, as he pushed his way through a throng of reporters on the way out the luncheon.
Callahan laughed, then said to me quietly: “I can’t answer that, Tim. But well put.”
British actor Colin Firth accepts the Oscar for best actor for his role in 'The King's Speech,' during the 83rd Academy Awards in Hollywood, Calif., on Feb. 27. (Gary Hershorn/Reuters)
A king's speech, an Arab movement's voice
They say movies reflect the times. And however improbably, two of the top winners at Sunday night's Academy Awards, “The King’s Speech” and “The Social Network," stand out amid the ongoing wave of Arab revolutions that are reshaping the world's mental maps.
With past weeks at times seeming like a standoff between autocrats and Facebook, between Egypt's Hosni Mubarak and Silicon Valley's Mark Zuckerberg, "The Social Network" has felt like an art-meets-life moment.
Yet at its heart, as Timothy Egan points out in The New York Times, Aaron Sorkin’s Oscar-winning screenplay about the creation of Facebook was “a fight among the privileged for more privilege.” At Harvard University, Mr. Zuckerberg is royally miffed that girls don’t date him and other brainy nerds. He’s not seeking dignity but acceptance at exclusive school clubs.
IN PICTURES: Oscar winners 2011
And so "The King's Speech" – a film about a reluctant prince who seeks help from a commoner to overcome his stammer and find his voice – may have more resonance at a time when ordinary Arabs have taken matters in their own hands, and have overcome many humiliations to find their own voice.
Winner of four Oscars, "The King's Speech" details the relationship between Prince Albert, a reluctant king treated coldly by his father and mocked by his brother, and speech therapist Lionel Logue, who understands that to treat the British royal he must approach him as a fellow human being. Mr. Logue has a conviction that people are not born at stammerers. In a plain downstairs office where Logue’s sons paint model airplanes, he calls the prince “Bertie” and insists that “In here, we have to be equal.”
Likewise, it seems, for the Arab moment: Gaining a voice, assuming equality and dignity among peoples, reducing the distance between the privileged and the rest of us – these are the tropes of the Arab spring.
Perhaps the genius of “The King’s Speech” is that it also ennobles the audience, allowing us to share in a relationship that throws out class and convention in the service of finding an innate voice. As Arab youth step up with courage to end repression, the lesson may be instructive. Perhaps in a larger sense it is true that no one is born without a voice.
Scorn for Qaddafi explodes from ecstatic Libyans
The outcome of Libya's stunning revolt remains uncertain, as I wrote about today (see story). But a few hours in the eastern city of Tobruk shows how much the country ruled by Muammar Qaddafi for 41 years has changed in just a week.
Foreign reporters like myself, viewed with fear and suspicion here for decades (since talking to one would likely earn a visit from the secret police, if not worse), are practically accosted by happy residents who want to tell their stories.
Consider my visit with a few other reporters today to a quiet shopping street, mostly shuttered, on a quest to buy Libyan phone cards.
Think you know the Middle East? Take our geography quiz.
A local man, who’d been helping to informally guard the central Tobruk square – where protesters with stones confronted, and defeated, Qaddafi’s police last week – acts as guide.
He knocks on doors, finds friends. One says he knows a guy and disappears down an ally. In the meantime a tray of Turkish coffee and china cups appears. A small group gathers. The friend returns with cards to add pre-paid minutes to Libyan phones, but not the SIM cards that are needed. He takes off again.
At this point about 20 Libyans have gathered, young and old. One’s brought the all-green Libyan flag introduced by Qaddafi after his 1969 coup, driving a car covered with a homemade version of the flag it replaced. As lighters come out to set it on fire, they heap abuse on Qaddafi.
“It’s all been inside for 41 years,” says our middle-aged guide. “Now it’s BOOM – like TNT!”
After their brief protest, we try to pay for the phone cards and SIM cards. The locals refuse all payment.
“The spirit here is just enormous,” says Saleh, a promising soccer player who played in the youth ranks at Barnsley in the UK and a few big clubs in the Gulf before his career was derailed by a knee injury. He was entertaining hopes of reviving his career when he moved back to Tobruk a year ago, but laughs when asked about his plans now.
“Football? I can’t even think about right now,” he says. “I’m here for Libya, and to make a real change.”
Antigovernment protesters demonstrate in Benghazi, Libya, on Thursday Feb. 24. With antigovernment protesters and defected soldiers now controlling the oil-rich east, eyes are turning to Libya's tribes and clans that will likely determine the political future of Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi. (Hussein Malla/AP)
Libya tribes: Who's who?
As Libya teeters on the edge of civil war, with antigovernment protesters and defected soldiers now controlling the oil-rich east, eyes are turning to the North African nation's more than 140 tribes and clans that will likely determine the political future of Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi.
His son admitted as much Sunday in a state television address. "Unlike Egypt and Tunisia, Libya is made up of tribes, clans, and alliances," Saif al-Islam said, warning of civil war if the tribal fabric breaks down. Indeed, Libya is considered one of the most tribal nations in the Arab world.
"In Libya, it will be the tribal system that will hold the balance of power rather than the military," Alia Brahimi, head of the North Africa program at the London School of Economics, told Abu Dhabi-based newspaper The National.
Several leaders have openly turned against Mr. Qaddafi, though he claims to retain support from "all the tribes."
In any case, their strength today is unclear. While the tribes were instrumental in fighting Ottoman and Italian rule, Qaddafi's greatest and most lasting accomplishment may prove to be stripping them of their political power as modernization also diluted their importance. The current chaos, however, has given them a window to reassert their importance.
They appear to be taking it. The nation's largest tribe, the Warfalla, was the first tribe to join the opposition.
"Just like the Army, tribal chiefs can have a crucial impact in this movement, even to the point of toppling the regime," Hasni Abidi, director of the Study and Research Center for the Arab and Mediterranean World, told France24. "They legitimize the antigovernment movement and if they join it, they can considerably expand the movement’s reach."
Qaddafi's son isn't the only one warning of civil war because of Libya's unique makeup. World leaders from President Barack Obama to French President Nicolas Sarkozy have all expressed such concern, and many diplomats, intelligence agents, and analysts agree that if Qaddafi stays, civil war erupts.
“Civil war is most likely unless someone assassinates Qaddafi today or tomorrow,” Robert Baer, a former CIA officer, told Bloomberg yesterday.
Only one world leader, actually, doesn't appear to be concerned about that option – and he's the one that counts.
Qaddafi has "used the country's vast oil and gas wealth to co-opt tribes," reports The Associated Press. "He gave them cash, perks and jobs, and fostered blood ties with intertribal marriages." There about 140 tribes and influential large families in Libya, regional expert Hanspeter Mattes told German magazine Der Spiegel, though only 30 have political influence.
Here is a breakdown of some tribal alliances that will undoubtedly influence Libya in the coming days and weeks:
From the east...
Abu Llail (anti-Qaddafi): Many of the antigovernment movement's activists are members of the Abu Llail tribes, according to Mr. Mattes in the Der Spiegel article.
Misurata (anti-Qaddafi): The largest and most influential tribe in eastern Libya, according to Arabic daily Asharq Alawsat, takes its name from the Misurata district in northwestern Libya. The tribe has particularly strong influence in the cities of Benghazi and Darneh.
Al-Awaqir (pro-Qaddafi): According to Arabic daily Asharq Alawsat: "The al-Awaqir tribe has also historically played a prominent role in Libyan politics, including during the previous era of the Libyan monarchy as well as during Gaddafi's reign. Al-Awaqir tribal members have held senior positions within Gaddafi's regime, including ministerial positions."
From the west...
Qadhafah (pro-Qaddafi): A relatively small tribe from which Qaddafi hails has staffed his elite military units. Reported to control the Air Force. It "had historically not been an important tribe in Libya prior to Colonel Gaddafi's ascent to power," reported Asharq Alawsat.
Magariha (alliance unclear): Libya's second-largest tribe, the Magariha are led by Abdel Sallam Jalloud, who was second-in-command in the country for decades until he fell out of favor with Qaddafi. A member of the tribe, Abdel Baset Al Megrahi, was convicted for the 1988 Lockerbie bombing. Brigadier General Abu Bark Younis Jaber, Libyan head of the army, is another prominent member. Indeed, the Magariha may be "best positioned to carry out a coup against Colonel Qaddafi because many of its members are in senior government and security services positions," reports The National.
Zuwaya, or Zawiya (alliance unclear): Hailing from the central coast, the tribe is active in government, with member Abdulqasim Zwai serving as justice minister. But on Feb. 20, tribal leader Sheikh Faraj al-Zwai threatened to interrupt oil exports if the use of violence didn't stop, according to Der Spiegel.
Warfalla (anti-Qaddafi): With more than 1 million members, the Warfalla is Libya's largest tribe and accounts for one-sixth of the nation's total population. It has traditionally made up Qadaffi's security apparatus and aligned with the pro-Qaddafi Qadhafah tribe. But in a stinging rebuke to the regime, the Warfalla was the first tribe to join the antigovernment movement. "It’s a very bad sign for Gaddafi’s regime," said the analyst Mr. Abidi. "And the regime knows that."
In 1993, Warfalla officers from southeast of Tripoli launched a failed coup attempt with alleged backing from the Magariha tribe. The reason, according to a 2002 report from Input Solutions, "was this tribe was poorly represented in the regime and only occupied second-echelon posts in the officers' corps."
According to the report: "If Jalloud's Magariha, the Warfalla, and Islamic militant groups unite against Qadhafi in an all-out confrontation involving the military, they could take over power. But that would soon be followed by challenges from other tribes. Ultimately, if Qadhafi is overthrown, these tribes could fight each other and Libya could be split into several regions."
Also to watch...
LIFG jihadists (alliance unclear): Formed in 1995, the Al Qaeda-aligned Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) has in the past launched assassination attempts against Qaddafi. Global intelligence unit Stratfor, in a report this week, says LIFG has been "for the most part demobilized and rehabilitated." But it warns that LIFG may yet attempt to seize control in the security vacuum.
"If the regime does not fall and there is civil war between the eastern and western parts of the country, they could likewise find a great deal of operational space amid the chaos.... Given this window of opportunity, the LIFG could decide to become operational again, especially if the regime they have made their deal with unexpectedly disappears. However, even should the LIFG decide to remain out of the jihad business as an organization, there is a distinct possibility that it could splinter and that the more radical individuals could cluster together to create a new group or groups that would seek to take advantage of this suddenly more permissive operational environment."
Previous
Become part of the Monitor community
36K on Facebook | 12K on Twitter | 2,250 on YouTube